• Tuesday, November 20, 2018

The Story Of The Accession Of The Princely State Of Junagarh

Discussion in 'Strategic & Foreign Affairs' started by HRK, Jul 27, 2013.

  1. Dillinger

    Dillinger PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST

    Messages:
    6,103
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Ratings:
    +13 / 14,292 / -0
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    NO! As @Vinod2070 stated, Unity first. As long as the majority of the landmass has stood united, specially the Ganges delta with the south and the north-east we've been able to rise as a power- when we have been clustered as small kingdoms divided upon petty lines we've been open to invasion. Let me put this in perspective through a quote- its a gora's quote (from a time when we weren't considered to be all that good at anything and "needed" the Britsh sahib to administer us lest we "devolve into madness")- "India had the start of the whole world in the beginning of things. She had the first civilization; she had the first accumulation of material wealth; she was populous with deep thinkers and subtle intellects; she had mines, and woods, and a fruitful soil. It would seem as if she should have kept the lead, and should be to-day not the meek dependent of an alien master, but mistress of the world, and delivering law and command to every tribe and nation in it. But, in truth, there was never any possibility of such supremacy for her. If there had been but one India and one language — but there were eighty of them! Where there are eighty nations and several hundred governments, fighting and quarreling must be the common business of life; unity of purpose and policy are impossible; out of such elements supremacy in the world cannot come. Even caste itself could have had the defeating effect of a multiplicity of tongues, no doubt; for it separates a people into layers, and layers, and still other layers, that have no community of feeling with each other; and in such a condition of things as that, patriotism can have no healthy growth." - Mark Twain.

    Comprehend the above. The day we become a theocratic state- Hinduism will die a painful death and so will we. Fire is not fought by fire yaara.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 5, 2013
  2. HRK

    HRK PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    8,326
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Ratings:
    +53 / 17,905 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    come on sentence was constructed 50% of Hindi word you can understand.....:angel:
     
  3. Capt.Popeye

    Capt.Popeye ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    11,951
    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    Ratings:
    +24 / 14,993 / -12
    NO. You can explain if you wish to...
     
  4. HRK

    HRK PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    8,326
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Ratings:
    +53 / 17,905 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Yara in simpler word.....it is a dead horse but it exist on legal ground, could be used if time allow in future.....
     
  5. indushek

    indushek SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    2,639
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,777 / -0
    If you want to greet the new year with some yarns that make you laugh, one way is to log on to the Pakistani foreign affairs ministry's Web site forisb.org - Pakistan Resources and Information. This website is for sale! and locate the piece titled "Jammu & Kashmir Dispute".

    That article is so compressed with quarter-truths, half-lies and full- falsehoods that you end up asking, "What's the difference between propaganda and prevarication?" The correct answer to that right now is: "The same as between Pervez and Musharraf."

    The article's lead-up to J&K is through Junagadh and Hyderabad. The following is the bludgeoned background it records of how those two princely states in the British rule of India became victims of "India's insatiable desire to grab territory".

    "The Muslim ruler of Junagarh, a state with Hindu majority population, announced his decision to join Pakistan. India responded by aiding and abetting the establishment of a so-called "Provisional Government" of Junagarh on Indian territory, which attacked Junagarh with Indian connivance and support. Subsequently Indian forces also invaded Junagarh, despite protests from Pakistan, in order to "restore law and order". A farcical plebiscite was organized under Indian auspices, and India annexed Junagarh. Similarly, in Hyderabad, a Hindu majority state, the Muslim ruler of the state wanted to retain an independent status. India responded by attacking Hyderabad and annexed the state by force. India sought to justify its aggression against Hyderabad and Junagarh on the plea that the rulers of Junagarh and Hyderabad were acting against the wishes of their people."

    Next comes the hammer blow on India's alleged double standard. The Pak embassy essay says, "In Jammu and Kashmir State, the situation was the reverse. The ruler of the State was a Hindu, while the population was overwhelmingly Muslim and wanted to join Pakistan. In this case, India consistently pressurized the Hindu Ruler to accede to India."

