New OIC secretary-general urged to help resolve Kashmir issue

[Yzd Khalifa]

What's this ?

It's an Arbi.

 

[livingdead]

We are helping people all around the world, not just a particular group which adheres to an A or a B religion:

KUNA : Saudi donation of USD 5.1 million for earthquake victims in Kashmir, Says - Geography - 11/12/2007
Prominent Saudi launches group to help victims of Kashmir violence | Arab News — Saudi Arabia News, Middle East News, Opinion, Economy and more.
Saudi Arabia to provide 573 million dollars in aid to Pakistan - Pakistan | ReliefWeb

first one is to help pak administered kashmir earthquake
second link is actually politicking, not giving any money to kashmiri people.
third one is self explanatory.

Most kashmiris I am talking about are muslims so even if you help them you will only help muslim. All I wanted to say is if you really feel for your fellow kashmiri muslim brother(the Indian ones) its better to do business with them, and may be visit the place. Nobody will stop you as most international tourists allowed there.

 

[p(-)0ENiX]

Has there ever been a census in Kashmir before 1947 or after where the locals could have voiced their opinion of either joining Pakistan, India or declaring independence?

@p(-)0ENiX @Armstrong and other people from Kashmir.

Those photos look dramatic.

Is there a documentary that you can recommend in English that we can watch to learn more details about the conflict?

The documentaries I have come across in the past aren't exactly professional, but you should be able to find them easily on Youtube. Our English language media outlets have discussed this issue a lot so following them would let you know of recent developments. The opinion of the people based on my interactions is predominantly in favor of Pakistan, but views that favor complete independence exist as well partly due to the multiple issues Pakistan faces at the moment.

 

[Khan_patriot]

The OIC has no legitimacy in my eyes, it has no writ over anything, it is in no capacity to solve something as complex as the Kashmir issue, it is just a statement to satisfy the ignorant.....

 

[Yzd Khalifa]

first one is to help pak administered kashmir earthquake
second link is actually politicking, not giving any money to kashmiri people.
third one is self explanatory.

Most kashmiris I am talking about are muslims so even if you help them you will only help muslim. All I wanted to say is if you really feel for your fellow kashmiri muslim brother(the Indian ones) its better to do business with them, and may be visit the place. Nobody will stop you as most international tourists allowed there.

I was merely responding to us not offering any kind of help to them. I don't put religion before my thoughts, judgements, and perceptions.

Saudi foreign assistance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Has there ever been a census in Kashmir before 1947 or after where the locals could have voiced their opinion of either joining Pakistan, India or declaring independence?

@p(-)0ENiX @Armstrong and other people from Kashmir.

Those photos look dramatic.

Is there a documentary that you can recommend in English that we can watch to learn more details about the conflict?

Simple answer is...

The revolt in 47... demanding merger with Pakistan... on the basis of being a muslim majority state.. (king ... bought the Kingdom from the british before it was ruled by Muslims)...

The revolt crushed by brute force... Genocide of Kashmiris at the hands of dogras n non muslim kashmiris.

Mass influx of refugees into Jhelum Valley (Pakistan).

Armed resistance started by Kashmiri world war 2 vets...

......

After almost 7 decades Pak Flag is still hoisted in IOKs capital Sri Nagar... despite the attrocities faced by Kashmiris.

Dude,

From Neutral perspective, Things should remain as they are.

When India was partitioned in 1947, ground situation was complicated. In 1947, India consisted of British India and 562 Independent Kingdoms who were protectorate ( vassal ) of Britishers.According to Independence of India Act, Pakistan was to be created from British provinces while Princely states were given three options; to join India or Pakistan or Remain Free. Of the British Provinces, only NWFP was Muslim Majority.In order to create viable Pakistan, three states of British India were partitioned; Punjab into Indian Punjab and Pakistani Punjab, Bengal into Bengal and East Pakistan and Separating Sindh from Bombay presidency.The decision to partition was precipitated by Direct action day which proved inevitability of Partition.

