How Kashmir was stolen from Pakistan by Mountbatten

[shelly]

I'm afraid not; most people are native to the Subcontinent (Indus Valley in this case) and a minority have partial mixed ancestry

from what i understand the muslim invaders carried off with them many many women and killed the males.. so if you are there it can only be that you are of mixed parentage, of arab men and hindu women lineage.

 

[Joe Shearer]

You don't need to worry about that; 'India' originally referred to the land of the Indus Valley, which is in Pakistan today. This is geographical and historical India, and the people of this type of India don't mind the Muslim 'invaders'.

Wrong, as usual. It referred to geographical India. Read Megasthenes for proof.

 

[jbond197]

@jbond197
The term Qadiani comes from the fact that Mirza Ghulam Ahmed the founder of the Ahmediyah movement was born in Qadian. Not that it consisted of his followers. His movement didn't take off until the 1900s and the vast majority of his converts were mainly the elites in Punjab, Delhi and UP and the Muslims based in London and the US.

I know very well about Qadianis and the fact that Qadian in Gurdaspur is highly important religious site for Ahmadis/Qadianis even to this day..

Qadianis were involved in the Pakistan movement from the very begnning. For example, the Lahore resolution of 1940 was drafted by Sir Zafurllah Khan. They had promimnent presnce in various Muslim League comittes and British India administrative machinery. Basically pretty much supported the Pakistan movement in all respects from the very begnning even when there was no support for it by others.

Its another story that soon after Pakistan was formed, a vicious campaign was launched against them in Pakistan and have been completely marginalised today.

My point about Qadianis was from today's perspective.. They are considered non-Muslims today and even at the time of Partition they were not considered any better.. Pakistanis tried to exploit them earlier but today when their constitution declared them Non-Muslims then we should look at least at Gurdaspur division incident@independence in a new light..

Today, with new facts on plate, such talks of injustices done at Gurdaspur should die down.. The point is Pakistan has made up their mind and call them Non-muslims.. Then from that point, any claims of Gurdaspur being Muslim majority in 1947 should be considered null and void.. Now, isn't it?

I was putting my arguments based on Qadianis but apart from that there were quite a few counter balances for Gurdaspur as well..

 

[Screambowl]

Kashmir was never a part of Pakistan from where the hell it got stolen from you? are you talking about Bangladesh?
as mentioned earlier, it was Pakistan who tried to annex Kashmir forcefully. You did similar with the Balochistan. No one wanted to join Pakistan rather have their Independent Nations!!!!

aur wese bhi chor ke ghar chori nahi hoti.

 

[shelly]

if pakistan claims stake in kashmir then Bangladesh also can because that was the real paksitan in 1971. because that part won the election

 

[Screambowl]

what do you have to say in the case where Balochistan was also stolen From Baluchis, Don't be monotonic in nature.
Please don't bring absurd threads to discuss which will end up in troll.

This thread should be closed

 

[Adnan Faruqi]

Kashmir is the only state in India who have a large majority of muslims ( also lakshwadeep isles )
It should belong to pakistan just because of that
Kashmir valley belongs to a muslim country, hindus killed so many Kashmiris

lol East pakistan (now Bangladesh) was also Muslim majority state what happen to it??????

Its a answer to ur question.

 

[T90TankGuy]

Did u see it? it says tht before the partion it was the hindus who were racist and tht was the reason muslims chose Pakistan... u couldnt drink from a well tht hindus drank from.... nor touch glasses in shops,houses of hindus and sikhs... same case with kashmir... how the dogras used to beat kashmiri workers and throw their luggage etc... the 47-48 dogra genocide of kashmiris is also well noted how they burnt down villages,looted houses and killed kashmiris almost 2 lac in one go... thts how the first kashmir war started.... it was the sikhs who started killing muslims and go it served where muslims were in majority...in Pakistan....

The first train tht reached Pakistan had only 1 survivor a baby recovered from the lap of his dead mother.

i cant help it if all you took from that documentary was that .

it showed both sides committed atrocities. by the way the so called "lashkars " which invaded Kashmir had nothing to do with the murders which happened on both sides during partition . those invaders had one thing in mind . that was to grab as much land as they could . the how ever stopped to rape loot and pillage .

 

[Bhairava]

Take Gurdaspur and give us Lahore and parts of Sindh which were Hindu majority in 47.

facepalm.

what a lame thread..

 

[Adnan Faruqi]

Pakistani says:

Gurdaspur should be part of pakistan because it was a Muslim majority district.