    Since the truths of Junagadh's and Hyderabad's homecoming are relatively unknown to today's generation of Indians and since the truths should necessarily concern all Indians here and abroad, even as they are now valiantly countering Pakistan's trickery on its tenet of terrorism, those two old bits of history are recalled here today.

    First, the facts -- as recorded in The Story of The Integration of The Indian States (Orient Longman, 1956) by V P Menon, ICS, Secretary of the States Department of free India.

    Yes, the nawab of Junagadh did decide to accede his State to Pakistan -- that was on August 15, 1947. Critical to note was that Pakistan's then prime minister, Liaquat Ali Khan, had argued then that a ruler had the absolute right to so accede without reference to the moral or ethnic aspects of accession. (No double standard then in J&K as Pakistan would have the world believe.) And yes, a referendum was indeed polled on February 20, 1948, when, out of the 190,870 who exercised their franchise, 91 (sic) voted in favour of Pakistan.

    What is fiction is that Indian forces entered Junagadh on October 9, 1947. The fact, instead, is that in mid-September that year it was Junagadh, as a part of Pakistan, that sent troops into Babariawad (a group of 51 villages) and Mangrol (a teeny princely State) -- both entities located in the heart of Junagadh and both of which had already acceded to India. These two pockets inside Junagadh State but outside its suzerainty were reclaimed by India on November 1, 1947, with a civil administrator accompanied by a small force.

    However, the most important facts now being conveniently cloaked by Pakistani propaganda-cum-prevarication are:

    On October 27, 1947, the dewan of Junagadh wrote to Jinnah describing the disastrous consequences following Junagadh's accession to Pakistan, when over 100,000 Hindus fled the State.
    On October 31, 1947, the same dewan wrote to the Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Commonwealth Relations, Pakistan, that the State's people were completely disheartened, and
    On November 8, 1947, saddled with an administration that had come to a standstill, the same dewan officially handed over the reins of Junagadh to the Government of India "pending an honourable settlement of the several issues involved in Junagadh's accession".
    On November 9, 1947, the Government of India sent a telegram to Pakistan's prime minister saying it "had no desire to continue this arrangement and wished to find a speedy solution in accordance with the wishes of the people". Thus the referendum of February 1948 when, to repeat, 91 voters out of 190,870 opted for Pakistan.
    Another fact was that towards the end of October 1947, before the last ignominious step, the nawab of Junagadh fled by air to Karachi with his bag, baggage and begums, the State's entire cash balances as well as the treasury's shares and securities in tow!
    The above course of history was inevitable considering that

    Junagadh State was a nightmarish jigsaw puzzle of geography. Excepting the Arabian Sea in the south and southwest, it was surrounded by several small States of the Kathiawar region that had acceded to India. Junagadh had no contiguity with Pakistan by land while its distance by sea to Karachi was about 300 miles. Further, while several pockets of Junagadh territory were dispersed in the neighbouring States, parts of other States that had opted for India were interspersed with Junagadh territory.
    The princely rulers and commoners of Kathiawar were greatly agitated at Junagadh's accession to Pakistan.
    Junagadh's nawab was "an eccentric of rare vintage" whose "chief preoccupation in life was dogs, of which he owned hundreds". Tales abounded of harassment of the majority Hindu community in the State.
    Aided by the princes of neighbouring States, a Congressman, Samaldas Gandhi, began running a provisional government which succeeded in creating an economic blockade whereby traders refused to do any business with Junagadh, the State's food situation deteriorated progressively and its revenue substantially decreased.
    No wonder then that Junagadh's dewan, Sir Shah Nawaz Bhutto, also fled India --for Karachi. The date was November 8, 1947. On the next day, the Government of India had taken over Junagadh's administration. QED.
    Hyderabad's amalgamation with the rest of India was more complex, more explosive. Pakistan dubs it a mere "annexation by force", while Indians recall it as "police action". The actual event took bizarre, devious and dangerous forms before it finally happened. The facts are revealed in Menon's book referred to earlier and, remember, the book's credibility has never been known to be challenged by any Pakistani military dictator or elected prime minister. Below are highlights extracted from Menon's classic account.