While the plan was to smoothly divide the aforementioned provinces, the plan did not go smoothly as there was not enough time for a proper division.In the elections that were held in 1945 under separate electorate system, Muslim league had won 92% of Muslim votes while Congress had won Majority of Non-Muslim votes; the only non muslim province which Congress lost was Punjab where Unionist party, a reactionary party of landlords and communal elements won ( In those days, congress pretty much covered every aspect of Indian polity compared to exclusive leftist it is today ). On top of that congress won in NWFP ( current talibani heartland ) also.When Pakistan was to be created,a separate vote of Muslim and non-muslim legislators was taken. In British provinces, separation of Sindh went smoothly as it was geographically non-contiguous area of Bombay presidency. In Bengal, Muslim legislators voted for whole of Bengal joining Pakistan since in a demographically based division, the Industrial heartland along with largest port and coal bearing areas would have gone to India but Non muslim voted in Favor of division.In Punjab situation was more critical. This was the most communally charged province with pretty much nobody wanting to live with person of another religion. The animosity had a historical root. This was the province in which Muslims were largest demographic group with Hindus and Muslims constituting the rest. The relations between Sikhs and Muslims had been extremely bad,historically. The root of this lies in the persecution and murder of Sikh religious leaders by Aurangzeb which sparked a war between Sikhs and Mughals in which Sikhs eventually emerged victorious (before being defeated by Britishers in 1849 ). The root of the problems between Sikhs and Muslims had theological root . Hindu faction of Punjab was also more radical than Hindus elsewhere. During 19th century when reforms movement were going on in Hinduism, Punjab was dominated by Arya Samajist, a movement which was intent on reverting Muslims of India to Hinduism and little is to be said about Punjabi Muslims,even today they are as delusional as those of 47, still trying to trace their mythological roots to Arabia ( most of syeds and seikhs in India + Pakistan are converts from upper caste Hindus).So while partition of Punjab was Unanimous, the accompanying violence was so great that there are practically no Muslims in Indian Punjab and no Hindus in Pakistan.In NWFP, there was a fresh referendum which Pakistan won by a margin of 0.57%.

In princely state there was a much greater potential for epic clusterfuck. All of the princely states while being nominally Independent were dominion of Britishers and Britishers were responsible for foreign policy and Defense. These states were free to do anything they want but there were practically no chances of Independence. They had practically no army to speak off and more importantly had no mandate to rule ( even monarchs require a tacit mandate from population ) as their survival was dependent on Britishers. INC was active in propaganda and political mobilization of population residing in these Princely states with exception of Hyderabad where Nizam actively suppressed congress and political vacuum was filled by Communists as they were militant in their approach thus being more suitable for armed conflict.All in all faced with a population that was adamant on joining either India or Pakistan and faced with might of Indian Army ( Both Indian and Pakistani faction ) which was most potent fighting force in Asia after WWII ( In India compared to Africa, both Bureaucracy and Army had Indians at all levels of leadership including field marshal ) they had no practical choice but to join either India or Pakistan. It was expected that all Princely states would join India or Pakistan ( or would be eventually coerced to ).

But there were some unexpected ( for realists, totally expected ) turn of Events.

1. Kalat( current baluchistan, 23%), while being Muslim majority and surrounded by Pakistan on all sided, refused to sign instrument of accesion and tried to declare Independence.

2. Junagarh, while being 96% hindu and surrounding on all sides by India and ruled by a Muslim King, acceded to Pakistan.

3. Nizam of Hyderabad, which was a overwhelmingly Hindu majority state and surrounded by India on all sides tried to declare Independence.

4. Kashmir, which was contiguous with both India and Pakistan had a muslim majority of 67% was ruled by a Hindu King and tried to declare Independence.


These were resolved in following manner

1. Kalat was militarily occupied by Pakistani Army in 1955.

2. The rulers of Mangrol and babariawad which were under the suzerainty of Junagadh declared independence from Junagardh and decided to accede to India, In response Junagarh invaded and occupied it's two vassals. India in response put a fuel embargo on Junagarh and send Army to occupy those two states which had succeeded to India. With no fuel and Administration facing collapse, /nawab of Junagarh ran away to Pakistan and his dewan signed Instrument of accession.

