Jammu & Kashmir: A list of Nehru’s 13 blunders

Here are some of the statements Nehru made between 1947 and 1955, the most crucial period as far as J&K was concerned

Jammu & Kashmir: A list of Nehru’s 13 blunders
Jammu & Kashmir: A list of Nehru’s 13 blunders

The Modi Government must review its stand on these Articles and undo all the wrongs the Congress committed in the state from time to time

The BJP was absolutely right when it on October 31, 2018, again questioned the manner in which JL Nehru handled the Kashmir issue in 1947 and thereafter. Indeed, Nehru never acted in the best interests of the nation. On the contrary, he made controversial statements at regular intervals about Jammu & Kashmir and created an impression that a final decision on the State’s political future had yet to be taken. Jammu & Kashmir was the only Princely State that was not handled by Sardar Patel, as Nehru had de-linked it from the Home Ministry and attached it with his own Foreign Ministry as if the State was an alien country.

I started with the presumption that it is for the people of Kashmir to decide their own future. We will not compel them. In that sense, the people of Kashmir are sovereign.

Glance through Nehru’s telegram No 413, dated October 28, 1947; and telegrams No 25 and 255, dated October 31, 1947, to his Pakistani counterpart; letter from Nehru to the Pakistani Prime Minister, No 368, dated November 21, 1947; his statement in the Indian Constituent Assembly, November 25, 1947; The Statesman, January 18, 1951 and May 1, 1953; statement in Parliament on February 12, 1951; address at public meeting in Srinagar, June 4, 1951; report of the AICC, July 6, 1951; statements made in Parliament on June 26 and August 7, 1952 and March 31, 1955; letters from Nehru to the Pakistani Prime Minister, dated September 3, 1953, and November 10, 1953; statement made in the Indian Council of States on May 18, 1954; The Times of India, May 16, 1954; and so on.

Here are some of the statements Nehru made between 1947 and 1955, the most crucial period as far as the State was concerned.

1. “We have always right from the beginning accepted the idea of the Kashmir people (read Kashmiri Muslims) deciding their fate by referendum or plebiscite. Ultimately, the final decision of settlement, which must come, has, first of all, to be made basically by the people of Kashmir.”

2. “In regard to accession also, it has been made clear that this is subject to reference to people of the State (read Kashmir) and their decision.”

3. “First of all, I would like to remind you of the fateful days of 1947 when I came to Srinagar and gave the solemn assurance that the people of India would stand by Kashmir in her struggle. (Who was he to speak on behalf of the people of India and who had given him that mandate?) On that assurance, I shook Sheikh Abdullah’s hand before the vast multitude that had gathered there (read Srinagar). I want to repeat that the Government of India will stand by that pledge, whatever happens. That pledge itself stated that it is for the people of Kashmir to decide their fate without external interference (read New Delhi’s interference). That assurance also remains and will continue.”

4. “Kashmir should decide on the question of accession by plebiscite or referendum under international auspices such as those of the United Nations.”

5. “…The people of Kashmir would decide the question of accession. It is open to them to accede to either Dominion (read Indian or Pakistan Dominion) then.”

6.“But as far as the Government of India is concerned, every assurance and international commitment in regard to Kashmir stands.”

7. “India is a great country and Kashmir is almost in the heart of Asia. There is an enormous difference not only geographically but in all kinds of facts there. Do you think you are dealing with a part of UP or Bihar or Gujarat? You are dealing with Kashmir”. (Home Minister P Chidambaram almost said the same thing in Srinagar after assuming the charge in 2009. He had said: “Solutions applicable to other parts of India cannot be replicated in Kashmir, as Kashmir has unique geography and unique history.” It appears he has gone through the Nehru’s June 4, 1951 address at a public meeting in Srinagar.)

8. “We had given our pledge to the people of Kashmir, and subsequently to the United Nations; we stood by it and we stand by it today. Let the people of Kashmir decide.”

9. “We have taken the issue to the United Nations and given our word of honour for a peaceful solution. As a great nation, we cannot go back on it. We have left the question for a final solution to the people of Kashmir and we are determined to abide by their decision.”

10. “If, after a proper plebiscite, the people of Kashmir said, ‘We do not want to be with India’, we are committed to accepting that. We will accept it though it might pain us. We will not send an army against them. We will accept that, however hurt we might feel about it, we will change the Constitution, if necessary.” (Interlocutors for Jammu & Kashmir Dileep Padgaonkar and Radha Kumar also expressed similar views in Srinagar in October 2010.)

