Kashmir Problem From Ambedkarite Perspective
[
http://www.ambedkar.org/jamanadas/KashmirProblem1.htm]
Dr. K. Jamanadas,
Region and the People
The state of Jammu and Kashmir has Muslim, Hindu and Buddhist population, mostly concentrated in valley, Jammu and Laddhak respectively.........
......
Recent Discussion
During recent times, it was Ms, Tavleen Singh who in an article in Sunday Express of 20 April 2003, made a daring suggestion of third party international intervention by America in Kashmir dispute. She was correct in saying that India has already asked American help to tame down Pakistan and that we must realize to start with, that the problem can not be solved domestically.
Now supposing with some good fortune, wisdom prevails on all sides and such talks do take place, what the Indian side hopes best to bargain for? What is not only just and reasonable but also possible under the circumstances for the Indian side?
The answer to this has been given long time back by Dr. Ambedkar, who had said, as mentioned previously, that, the Hindu area of Jammu and Buddhist area of Laddhak be separated from the Muslim area of the Valley. These non-Muslim area should be the part of India and the valley be given independent status with every right to them to do what they want.
RSS realizes bifurcation is good
It is now after so many years that RSS has come to realize the sagacity of this formula and asked for bifurcation of J & K on such lines within Indian frame work, but the pride and prejudice will not allow them to implement even that.
Rule by force, how long?
From Pakistan point of view, no matter which group of people rule over Kashmir, it is going to be a Muslim rule. What more does Pak want? Unlike Hindus with thousands of castes and groups, Muslim society is comparatively more monolithic. If the individuals do not matter, how does it matter to Pak, whether Kashmiri people feel more comfortable in India or not?
From Indian point of view, Indian spending in Kashmir directly and indirectly has been so great that lot of developmental works could have been possible in rest of India with that money. Now, further, it is contemplated to spend on Railways in Kashmir from the resources from rest of India, as if it is going to be with you till the sun and moon last. The British could not rule India by the force of sword for long, will India or for that matter Pakistan rule Kashmir for long against their wishes? If the answer is negative, then why is the conflict?
A lost case for India
The Hindus, as a matter of fact, lost Kashmir forever in thirteenth century, when a boy of tender age, Ratanju, of no fixed religion or nationality was refused entry to Hinduism, and was converted by a Muslim fakir Bulbulshah to Islam. His son Shahamir usurped the throne. Kashmir, a Buddhist and Hindu country till then, became Muslim very soon. It is said, those pundits, who refused to become Muslims, were put in gunny bags and drowned in river Jehlam by Ratanju and Shahamir. The place in Shrinagar where they were drowned, is famous even now by the name of 'watta mazaar'. [Santram, Sarita Mukta vol. 8, p.162.]
Chenab formula
Muzamil Jaleel in Indian Express of 28 June 2003, wrote of Chenab Compromise. Though the official stance of both India and Pakistan says they want full control of Kashmir, they both are - may be under pressure from America - likely to come to accept the idea of compromise. India would be happy if LOC becomes International boundary, which has been strongly refuted by Pak. Now and again India talks of ***, knowing well that there are no takers.
What does Pak want to settle for - apart from full control of J & K - nobody knows. But Sardar Sikandar Hayat Khan Prime Minister of ***, last month, had called upon both Delhi and Islamabad to consider River Chenab as the Border - ostensibly a Pak motivation. Australian Diplomat Sir Owen Dixon had expressed similar idea in 1950.Even in mid sixties, the Britain and US were urging both India and Pakistan for partition. In Pakistan media there seems to be support to Hayat proposal. Also the Kashmiri separatist leadership seems to favour the idea.
Will the caste ridden India accept it? Those who were talking of "Akhand Bharat", had to accept the Partition of India, as predicted by Ambedkar. But India and Pakistan both had to suffer a lot during the process with loss of life, property and human suffering, as the safeguards as advocated by Ambedkar were not followed.
Now the talks are likely to start on the problem. Partition along the river Chenab, which runs north of Jammu is one of the proposals for long time. But the partition involves human angle and all those precautions advocated by Ambedkar during partition of India and Pakistan will have to be taken, if the human tragedy has to be averted. ...
==========================
the *** are Pak occ Kashmir!