3. Nizam and Raja of J&K tried to remain independent. The situation was a mirror image of each other. Initially India wanted to come to an understanding with Pakistan and signed an standstill agreement with Nizam of hyderabad, Pakistan wanted to have Hyderabad on Legal grounds and J&K on demographic grounds. Nizam meanwhile tried to buy Goa from Portugese and formed razakar shock troops to forcibly convert hindus to Islam which lead to an armed insurgency with Razakars and Communist pitted on opposite sides. India intervened in 1948 performing operation polo under the pretext of preventing spread of communist violence to India and forced abdication of Nizam.

4. In J&K, King tried to retain his independence.In order to occupy J&K, Pakistan attacked in guise of tribal invasion.Of the four separate regions of J&K, Gilgit-Baltistan being 100% muslim fell immediately to Pakistani invaders while king's forces were routed in Kashmir, Jammu and ladakh being Hindu and Buddhist majority area held steady. King under the threat of his capital being overrun signed instrument of accession to India.India after that airlifted troops to Srinagar ( they were waiting in Delhi for such eventuality ). Indian troops recovered ground lost by King's Army and ceasefire line which is called LoC was agreed upon after India took the issue to UN.


That's enough of history now some geographical realities of J&K.

J&K consist of four geographically separate regions Jammu, Kashmir, Ladakh and Gilgit-Baltistan. Of these regions Jammu is southernmost and is a Hindu majority ( 70%) region with substantial muslim population in only two districts.Kashmir is a valley between pir-panjal range and Himalayan crystalline sequence and is muslim majority region( currently 95%). Ladakh which is a green schist intermontane plateau between Himalayas and Karakorum range is Buddhist majority and gilgit baltistan between karakoram and Hindukush is muslim majority (100%).


The situation on the ground is such that

1. The idea of Independent Kashmir was never there on table practically. While J&K may be Muslim majority in demography, that muslim majority is concentrated in a narrow valley of Kashmir (15000 sq KM) while Ladakh which has largest areal spread and Jammu which has second largest are not Muslim majority. An Independent Kashmir was never a viable option as neither could a fundamentalist Islamic state morally claim Non-Muslim land nor could it take it by force.

2. The idea of pelbiscite has a pre-condition that Pakistani troops withdraw from J&K ceding control to Indian Army. Only after that, a pelbiscite was to be conducted.Since the fact that Pakistani army has not evacuated and the demographics has changed due to influx of Punjabis in Azad Kashmir as admitted by Pakistani foreign minister and expulsion of Hindus from Kashmir valley, demographic realities have changed.


3. The Geographical realities have also changed due to occupation of Askai chin by china ang gifting of shasgam valley by Pakistan to China.


4. Legally, the whole state of J&K should have acceded to India as was mentioned in terms of instrument of accession.There is no legal ground in claims of J&K by any other party.

5. The Muslims in Kashmir are also not unanimous in their desire to join Pakistan. Shia's in
Kashmir are completely opposed to Idea of joining a sunni state while gujjar muslims who practice transhumance also do not want to join Pakistan. Support of Pakistan is limited to old urban centers.

6. The most relevant argument in favour of status quo would be the amount of time that has passed since 1947. India was open to change in borders until 1959.

7. The J&K insurgency which started with bomb blast in front of Telegraph office in Srinagar was entirely driven by foreign militants.ISI channeled Jihadis returning from Afghanistan into Kashmir. There was never a Pro-pakistani wave in Kashmir barring in urban pockets like Old city in Srinagar. There are two anecdotal evidence to it. In 1965 when Pakistan invaded Kashmir under operation Gibraltar which envisioned infiltration of pakistani army in Kashmir under guise of mujahedeen failed because Kashmiris ratted out infiltrating Pakistanis themselves. Another one is near complete cession of violence since fencing of LoC.

