VISIT MY BLOG - KALHANA BULLETIN neterraina.blogspot Sheikh Abdullah preferred India - Why “Abdullah once told me that he could have become the Prime Minister if his party had sided with Pakistan after Independence” but Abdullah should realise ‘there has been history in Pakistan of hanging of Prime Minister and therefore Abdullah could have faced similar danger’ the Samajwadi Party chief, Mulayam Siungh Yadav informed the Lok Sabha a few days back. The revelation speaks much about Dr. Abduallah who possibly has not made a sincere effort to know about genuine reasons behind the historical decision of late Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah about 65 years back to join Indian mainstream, side with the Maharaja Hari Singh, the endorsement of the Instrument of Accession and rejecting Mr. Mohammad Ali Jinnah’s theory. Sheikh Abdullah was facing, no doubt, a critical challenge to decide between the two school of thoughts, ideologies and the opposite political view points and had to choose between Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru, the secular India and Mr. Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the Muslim Pakistan. Sheikh Abdullah took a well thought, farsighted and bold historical decision to side with Nehru, instead of M A Jinnah to keep his state’s secular fabric, the Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs unity in mind. To afresh our memories about Pakistan and its past happenings and learn about the forcible removals, killings or hanging of those in power is no way our subject right now but we have genuine reasons to do necessary justice to Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah and read correctly between the lines of the historical decision of October 1947. Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah, a teacher risked and took the lead in the movement of 1931 and on changing his front too often created him the mass leader of Kashmiris. In early days of the movement, he emerged with a communal view point before the people, possibly the need of the hour, as the people in the valley were economically, educationally and politically backward. This wedded him to a nationalist school of thought for promotion of a responsible Government later in 1939 when the Muslim Conference became extinct and replaced by the National Conference. This followed the demand for ‘Quit Kashmir’ and the movement in 1946 resulted arrest of Sheikh Abdullah in May 1946 and later Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru, at Kohala on his way to Srinagar in June 1946 offering further impetus to the movement in Kashmir. Mr. Mohd. Ali Jinnah went to Kashmir to win over the sympathies of Kashmiri Muslims in early 1944. The National Conference in a reception and welcome address said, “We Kashmiris today receive you as a prominent Indian despite ideological differences we have with you. We hope that you, along with other leaders of India, will try to arrive at a solution which will go a long way to emancipate the teeming millions of India”. Mr. Jinnah replied, “I am happy to see all classes and groups combined here to receive and honour me”. Shortly, in another reception given by the Muslim Conference Mr. Jinnah said, “Muslims have one platform, one Kalma and one God. I would request the Muslims to come under the banner of the Muslim Conference and fight for their rights”. The National Conference in sharp rejoinder said, “ills of this land can only be remedied by carrying Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs together” writes PNK Bamzai in his book Kashmir and Power Politics. Mr. Mohd. Ali Jinnah exerted to win over Sheikh Abdullah before Independence to his way of thinking but did not succeed. Sheikh Abdullah’s endorsement of the accession in his capacity as the mass leader of Kashmir’s principal political party, the National Conference and his particular role rather displeased, offended and scared Jinnah the most. The veteran Writer and journalist Durga Das in his book India – from Curzon to Nehru & after writes that he (Mr. MA Jinnah) was very sore on his return from Srinagar and when he was, asked what he thought of the Sheikh, he contemptuously remarked, “Oh, that tall man who sings the Koran and exploits the people?” Let us remember that the holy Koran, is recited and not sung. Dorothy Norman in his book Nehru–The First Sixty Years (Vol-II) writes, “The Maharaja of Kashmir decided to accede to India on October 26, where upon Indian troops were sent to the State by air on October 27, following the signing of the Instrument of Accession the previous night. When the Maharajah acceded, this act was not only legal, but it also was carried out on the advice of Sheikh Abdullah, leader of the All Jammu and Kashmir National Conference, the political party commanding the widest popular support in the state. Sheikh Saheb, who had been imprisoned by the Maharajah, had been released to become head of a Provisional Kashmir Administration”. In the Special Convention of the National Conference held in October 1948 on the eve of the Anniversary of Pakistan’s aggression on Kashmir Sheikh Abdullah, the President of the National Conference and the undisputed leader of the Kashmiri Muslims, whilst moving the resolution said, “So far as I am concerned, I feel certain that the political, economic, social and cultural interests of Kashmir demand an immediate and final accession to India, India and India alone” writes B N Mullick in his book, My years with Nehru-Kashmir. Further, he explains that Joseph Corbel, a member of the UNCIP Mission, in his book, Danger in Kashmir had summed up Sheikh Abdullah correctly in the following words: “In May, 1949, Sheikh Abdullah assured Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru that ‘I want you to believe that Kashmir is yours. No power in the world can separate us. Every Kashmiri feels that he is an Indian, and that India is his homeland’. On the occasion of Id on 24 June 1952 he said, “Our relationship with India is not a product of sentiment. We have contracted this relationship after giving it ample thought and deliberation. We have taken this step because our ideal and our path is common and one. Those who want to weaken these relations are not only playing a traitor to the sacred principles of humanity but also indulging in a dangerous game with the independence and freedom of our country”. In July 1952, while appreciating the secular and democratic character of India Sheikh Abdullah said, “In fact India belongs neither to Hindus nor to Muslims nor to Sikhs. In India there is complete freedom and equality for everyone. In this very India we are terminating today the 106 -year old ruling dynasty of Kashmir. If India were a Hindu country, how could it have supported us in doing away with a Hindu Maharaja? But in Pakistan old Nawabs still rule” writes B L Sharma in his book –Kashmir Awakes. In a letter of 2nd October 1948, Hon’ble Mr. N Gopalaswami Ayyangar to Sardar Patel writes about the press conference of Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah on 29 September 1948 that “I had one consolation in reading that morning’s newspapers, for they reported that Begum Abdullah had publically committed herself to the proposition that Kashmir should permanently accede to India and that any other course would be ruinous to that state” writes Durga Das in the book Sardar Patel’s correspondence (1945-50) Vol–I. The challenges before Sheikh Abdullah were many. The ideology, role and conduct with personal remarks by Mr. Mohd. Ali Jinnah would have disheartened the then tallest man of Kashmir, Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah and gave him enough wisdom to read the situation correctly. The indifferent approach offended and scared him to go for Mr. Jinnah’s Pakistan. This is why he offered his people the India as their country. Sheikh Abdullah had very well understood that Kashmir is safe enough with India alone and joining Pakistan would mean endangering the lives of lakhs of Kashmiris. To secure the identity of Kashmiris meant his identity too which he did not risk or compromise. Time has proved him correct. Today, even after three decades of his place in heaven, the Kasshmiris and their identity, barring the terrorist activities aside, continue to be safe enough for all the times to come.
Posted on: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 04:42:46 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015