11. “I want to stress that it is only the people of Kashmir who can decide the future of Kashmir. It is not that we have merely said that to the United Nations and to the people of Kashmir, it is our conviction and one that is borne out by the policy that we have pursued not only in Kashmir but everywhere. Though these five years (1947-1952) have meant a lot of trouble and expense and in spite of all we have done we would willingly leave Kashmir if it was made clear to us that the people of Kashmir wanted us to go. However sad we may feel about leaving, we are not going to stay against the wishes of the people. We are not going to impose ourselves on them at the point of bayonet. I started with the presumption that it is for the people of Kashmir to decide their own future. We will not compel them. In that sense, the people of Kashmir are sovereign.”

12. “The whole dispute about Kashmir is still before the United Nations. We cannot just decide things concerning Kashmir. We cannot pass a bill or issue an order concerning Kashmir or do whatever we want.”

13. “As a result of the plebiscite over the entire state, we would be in a position to consider the matter, so that the final decision should cause least disturbance and should take into consideration geographical, economic and other important factors.”

All this should establish that Nehru was willing to allow Jammu & Kashmir go out of India. How sad?

The Modi Government must review its stand and undo all the wrongs the Congress committed in the state from time to time to drive the state away from the national mainstream.

However, it is sad that PM Narendra Modi is not treading the path SP Mookerjee charted. His government is, again and again, urging Supreme Court to not hear national and rational pleas against Articles 35A and 370 by advancing spurious arguments. Take, for example, what it did in the Supreme Court on November 16. It told the apex court that situation in Jammu & Kashmir was very “sensitive” and it would not be advisable to hear the plea challenging the “constitutional validity of Article 370”. The Supreme Court endorsed the official argument and ruled that it would hear the plea only in the first week of April 2019. The Modi government’s stand in the apex court, on the one hand, created an impression across the world that situation in the entire state was volatile, which was not the case. Jammu and Ladakh, which constitute 89 per cent of the state’s land area, are peaceful and want abrogation of Articles 35A and 370. It’s only the tiny Kashmir, where the situation is bad and bad since decades despite the fact that Kashmiri Sunnis have occupied everything that belongs to the state and New Delhi has handed over everything to them. On the other hand, the stand of the Modi Government only electrified the communal scene in Kashmir, which has not become 99.99 per cent Muslim.

It’s an irony that Nehru denied full Indian citizenship to the Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs and Jains through Articles 35A and 370 to appease Muslims in Kashmir and the Modi Government has been successful in persuading the Supreme Court to defer again and again hearing on these Articles. The Modi Government must review its stand on these Articles and undo all the wrongs the Congress committed in the state from time to time to drive the state away from the national mainstream.

Note:
1. The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of PGurus.

18 COMMENTS

  1. Nehru becoming first Prime Minister of India supported by Gandhi is the worst that happened to India. India will bleed permanently because if his traitorous antinstional intentions.

  2. This article would have been stronger if the contents of Christine Fair’s clear rebuttal to the Pakistani Rhodes scholar were also included. Pakistan blew it by sending its tribals and now much water has flowed under the bridge.

  3. Kashmir issue has been groomed over the years .why Nehru too such a stand about kashmir is doubtful has raised voices world over.His Kashmir policies have proved disastrous of minorities living their for centuries even before advent of Islam there .The other parts of state Jammu and Ladakh are peaceful and highly nationalist are worst sufferers like Kashmiri Pandits .The nation had very high hopes from Nariender Modi govt. but alas!nothing changed. BJP was against existence ofArt.370 &Art 35A ,but could do nothing ultimately harms the people of other regions of the state which are being taken for granted.Discontentment is brewing in Jammu and Ladakh ,people feel discriminated at the hands of Kashmir centered power politics .

  4. As per UN Resolution about PoK and plebiscite on J&K, the Pakistanis must first withdraw their troops in PoK.Then only plebiscite will occur.India need not withdraw troops from J&K.As cricketer Shahid Afridi has said Pak cannot manage its four provinces properly ; maintenance of Kashmir doesn’t arise .

  5. What if Nehru might hv found a tough and critical situation during the time of independency as it was parted into two piece of the same Country and the Muslims who might got enjoyed, was feeling unsafe here in Partial part of India.
    Than, to feel them safe Nehru brought this Article so that to make all muslims feel that they are going to own their own land with all their Rituals.
    Anyone would hv done this if he was there in a place of Nehru than. Just imagine what the scenario was there on that time. A muslim Country were born having it’s new name “Pakistan”. Many muslims fromm all over migrated to the Muslim Country with hvaing a pride but think of those Muslims who just don’t want to leave India, and were looking for the same Muslim land. Nehru than, might hv decided that he would do it for the sake of Indian Muslims.
    But, this article need be Reviewed and required the Changes according to the National Integration and Unity.
    Must not be a subject of Political Heed

  6. These are not exactly blunders of Nehru. They are his intentions & his definite schemes. The removal of Kashmir from the Home Ministry under Sardhar Patel is a clear case of Nehru architecting his plan. To assume otherwise will be our own naivety and we are prone to it due to our historical conditioning. It is also likely that being a British stooge, Nehru was executing the British design to have a permanent problem in that area to have India under their sphere of influence & dependence.