The ideal situation in 1947 would have been a four way division of J&K with India keeping Jammu and Ladakh and Pakistan getting Valley and Gilgit. But since that hasn't occurred, status-quo is best solution.

FULL OF SHIT... CONCOCTED FICTION.. ALL OF IT..

 

[jaunty]

I'm not an expert on the subcontinent. However, since these boards allow us to communicate with people on both sides, I'd like to hear from both of you.

I know you guys are not fully aware of the facts, so your friend @Arabian Legend shouldn't be making ignorant comments like "In all seriousness, Kashmir must be handed back to Pakistan where it belongs." when he has no idea of what he is talking about.

The revolt in 47.

Revolt

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

I know you guys are not fully aware of the facts, so your friend @Arabian Legend shouldn't be making ignorant comments like "In all seriousness, Kashmir must be handed back to Pakistan where it belongs." when he has no idea of what he is talking about.



Revolt

Yes ... After the massacres.. ask me which? you pathetic ...

2)Tell them the facts??

 

[jaunty]

Yes ... After the massacres.. ask me which? you pathetic ...

2)Tell them the facts??

1) Are you speaking English?
2) Already been told by anonymus

 

[INDIC]

2)Tell them the facts??

Oh! You didn't tell them that those Pashtuns militia looted the homes of Kashmiri Muslims and delayed the conquest of Srinagar airport as they were very busy in looting in Baramulla.

1) Are you speaking English?
2) Already been told by anonymus

Muslim League had no following in Kashmir, Sheikh Abdullah of National Conference was the popular leader of Kashmir who was against Jinnah's two nation theory. Nehru was too himself a Kashmiri Pandit

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Oh! You didn't tell them that those Pashtuns militia looted the homes of Kashmiri Muslims and delayed the conquest of Srinagar airport as they were very busy in looting in Baramulla.

More nonsense from indic the shameless troll..

Muslim League had no following in Kashmir, Sheikh Abdullah of National Conference was the popular leader of Kashmir who was against Jinnah's two nation theory. Nehru was too himself a Kashmiri Pandit

V N Datta, a renowned Indian scholar and an acclaimed writer commented on Sheikh Abdullah in the following manner:
"Nehru’s backtracking on verbal promises, a provoked Sheikh’s utterances in public culminated into a fait accompli coup that silenced him through a direct order issued by Prime Minister of India, Jawaharlal Nehru, a sinister conspiracy of personal vendetta hatched in the state to topple Abdullah's government. The ground for his arrest was the fear that he would declare the state independent, and the quintet that pulled it off comprised Kaul, Mullick, Bakhshi, Karan Singh and that consummate wirepuller, D.P.Dhar. Despite the decade long judicial proceedings against the Sheikh, there was nothing to prove, and the trial had to be called off. Sheikh was released and all this was not enough for him to learn a lesson."

Sheikh Abdullah's warning in 1952, that "any suggestion of altering arbitrarily this basis of our relationship with India would not only constitute a breach of the spirit and letter of the Constitution, but it may invite serious consequences for a harmonious association of our State with India", fell on deaf ears and from Nehru to Jagmohan all left no stone unturned to erode the relationship that Sheikh Abdullah had, apparantly, developed with his mentor, Nehru.

By 1953 Sheikh Abdullah realized India's other intentions and started objecting to any interference from Indian Government. He reminded Nehru of his promise of independence for his country and this fragile and temporary friendship did not last very long and Nehru in his first opportunity arrested Sheikh Abdullah on 9th August, 1953 and installed a puppet regime of Bakshi Ghulam Muhammad. Sheikh Abdullah was released in 1970 and the geographical political change in the sub-continent..


A short sighted man who got screwed by india... just for power.. his son or whatever still on delhis payrole... the Kashmiris suffering since 47.. first at the hands of dogras now india.. what a shame.

1) Are you speaking English?

No hinglish.

2) Already been told by anonymus

His claims are full of ,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

[Yzd Khalifa]

Well,

I dare not to speak on behave of anyone.

@Arabian Legend has his own thoughts and opinion. Maybe he knows better than I do about the situation in the subcontinent.

