New Delhi: Noted civil liberties and human rights activists, among them Inder Mohan, Justice V.M. Tar Kunde, Minoo Masani, Gauri Bajaj Malik and N.D. Pancholi, feel it is time the Kashmiris were given the right to self-determination. They are against India’s holding on to the strife-torn state at gunpoint, and want a more sympathetic approach towards the Kashmiris’ demand for independence.
While some would even go as far as to say that Kashmir was never an integral part of India and will never be, a majority also advocate a federal structure, granting maximum autonomy to the state. However, they are all unanimous on at least two counts: that Article 370 should be restored to its original form and the security forces should be immediately withdrawn from the valley.
These views were expressed last month at a seminar organized by the Coordination Committee on Kashmir (set up in October last year by civil liberties activists, with Tarkunde as the chairman).
Persons like the committee chairman Tar Kunde, besides Minoo Masani and Inder Mohan, have been advocating independence; Pakistan….India later forgot all about the plebiscite: for Kashmir quite some and to this day the people of time now.
Why are we so allergic to -independence (of Kashmir)? asks Mohan. Instead of vociferously ‘opposing the demand, the Centre should negotiate with the people of Kashmir, he says. It could be towards maximum autonomy; it could be towards an independent Kashmir. Article 370 is nothing, we have to concede much more, he warns.
State terrorism: If the people of Kashmir want independence, says the PUCL activist, it does not necessarily mean that they are not patriotic or secular. but in view of the state repression they have suffered for four decades, their demand for independence is not unjustified and needs to be considered sympathetically and objectively. He then becomes more categorical: we should not try for possess Kashmir. It is already lost.
Inder Mohan, who has been associated with the Valley since his student days in Lahore in the 40’s, maintains that since 1953 Kashmir has sufferance rigged elections, lead, installed by -the “Centre, unparalleled corruption, and irately, brutal repression by the security forces. And whenever the people: protege, they have been labelled as pro-Pakistan, he points out.
Self-determination front New Delhi: The Tamil National Front, Shiromani Akal Dal (Mann) and Sanjukta Lok Parishad, Assam, have come together to form a “Nationalities Front of India”, representatives of the three groups announced on April 19. Demanding the right of self-determination, the groups claimed that they did not believe in secession. Nibaran Bora has been appointed Chairman, K. Nagaimugan, coordinator, and S.S. Mann the convenor of the organisation. The decision to form the Front was taken at a meeting in Chandigarh by the three persons. The Front has promised io “end the monopoly of Uttar Pradesh and Hindi rule in India and exploitation of non-Hindi States and people by Delhi and will fight for a fool-proof system of language wise or state wise rotation for the Prime Minister of India. Bora was at one time a leader in the All-Assam Gana Sangram Parishad. Nagaimugan claimed that “nationalism did not mean having a Prime Minister from Uttar Pradesh.” He said the DMK and Telugu: Desam had lost their regional character as they were part of the National Front. (Hindu April 20).
Nehru’s mistake: Tarkunde says a people who have a distinct language, culture and religion and who constitute an overwhelming majority in the Kashmir valley cannot be retained in India by force and against their will for an indefinite period.
Had a plebiscite been held in Kashmir after its accession to India, as per the recommendation of the United Nations, it would certainly have been in favour of India. One of the biggest mistakes committed b: Jawaharlal Nehru, maintains Tarkunde, was to be out of the plebiscite proposal on the wholly irrelevant ground that Pakistan in the meantime had accepted gems and entered into a military pact with the United sates.
Minoo Masani, editor of Freedom First and a well-known human rights activist, in an article reproduced in the Radical Humanist around the same time, writes: the state of Jammu Kashmir was never a part of India. Let me repeat that at the time of the transfer of power by the British, Kashmir was not a part of India. Lord Mountbatten gave the Maharaja of Kashmir the option, if he so desired, for join either India or Pakistan….India later forgot all about the plebiscite quite some and to this day the people of Kashmir Valley have been denied the right of self-determination.
The advice of holding a playingly in Kashmir may not be palpable to many, but reiterates that sooner or later, it would have to be carried out. And at least one advantage of holding it early. is that we could stop spending the large amounts on Kashmir that we do, without getting any gratitude. J.P.’s verdict: Advocate N.D. Pancholi, another veteran member of the Radical Humanist Association, and a founder member of Citizens for Democracy, (CFD) started by Jayaprakash Narayan, also upholds the Kashmiris right to self-determination. They should be allowed to have their own government, India could keep foreign affairs, defense and communication.
The bedrock for most of these humanists today, however, are the wound dverdsict of Jayaprakash Narayan, who had genet the Pakistani President, Gen. Ayub Khan, as the emissary of Prime Minister, Mr. Lal Bahadur Shastri to find a solution to the Kashmir issue. He came back with Gen. Ayub Khan’s suggestion that Ladakh and Jammu should join India and the Kashmir. Valley be given independence, which was shot down by the Prime Minister.
In an article in an English daily in 1964, JP wrote: I may be lacking in patriotism or other virtues, but it has always seemed to me to be a lie to say that the people of kashmir had already decided to integrate themselves with India. they might do so, but have not done so yet. (Times of India, April 21).
