Date 02-03-2021
Dear Sir/Madam,
This is in response to the article of Mr. Ghulam Ali Fai’s article viz.
Kashmir: Shining example of pluralism, diversity which was published on 21-02-2021.
The narrative of Mr. Ghalam Ali fai does not give proper weightage to the historical perspective of Kashmir.
Kindly look hereunder for the other side.
Regards,
Thanking you,
Shirish M. Dave
Kashmir: Multiple plebiscite not needed.
Kashmir is an issue between India and Pakistan. Kashmir issue, means a portion of Kashmir occupied by Pakistan by sending its army under a fake name of a tribe. It was India’s Prime Minister who took the issue before UN to disclose the invasion on Kashmir by Pakistan.
UN had passed a resolution containing
(1) Pakistan should vacate the POK. Any military activity by Pakistan in POK was not permitted.
(2) Pakistan was supposed to open supply line of commodities for the JK.
(3) Once the above two resolutions met with, India was allowed to keep its military as usual in POK too, and
(4) Then India will carry out plebiscite.
But Pakistan did not fulfill any obligations. Lastly India conducted assembly elections of JK state, like all other kingdoms who had signed the letter of accession with India. And that JK state assembly approved the Accession of JK with India in 1951-52.
In this way the issue of Plebiscite does not exists at all.
The issue remains unresolved is, Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK). Indira Gandhi was ready to resolve the issue under Shimla Pact (1972 a pact which was signed between the Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan after the Indo-Pak war in 1971 where the Pakistan Army had surrendered to India after its defeat). But Mr. Bhutto the PM of Pakistan said “we would solve it latter, with mutual discussion. We would not involve third party at all”. Accordingly the Shimla Pact was specifically signed.
As for the relation and culture of the kingdom, for centuries Hindus and Muslims in J &K lived together happily till the cold war ended.
On ending of the cold war, the terrorists started their activities against India. They joined hands with the Sikhs having ideology of Khalistan as a separate nation out of India. This was just like some Muslim leaders desires for JK kingdom. Muslim Terrorists and Khalistani Sikh had made an alliance. This was absolutely a political alliance. It has nothing to with any principles of democracy or humanity or any type of brotherhood. A lot of very few Sikhs are having Khalistani mindset. Actually in 1947 the Sikhs and Muslims in Punjab were Enemy Number One to each other.
Under India Independent agreement, the British had divided Punjab State of British India in East Punjab and West Punjab. East Punjab was given to India and West Punjab was given to Pakistan under the above tripartite agreement signed by India- Pakistan-British.
Under the process of transfer of population of Punjab there were the biggest genocides of Hindus and Muslims. The effect of this genocide is very eep in the mind of the normal Sikh. They did not forget till date. E.g. A whole railway train which had come from Lahore, to Amritsar, was packed and full of dead bodied of Hindus (Sikhs were considered as Hindu for all practical purpose). West Punjab was made free of Non-Muslims and East Punjab was made free of Muslims.
To Talk about Sikh – Muslim love and cooperation is a ridiculous talk till 1980. Yes. Some Sikhs did demand a separate State for Sikhs majority area of East Punjab (i.e. Punjab State in Independent India). The central Government of India had also given a separate state of Punjab by reorganizing the Punjab state in 1966.
As usual a political quarrel initiated within the Akali Dal (better known as Shiromani Akali Dal). There were several political groups in this Akali Dal too. One leader viz. Bhindaranvale was one of the leaders in the above Akali Dal.
Bhandaranvale a leader of Akali Dal was lifted by Indira Gandhi in 1980s to divide the other group of Sikh in the Punjab State of India. This was done by Indira Gandhi (the then Prime Minister of India) only for the political gain of her party.
The story of Bhindaranvale is very long. He initiated terrorist group with the help of terrorists groups available in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Ultimately the Khalistani movement had brought to an end by 1988-89, by Mr. Kanvar Pal Singh Gill a top ranked police officer. Mr. Kanwar Pal Singh was also a Sikh.
Some Sikhs, on the plea for persecution, took shelter in Canada. Thereafter this type of migration was converted into a racket to enter in Canada. Justin Trudeau might be not knowing the full story of the racket, or he might be looking for VOTE Bank politics.
If we go back into history, the Sikh religion was formed to protect Hindus from atrocities conducted by Moguls. A tradition was established by Hindus that a Hindu family’s first son, should be made a Sikh. Hindus and Sikhs are the same. MK Gandhi too had said “I do not take Sikhism, Jainism and Bauddhism as separate from Hinduism.”
Kashmir (JK) does not have a separate culture. It is just like other states. Every state of India has some specialty. Actually it is the biggest SEAT of Hinduism in Kashmir. When Saraswati river dried up somewhere in 3000 BCE, the Saraswati civilization spread towards east, north and south India. Most of the Rishi were having abode in Himalayas inclusive of Kashmir. The name Kashmir is known as Kashmir because it was a SEAT of Kashyap Rishi. The writer of “Adwait” philosophy (inherently “Adwait” consists the Unified Field Theory promoted by Albert Einstein) was Shankaracharya. He had promoted this theory, based on the philosophy of Vedas in 8the century. He had established one out of four EATS in Kashmir. A lot Hindu literature, scriptures and books of Indian History had been originated from Kashmir.
In 1339, Muslims invaded Kashmir after several attempts and ruled Kashmir under several dynasties, till 1819. During this period at random, the Islamization was carried until a Hindu king occupied Kashmir.
Hindus did not believe in forcible conversion. The ultimate effect was, that the converted Muslims were tolerant. They were called Sufi.
Pakistan took birth only under the political reasons.
Jinna and Nehru, both wanted to be the head of the nation. British lifted Jinna. Nehru was so adamant that he was not ready to accept Jinna as a peon in his office. Nehru was popular among Muslims and Hindus both. Jinna was popular among Muslims only after he joined Muslim League Party.
Nehru had insulted Mohammed Ali Jinna, hence Jinna, instead of keeping silence and waiting for some more time, he created Pakistan with the help of British. Jinna was repenting in his last days for what he did. It was too late for him to convince other Muslim leaders, who were desirous of power on communal ground.
Pakistan is termed as a Muslim country. India is not termed as Hindu Country despite of BJP rule. The pseudo secular parties of India, call BJP as communal party only for the vote bank politics.
If a plebiscite is taken in Pakistan, majority would prefer to rejoin with India. Because they are fed up with the Government heavily influenced by Army. It is a long story.
Shirish M. Dave
Read Full Post »
Third Eye (ત્રીજી આંખ) 