I know you guys are not fully aware of the facts, so your friend @Arabian Legend shouldn't be making ignorant comments like "In all seriousness, Kashmir must be handed back to Pakistan where it belongs." when he has no idea of what he is talking about.



Revolt

 

[Kambojaric]

Has there ever been a census in Kashmir before 1947 or after where the locals could have voiced their opinion of either joining Pakistan, India or declaring independence?

@p(-)0ENiX @Armstrong and other people from Kashmir.

Those photos look dramatic.

Is there a documentary that you can recommend in English that we can watch to learn more details about the conflict?

I dont know about documentaries but to give a brief account, when the British invaded our part of the world in the 1850s they gave Muslim majority Kashmir to a Hindu named Gulab Singh as he had collaborated with them, and so Kashmir becomes what is known as a "princely state".
Moving forward to the 1940s, as independence came closer the princely states were given a choice to either join India or Pakistan. The Hindu King of Kashmir at that time however would not make a decision with many claiming he actually wanted his own personal kingdom seperate from both India and Pakistan. Due to his delays resentment started rising amongst the Muslims, and the Maharajah reacted with brutality and extreme violence. To give you some examples:

Prem Nath Bazaz, A Hindu Kashmiri Journalist
"Restlessness was universal. In Punch, where thousands of demobilized Muslim veterans live, an open armed rebellion broke out against the Maharaja and his administration. The rebellion spread rapidly to the adjoining area of Mirpur, where war veterans also lived in large numbers. Instead of realizing what he had done, the Maharaja egged on by Congress leaders and his new counsellors, dispatched the whole of the Dogra Army to quell the disturbances, or as one colonel put it, to reconquer the area. The army perpetrated unheard of atrocities on the people of Punch. Whole villages were burned down and innocent people were massacred. Reports reaching Srinagar were not allowed to be published in the Press. No official reports were issued to allay the fears of the public." Official Records of the United Nations Security Council, Meeting No:534, 6 March 1951, pp.3-4

Similarly Alaistair Lamb states:
"There is evidence that from the outset that regular troops and police in the State service joined informally and covertly, but enthusiastically, in these atrocities which, some have estimated, eventually resulted in the death of atleast 200,000 Muslims and drove twice as many into exile.

By the beginning of October the Jammu & Kashmir State authorities joined openly in this anti-Muslim policy by setting out to create along the State's border with Pakistan (in the region of Gujarat and Sialkot) a depopulated zone some three miles deep. Hindus here were evacuated. Muslims were either killed or driven across into Pakistan. On a number of occasions Jammu & Kashmir State Forces actually crossed over into Pakistan and destroyed villages there(well documented acts of Jammu & Kashmir State's "aggression" on its territory which Pakistan has signally failed to exploit in its arguments concerning the rights and wrongs of the Kashmir situation). Early in October British observers saw in one such village on the Pakistan side of the border no fewer than 1,700 corpses of slaughtered Muslim men, women and children. Before 22 October, a crucial date on the Kashmir story, the Pakistan authorities reported that at least 100,000 Muslim refugees from Jammu were being cared for in the neighbourhood of Sialkot. The Government in Karachi might talk about negotiations, but there was a growing body of opinion in Pakistan, particularly in the Punjab, which argued forcefully for more direct action to stop the killing."
Alastair Lamb, Incomplete Partition, Roxford 1997, p.128

As can be seen hence the Kashmiris themselves launched independence wars from the autocratic Hindu monarchs. In the North the Gilgit and Baltistani people successfully ousted the Maharajahs soldiers and then voluntarily united their state with Pakistan (page 68 Conflict Between India and Pakistan: An Encyclopedia - Peter Lyon - Google Books)

Similarly in the south in Poonch and Mirpur Muslims organized themselves and started fighting the Maharajahs army in spring 1947. In September they were joined by tribal Pashtuns from the neighbouring province in Pakistan. (Kashmir: Roots of Conflict, Paths to Peace - Sumantra Bose - Google Books)
The Maharajah under pressure from this internal Muslim revolt and the aid coming from neighbouring Muslim groups gave the state to India who then airlifted its own soldiers into Kashmir and the two sides fought until a UN sponsored ceasefire brought the fighting to a halt with the two sides holding roughly the same land today in Kashmir as they did back in 1948.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Well,

I dare not to speak on behave of anyone.