The Fact says:

Gurdaspur is a Ahmadis/Qadianis majority state not a Muslim majority district.

1. Pakistanis don't consider Ahmadis/Qadianis as a Muslims but when it comes to getting a district "Gurdaspur" they are ready to lie and spread propaganda by calling it a Muslim majority district.

2. When Ahmadis/Qadianis are not Muslim then how come their population can be counted as the Muslims???

2. Pakistanis should decide first:

a.) Ahmadis/Qadianis = Muslims or not.

3. This is a perfect example of hippocrasy, double standards and fake propaganda.

 

[Rig Vedic]

Qadianis ... are considered non-Muslims today and even at the time of Partition they were not considered any better.

This is not quite the right perspective.

As a pro-British sect, Qadianis were among the leaders of the movement for creation of Pakistan.

Now of course they may rue it.

 

[Joe Shearer]

what appears is of no concern- what had appeared is- We all talk in English now-

That's fine by me. The point is that in either case, the 'Muslims', whatever you mean by sweeping everybody into that category, were slated to lose power. Why talk about the British 'stealing' Hindustan? There were others - Marathas, Sikhs - ready to sweep aside the rag, tag and bobtail that was left by the beginning of the nineteenth century.

How was Hindustan acquired by the predecessors of the British? By court decree?

 

[alphamale]

history is history, talk abt present. neither pak can get whole kashmir nor india can get Pakistani kashmir. Kashmirs on both sides have no choice. they have to live with their respective countries(ind & pak), no matter what ur believes are, what ur theories are.

 

[Screambowl]

4 baar maar kha chuka hai lost muslim majority Bdesh still they are exploiting Islam to get Kashmir. How cheap!!

 

[niaz]

As usual we get side tracked and talk of pillage and rape by Indian troops or by the Frontier tribesmen. Both the Indians and my country get highly emotional on the Kashmir question.

The fact that Gurdaspur went to India thru Mountbatten bias happens to be true and corroborated thru other sources. Don’t know the reason, may be because Mountbatten expected to be the first Governor General of both India & Pakistan and the Quaid disappointed him by insisting that he would be the first Governor General of Pakistan instead. However Gurdaspur with India only helped India to keep hold of Kashmir but had no bearing on the instrument of accession signed by Raja Hari Sing Dogra.

Mountbatten did not steal Kashmir, if anyone did it was Sh. Abdullah who was the leader of National Conference (initially called Muslim Conference) the largest political party of Kashmir. Sh. Abdullah always wanted self-rule for the Kashmiris. This was not a communal party and would struggle for the rights of the oppressed, whether Hindu, Muslim or Sikh, with the same fervour.

Sheikh Abdulla reasserted that the struggle of Kashmiris was not a communal struggle. Party was initially called Muslim Conference but the name was later changed to national conference.

Naya Kashmir (New Kashmir) is the name given to the memorandum that Sheikh Abdullah submitted to Maharaja Hari Singh then ruler of Jammu and Kashmir State in 1944.

It was the outline of a plan to convert the Jammu and Kashmir state from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional democracy with the Maharajah remaining as the Head of the State as the Monarch is in Britain. A detailed economic plan for the development of Jammu and Kashmir State was a part of this memorandum. It was subsequently adopted by the National Conference as its manifesto. The "Naya Kashmir" plan proved to be immensely popular in Kashmir as it was the blueprint for a welfare state far in advance of its times.

Thus majority of Kashmiris including Muslims leaders such as Ch. Ghulam Abbas, Sh. Abdullah and Mulavi Abdul Rahim (Founders of the Muslim Conference) were not in favour of division on communal basis. Kashmir with Sh. Abdullah as her Prime Minister did in fact enjoy a special status within India until outfoxed by Nehru in 1953.

By a simple order by Constitutional Head of the State; Dr Karan Singh (son of the Raja Hari Singh) Sh. Abdullah was fired as a Prime Minister and Kashmir was made into a State as part of the federation of India. Sh. Abdullah was tried for conspiracy against India and imprisoned for 11 years.

There is also a very strong misconception among Pakistanis that 1948 UN resolution was in Pakistan’s favour. For the record UN Resolution adopted on August 13, 1948 is noted below. Please read Part III carefully.