    Over 85 per cent of Hyderabad State's population was Hindu but the civil services, police and army were a close preserve of Muslims, with the ruler, called the nizam, nurturing ambitions of being an independent member of the British Commonwealth after the British Parliament's decision to quit India.
    India offered a referendum, the Nizam refused, but was agreeable to a treaty short of accession and wanted to deny to the Dominion of India the right of legislation on defence, external affairs and communications.
    A Standstill Agreement was signed on November 29, 1947. The nizam promptly appointed a Pakistani as president of Hyderabad State's Executive Council, loaned Rs 20 crore (Rs 200 million) to Pakistan in the form of Government of India securities, but wrote secretly to Lord Mountbatten, Governor-General of India, that he would not accede to Pakistan.
    Most of the Indian Army was withdrawn from Hyderabad in December 1947.
    The nizam's government issued two ordinances restricting export of all precious material from Hyderabad to the rest of India and declaring that Indian currency was no more to be legal tender in the State. It also appointed a PRO in Karachi without reference to the Government of India.
    The Razakkaars (a private militia enjoying the nizam's patronage) created communal havoc in the State during the day while communists ruled by night in the border districts of Andhra and Hyderabad, forcing Madras to ask for Indian military aid.
    The Government of India wrote in detail to the nizam pointing out violations of the Standstill Agreement; Mountbatten objected to the two ordinances.
    Hyderabad State was not agreeable to give legislative powers to the Indian government over the subjects of defence, external affairs and communications. Instead, it wanted more concessions, including freedom in trade, economic and fiscal matters.
    A situation of extreme tension prevailed in June 1948. Jawaharlal Nehru conceded, "It is impossible for an independent state to have foreign territory right in its heart."
    The nizam requested the president of the United States of America to intervene; the request was refused. In late August 1948, a Hyderabad State delegation presented its case to the United Nations Security Council.
    The Indian Army marched into Hyderabad on September 13, 1948. The State army surrendered four days later.
    The nizam gave in. He first released K M Munshi, India's agent-general, from house arrest, then withdrew his case from the UN on September 23, 1948.
    On November 23, 1949, the nizam issued a firman (edict) accepting the Constitution of India, to be formed by the Constituent Assembly of India then in session, as the constitution of Hyderabad State. QED.

    rediff.com: Arvind Lavakare nails Pakistan's lies on Junagadh and Hyderabad
     
  6. Capt.Popeye

    Capt.Popeye ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    11,951
    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    Ratings:
    +24 / 14,993 / -12
    Oh; then you plan to ride a "dead horse"..........................where will it take you? :D
    To legal grounds or to burial grounds.

    Try a "lame horse" instead.....
     
  7. SarthakGanguly

    SarthakGanguly BANNED

    Messages:
    18,420
    Joined:
    May 10, 2013
    Ratings:
    +16 / 30,449 / -9
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    Yeah I know that. :undecided:
    Ah lets have some kahva shall we? :)
     
  8. third eye

    third eye ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    17,796
    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Ratings:
    +25 / 23,847 / -8
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    These unsigned documents appear to more like a Draft Instrument of Accession certified as a true ( Draft) by a Govt official in 1989.

    Thats about all.
     
  9. indushek

    indushek SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    2,639
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,777 / -0
    This document is a continuation of Pakistan's recognition of Junagadh state as its territory, as part of which the ruler who took over the succession from his predecessors as Nawab of Junagadh in 1989 (although physically in Pakistan) officially. The details of the Nawab with his titles is as below. So outside Pakistan this document holds no water.