@Arabian Legend has his own thoughts and opinion. Maybe he knows better than I do about the situation in the subcontinent.

It is one of the least known genocides in modern history. It was carried out with such a precision that it is difficult to find its traces, except in the memories of the survivors, and the tales of horror they passed on to their next generations. Around 500,000 Muslims were killed with military precision. It was such an operation that language lacks words to express this offence of demolition of human being.

Though the targeted killing had already started in Jammu around mid July 1947, the operation got a fillip immediately after a fleeing Maharaja Hari Singh and his wife reached Jammu on 26 October 1947. An organised carnage was orchestrated to kill Muslims, wherever found or spotted in Jammu.

British daily The London Times quoting its special correspondent in India stated that the Maharaja, under his own supervision, got assassinated 2,37,000 Muslims, using military forces in the Jammu area. The editor of Statesman, Ian Stephen, in his book Horned Moon writes that till the end of autumn 1947, more than 200,000 Muslims were murdered in one go. Horace Alexander wrote in the Spectator (16 January 1948) that the killings had “the tacit consent of State authority” and put the figure at 2,00,000.

The Hindu Dogra ruler’s main aim was to change the demographic composition of the region by eliminating the Muslim population. Such was the intensity of carnage that in Jammu province about 123 villages were ‘completely depopulated’. Kathua district ‘lost’ almost fifty per cent of its Muslim population. Thousands of Gujars were massacred in mohalla Ramnagar. Village Raipur, within Jammu cantonment area was completely burnt down. The Dogra State troops were at the forefront of attacks on Muslims. The State authorities were also issuing arms not only to local volunteer organizations such as the RSS, but also to those in surrounding East Punjab districts such as Gurdaspur.

The State administration had not only demobilised a large number of Muslim soldiers serving in the state army, but Muslim police officers had also been sent home. In the Jammu city, the Muslim military were disarmed and the Jammu cantonment Muslim Brigadier replaced by a Hindu Dogra officer. Muslims seeking refuge in police stations and Deputy Commissioners’ offices were openly handed over to RSS beasts by the Dogra officers themselves.

Meanwhile, Maharaja of Patiala was not only supplying weapons but also a Brigade of Patiala State troops were operating in Jammu and Kashmir, without whose help and assistance, the objective could not have been achieved with such precision. The Times of London reported the events in Jammu with such a front page headlines: “Elimination of Muslims from Jammu”, and pointed out that Maharaja Hari Singh was “in person commanding all the forces” which were ethnically cleansing the Muslims.

That there was a design to change the demographics is evidenced by another well-reported incident. Prime Minister of Jammu and Kashmir, Mehr Chand Mahajan, upon arrival in Jammu told a delegation of Hindus, which met him in the Palace, that now when the power was being transferred to the people they should better demand parity. When one of the delegation members wanted to know how that was possible, Mahajan, pointing to the Ramnagar natural reserve below, where Muslim corpses were still lying said, “the population ratio too can change” like that (“Elimination of Muslims from Jammu” II, The Times, London, 10 August 1948, page 5. See also Ved Bhasin’s interview to Kashmir Life).

Both documentary and oral sources suggest that the crime committed on the Muslims was nothing less than an organized holocaust. Sheikh Mohammed Abdullah, who was appointed “Chief Emergency Administrator” on 30 October 1947 could not prevent the carnage. He writes in his autobiography Atish-e-Chinar (page 312) that the carnage got impetus after the arrival of Union Home Minster Sardar Patel, Union Defence Minster Baldev Singh along with the Maharaja of Patiala, a person known for his anti-Muslim bias, in Jammu. The trio met various Hindu organizations and delegations, after which the massacre attained a great momentum. Hindu fanatics, aided and abetted by government forces, started burning down village after village inhabited by Muslims. Women were raped at will. Weapons were distributed freely to marauders from the Kachi Chawni house of Pandith Prem Nath Dogra and motivated by Balraj Madhok.