Quote

Resolves to submit simultaneously to the Governments of India and Pakistan the following proposal

PART I
CEASE-FIRE ORDER

A. The Governments of India and Pakistan agree that their respective High Commands will issue separately and simultaneously a cease- fire order to apply to all forces under their control in the State of Jammu and Kashmir as of the earliest practicable date or dates to be mutually agreed upon within four days after these proposals have been accepted by both Governments.

B. The High Commands of Indian and Pakistan forces agreed to refrain from taking any measures that might augment the military potential of the forces under their control in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. (For the purpose of these proposals "forces under their control shall be considered to include all forces, organized and unorganized, fighting or participating in hostilities on their respective sides).

C.The Commanders-in-Chief of the Forces of India and Pakistan shall promptly confer regarding any necessary local changes in present dispositions which may facilitate the cease-fire.

D.In its discretions and as the Commission may find practicable, the Commission will appoint military observers who under the authority of the Commission and with the co-operation of both Commands will supervise the observance of the cease-fire order.

E.The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan agree to appeal to their respective peoples to assist in creating and maintaining an atmosphere favourable to the promotion of further negotiations.

PART II
TRUCE AGREEMENT

Simultaneously with the acceptance of the proposal for the immediate cessation of hostilities as outlined in Part I, both Governments accept the following principles as a basis for the formulation of a truce agreement, the details of which shall be worked out in discussion between their Representatives and the Commission.

A. (l) As the presence of troops of Pakistan in the territory of the State of Jammu and Kashmir constitutes a material change in the situation since it was represented by the Government of Pakistan before the Security Council, the Government of Pakistan agrees to withdraw its troops from that State.

(2) The Government of Pakistan will use its best endeavor to secure the withdrawal from the State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistan nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purpose of fighting.

(3) Pending a final solution the territory evacuated by the Pakistan troops will be administered by the local authorities under the surveillance of the Commission.

B. (1) When the Commission shall have notified the Government of India that the tribesmen and Pakistan nationals referred to in Part II A 2 hereof have withdrawn, thereby terminating the situation which was represented by the Government of India to the Security Council as having occasioned the presence of Indian forces in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, and further, that the Pakistan forces are being withdrawn from the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the Government of India agrees to begin to withdraw the bulk of their forces from the State in stages to be agreed upon with the Commission

(2) Pending the acceptance of the conditions for a final settlement of the situation in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the Indian Government will maintain within the lines existing at the moment of cease-fire the minimum strength of its forces which in agreement with the Commission are considered necessary to assist local authorities in the observance of law and order. The Commission will have observers stationed where it deems necessary.

(3) The Government of India will undertake to ensure that the Government of the State of Jammu and Kashmir will take all measures within their power to make it publicly known that peace, law and order will be safeguarded and that all human and political rights will be guaranteed.

C. (1) Upon signature, the full text of the Truce Agreement or communiqué containing the principles thereof as agreed upon between the two Governments and the Commission will be made public.

PART III

The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan reaffirm their wish that the future status of the State of Jammu and Kashmir shall be determined in accordance with the will of the people and to that end, upon acceptance of the Truce Agreement both Governments agree to enter into consultations with the Commission to determine fair and equitable conditions whereby such free expression will be assured.
________________________________________

*The UNCIP unanimously adopted this Resolution on 13-8-1948.
Members of the Commission: Argentina. Belgium, Columbia, Czechoslovakia and U.S.A.

Unquote

Kashmir state has for a long time enjoyed an independent or semi-independent status and historically distinct from India. (Indians please don’t quote ‘Rajatrangini’; I have that book in my library in English).

Even though Mahmud Ghaznavi attacked the valley in 1014, 1015 & 1021, Muslim rule in Kashmir did not start until 1338. Kashmir remained independent until annexed by Akbar in 1586.

It must be clearly understood by all my countrymen until such time that a referendum has taken place; and no one can be 100% certain what would be the outcome; Kashmir does not belong to India or to Pakistan, but to the Kashmiris.

Only if we were expecting to occupy Kashmir by force, can it be said that Mountbatten stole Kashmir from Pakistan by making it difficult for Pakistan to conquer Kashmir. But in my honest opinion, Pakistan was never in a position to do so.

The fact that Operation Gibraltar failed miserably in 1965 to incite Kashmiris to throw off the Indian yoke; proves that it is not a forgone conclusion that Kashmiris will automatically opt for Pakistan.

I have been discussing this subject with the Kashmiris, and there are far too many in the UK, for the last 40 years. Believe me, a lot of them have no wish to join Pakistan and would rather have an independent Kashmir.

This is the bitter truth, whether you like it or not.