    H.H. Shri Diwan Nawab Muhammad Jahangir Khanji Bahadur Babi, Nawab Sahib of Junagadh. b. at Karachi, 6th August 1955, eldest son of H.H. Shri Diwan Nawab Muhammad Dilawar Khanji Bahadur Babi, Nawab Sahib of Junagadh, by his second wife, H.H. Nawab Shah Begum Sahiba, educ. Jesus & Mary Convent, Karachi, Burn Hall, Abbottabad, Aiglon Coll, Chesières-Villars, and Gstaad International Sch (GIS), Ahorn, Gstaad, Switzerland, and Karachi Univ (BA), Karachi Sind, Pakistan. Succeeded on the death of his father, as Head of the Royal House of Junagadh, 30th August 1989 (officially recognised by the Government of Pakistan). Installed at Junagadh House, Karachi, 9th October 1991. Senior Adviser on Cultural Heritage and Archaeology to the Chief Minister of Sind. Chair Nawab of Junagadh Foundation. Presdt Junagadh Muslim Federation 1986. Mbr Friends of Thar Cttee, Sky Club of Switzerland, etc. m. H.H. Nawab Sarah Begum Sahiba, daughter of Naushid ‘Ali Khan, of Malerkotla. He has issue, one son and one daughter:
    1) Nawabzada ‘Ali Murtaza Khanji Jahangir Khanji Sahib, educ. St Michael’s High Sch, Army Public Sch and Intermediate Coll, Pano Akil Cantt, and Bahria Univ, Karachi, Sindh. Owner-operator of the Ruby Kennel Club of Pakistan since 2011.
    1) Nawabzadi Bima Shri Durr-e-Mariam Bakhte Sahiba, educ. Jesus & Mary Convent Sch. Karachi, and Virginia International Univ, Fairfax, Virginia, USA.
     
  10. HRK

    HRK PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    8,326
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Ratings:
    +53 / 17,905 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    when time come we will convert this dead horse a flying horse.....:angel:
     
  11. Capt.Popeye

    Capt.Popeye ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    11,951
    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    Ratings:
    +24 / 14,993 / -12
    Please do.....................Good Luck. :tup:
    But before that ................even pigs may fly.
     
  12. AsianUnion

    AsianUnion SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    7,004
    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2010
    Ratings:
    +5 / 5,382 / -7
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Does Pakistan Claim Junagadh in the Indian State of Gujarat?

    India and Pakistan’s territorial conflict over Kashmir (“Jammu and Kashmir” officially) is well known, as are the complications that it creates for cartographers. Maps produced in India must portray all of the disputed area as Indian land, while Pakistani maps show it as part of Pakistan. Outside observers who try to remain impartial usually divide these two countries at the actual line of control, depicting the areas under Indian administration as part of India and those under Pakistani administration as part of Pakistan. Careful maps note that the boundary line is disputed. If one does not indicate the conflicted nature of the division, controversy can ensue. As we have discovered at GeoCurrents, maps that do not include Pakistani-controlled Gilgit-Baltistan and Azad Kashmir as parts of India can arouse the ire of Indian readers.

    [​IMG]

    The new edition (2012) of the Atlas of Islamic Republic of Pakistan is an interesting source to examine the Pakistani position on this issue. The atlas has official status; its copyright is marked as “Government of Pakistan,” it was printed by the Survey of Pakistan, and it was published under the direction of Surveyor-General of Pakistan. Not surprisingly, its maps portray Kashmir as part of Pakistan, but they do mark most of this area as “Disputed Territory,” further specifying that its eastern border with China remains “undefined.” The Atlas does, however, oddly exclude Gilgit from the disputed zone. It also never marks the actual line of control that separates Indian-administered from Pakistani-administered territory.

    [​IMG]The truly peculiar feature of the atlas, however, is not its portrayal of Kashmir, but rather that of the Indian state of Gujarat. All maps of Pakistan in the atlas depict a sizable section of western Gujarat as an integral, non-disputed part of Pakistan, whereas its world political map seemingly classifies this same region as if it were an independent country. The area in question is the former princely state of Junagadh. In the imagination of the cartographer, “Junagadh and Manavadar” retains its former complex territory, with numerous exclaves and enclaves, that in actuality vanished shortly after the end of British India. Such fractionated territoriality reflects its heritage as an autonomous statelet that had been under the suzerainty of the British Raj during colonial time. After partition, Junagadh became part of the Republic of India, but evidently that incorporation is still viewed as illegitimate in some[​IMG]
    Pakistani governmental circles. The map in question also portrays the city of Diu as remaining under Portuguese control, whereas in actuality it was annexed by India in 1961.