On 6 November surviving Muslims were told to assemble in an open ground, to be sent to Pakistan, herded in trucks like cattle and killed mercilessly with machine gun fire between the Digiana and Samba belt. Women were abducted and raped. Even the daughter of the legendary Chaudhary Ghulam Abbas was not spared. Many women preferred death than falling prey to the cruel beasts who wouldn’t tire calling themselves as secular people.

On the ground, the killing operations were organized, directed and supervised by Maharani Tara Devi in league with her debauch Guru Sat Dev and the governor of Jammu, Chet Ram Chopra. At the politico-administrative level, Sheikh puts the blame solely on the Dogra ruler Hari Singh and Prime Minster Mahajan. At one point of time, Sheikh had even thought of initiating action against the duo for crimes against humanity (Atish-e-Chinar, page 331). But why didn’t he translate his thoughts into action remains shrouded in mystery. Did he surrender this right before Sardar Patel as quid pro quo for prime ministership, which came his way in March 1948? As is generally known, the government of India and the Dogra ruler were only interested in conceding him a limited role in a “Mysore type of government”. But later this plan was changed and Sheikh was offered full-fledged prime ministership. Or was it a result of coercive pressure applied by Patel on Abdullah to imprison his close relative caught red-handed of theft of valuable jewellery in Maharaja of Indore’s (known as Holkars) palace where he was employed?

The other aspect of the carnage was appropriation of properties of Muslims. The Muslim names were immediately erased to conform to new ownership. For instance Urdu Bazar became Rajinder Bazar and Islamia School became Hari Singh High School to conform to the new “ownership”. Almost 95 percent of left-over properties, which should have in the normal course been taken over by the State government were allowed appropriated by looters and rioters (Daily Telegraph of London dated 12 January 1948).

These properties continue to be under the illegal occupation of looters and their descendants and it is precisely for this reason that the Resettlement Bill faces a stiff opposition in Jammu fearing vacation of such properties under a due process of law. Even Indira Gandhi expressed such fears in Jammu in her 1983 election campaign.

Another incident needs a mention here. When Hindu refugees from Muzaffarabad and surrounding areas reaching Kashmir desired to be sent to Jammu or Punjab, local Muslims motivated Kashmiri tongawallas (horse-cart drivers) to transport them to Jammu against heavy odds. Initially 22 tongawallas were hired. They were later joined by many others from the Khannabal-Qazigund rural belt. On return all these poor tongawallas numbering around 90 were massacred near Nagrota. Their only fault was that they made Hindu refugees to reach their destinations safely. What makes this holocaust unique is the complicity of State on the one hand and the exemplary treatment of Kashmiri Muslims to its minorities on the other hand, given the grave provocation of Jammu genocide. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was so disgusted with the carnage that on two occasions (27 November and 25 December, 1947), he made mention of it in following words:

“The Hindus and Sikhs of Jammu and those who had gone there from outside (referring to RSS goons from Gurdaspur and surrounding areas) killed Muslims there. Their women have been dishonored. This has not been fully reported in the newspapers. The Maharaja of Kashmir is responsible for what has happened there” (Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, volume 90, page 115 and 298).

It is no wonder, then, that when Gandhi was killed by an RSS supported Hindu fanatic, sweets were distributed throughout Jammu in special thalis supplied from the Maharaja’s Palace.

But there have been some valiant efforts on the part of a few Hindus also who tried to save the caged Muslims in Jammu those days. The names of Krishen Dev Sethi, Ved Bhasin etc. top that list. But such instances have been few and far.

 

[Android]

when Gandhi was killed by an RSS supported Hindu fanatic, sweets were distributed throughout Jammu in special thalis supplied from the Maharaja’s Palace.

Although I have a great respect for Nathuram Godse, he was not a member of RSS when he assasinated that bastard Gandhi he left it long back.