    The Junagadh controversy goes back to 1947-1948 and the emergence of India and Pakistan as independent states. At the time, the rulers of the “princely states” were given some leeway in regard to which country their territories would join. Problems emerged in several princely states, especially those in which the ruler followed a different religion from that followed by the minority of his subjects. Whereas Kashmir at the time was ruled by a Hindu but had a clear Muslim majority, the situation in Junagadh was reversed. During the partition process, the Nawab of Junagadh tied to join his state to Pakistan, much to the displeasure of both his subjects and the British viceroy, Lord Mountbatten. India was also infuriated, and responded with a blockade of the territory. As explained in the Wikipedia:

    Eventually, [India’s Deputy Prime Minister Vallabhbhai] Patel ordered the forcible annexation of Junagadh’s three principalities. Junagadh’s state government, facing financial collapse and lacking forces with which to resist Indian force, invited the Government of India to take control. A plebiscite was conducted in December, in which approximately 99% of the people chose India over Pakistan.

    …..

    Nehru [subsequently] sent a telegram to Liaquat Ali Khan about the Indian take-over of Junagadh. Khan sent a return telegram to Nehru stating that Junagadh was Pakistani territory, and nobody except the Pakistan government was authorised to invite anybody to Junagadh. He also accused the Indian Government of naked aggression on Pakistan’s territory and of violating international law. The Government of Pakistan strongly opposed the Indian occupation.

    As evidenced by the Atlas of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the government of Pakistan has never accepted India’s annexation of the territory, which did proceed in a highly irregular manner. (In fact, as reported to me by by Munis Faruqui, “the Pakistan government still issues a very limited number of car license plates emblazoned with the name “Junagadh,(presumably to members of the former royal family.”) But its also seems clear that a sizable majority of Junagadh’s people wanted union with India, although the 99-percent pro-India vote does make me rather suspicious of the plebiscite.

    [​IMG]
    Another complicating factor was the extraordinarily complex and essentially feudal nature of the political geography of India’s princely states, especially those in Gujarat (see http://www.indiastaterevenues.com/Templates/kathiaw.html for a superb map, reproduced here at a reduced scale). Manavadar, for example, formed a separate territory under the vassalage Junagadh, which in turn was something of a vassal of the much more populous state of Baroda, which had been ruled by a Hindu Maharaja. According to some sources, such subordination meant that their rulers had no right to choose between India and Pakistan. As outlined in a different Wikipedia article:

    On 14 September 1947, following the independence of the new Dominions of India and Pakistan, the Khan Sahib Ghulam Moinuddin Khanji acceded the state of Manavadar to the Dominion of Pakistan though the state had no such right to do so being a vassal of Junagarh. This act was done at the same time as his master, the Nawab of Junagadh who himself had no right, being a vassal of Baroda State. Indian police forces were subsequently sent into Manavadar on 22 October 1947, and the Khan Sahib was placed under house arrest at Songadh.

    In a fascinating and informative article, Sandeep Bhardwaj refers to the accession of Junagadh to India as a “farce of history.” As he notes:

    Junagadh itself contained dozens of petty estates and sheikhdoms within it. In fact the situation was so confusing that it took the Government of India several weeks just to figure out the correct borders before they could formulate a military plan. Moreover, the government lawyers couldn’t figure out whether these tiny sheikhdoms were legally independent or under the suzerainty of Junagadh even after the accession. But Junagadh was an important state, with a population of 700,000, 80% of them Hindus and, predictably, ruled by a Muslim prince.

    The Nawab of Junagadh was an eccentric character, famously obsessed with dogs. He was said to have owned 800 of them, each with its individual human attendant. When two of his favourite dogs mated, he is said to have spent Rs. 20-30 lakhs in “wedding” celebrations, and proclaimed the day as State holiday. It is no surprise that the actual governing of the Junagadh was carried out by his dewan(Chief Minister). In the last months of British India his dewan was a Muslim League politician named Shah Nawaz Bhutto (father of future Pakistani Prime Minister Zulfikar and grandfather to Benazir Bhutto).

    Farce or not, the accession of Junagadh to India apparently remains a highly contentious issue in Pakistan, at least from the evidence found in the Atlas of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. But as we shall see in a later post, this atlas is itself an extremely problematic work at a number of different levels.

    (Note: I am indebted to Chris Kremer for bringing this atlas, and its depiction of Junagadh, to my attention)
    Source: http://www.geocurrents.info/geopoli...m-junagadh-indian-state-gujarat#ixzz4Hpofn8xJ