  7. @narendramodi always times his moves to perfection. He is a master class and shall prioritise all jobs on hand to nation’s progress & development.

  8. What if Nehru might hv found a tough and critical situation during the time of independency as it was parted into two pieces of the same Country and the Muslims who might have enjoyed, was feeling unsafe here in Partial part of India.
    Then, to make them feel safe Nehru brought this Article so that he could make all muslims feel that they are going to own their own land with all their Rituals.
    Anyone would hv done this if they were there in place of Nehru ..Just imagine what the scenario was there on that time. A muslim Country were born having it’s new name “Pakistan”. Many muslims from all over migrated to the Muslim Country with hvaing a pride. But think of those Muslims who just don’t want to leave India, and were looking for the same Muslim land. Nehru then, might hv decided that he would do it for the sake of Indian Muslims.
    But, According to the National Integration and Unity this article needs to be reviewed…
    It Must not be a subject of Political Bait..

  9. If someone agrees or not, but the fact remains, Narendra Modi (NM) is not a sophisticated personality. To take such a decision you need a lot of wit, will and far sight. Believe it or not, NM has some sort of charm he would have acquired due to his spiritual practices for many years, using which he is able to pull the crowd. But on the ground the work he was supposed to do, he could not mainly because he is just not capable and experienced to do so. People of India are asking too much from a naive personality. Should we choose a person like Prof. Swamy, we have some chance, at least we know he is able and not naive.

    Look at his major decisions by NM, GST and DeMOn- we all know both of them were NOT his decisions personally, he just went with flow. These decisions were not even successful as expected mainly because of his nativity.

    I infact I prefer Yogi Adityanat, who at least has courage to take decisions.

    Its God decision to see who will rule next 4 years, I have my own doubts it is going to NM. Sorry.

    • In the current context, the appeal of NM has diminished mainly due to bad publicity unleashed by congress and media.
      Ofcourse, NM has statesmanship but he is still guided by some inexperienced people. While we need a statesman like him to represent our country in the world, the execution and guts will and can come only from a combination of personalities like adityanath and swamy. He lacks ecexutional experience. It is necessary for BJP to promote yogi into the centrepoint after proper polishing from the experience he gained from a critical state like UP. It is necessary for NM/BJP with another term to consolidate and derive the desired results from the good job done on corruption, black money and other developmental jobs during the last 4 years.
      Evolution and change is necessary when the time moves on. Like demonetisation, even if some section is inconvenienced, all national issues lije kashmir, Ayodhya or common civil code must be resolved immediately.

  10. Nehru was the last viceroy of India in true sense rather than being the first PM. He was so enamoured by communism that throughout his term in office he acted like an ambassador of Soviet Union & China. Such a moron that despite Stalin refusing to recognise India as an independent nation, he gave a long speech and addressed him as “Marshal Stalin” as if he Stalin was the best thing to happen to the planet.

    Sardar Patel had warned him via a letter about China’s intentions to invade and grab territory of neighbouring nations. Not only did this British stooge betray Tibet and left them to China’s mercy, he also didn’t pay any attention to Chinese activities along the border prior to the invasion. Always awarded high positions to his communist bumchums like Krishna Memon and K M Panikkar who knew nothing but to spoil themselves in luxury at the expense of the nation.

    His policy of “non-alignment” was another farce that made India the butt of jokes all over the world. He preached non-alignment but practiced salesmanship of Soviet Union and China. His decision to let go off the permanent seat at the UN still bites us when China uses that veto to undermine India’s national interests.

    Nehru belongs only to the dustbin of history. His legacy resembles nothing more than the repulsive sight and smell of a stinking gutter.

    • We fail to see it was Gandhi who allowed him to be PM, Gandhi should have allowed him to so called try breaking congress. That would have atleast not given him absolute power-which he misued to destroy Bharat.

      What we should also know is Nehru is also a patriot unlike modern day congressi, but its just that he was not blessed with sufficient intelligence to take good decisions. He is a crooked personality though, which he used to consolidate power.

      So yeah its Gandhi not Nehru we all should blame. Gandhi I pray suffer in hell for eternity. Gandhi is a sham..

    • Yes. Rightly brought out the fact.We have had Mango, Apple and Biryani, Simla agreement failed diplomacy.
      I knew only four Nehru blunders on Kashmir. Thanks to Hari Om Mahajan ji for furnishing 13 blunders of Nehru. Abdullah-Nehru dynasties complicated Kashmir issue further.

  11. Many precious lives have been lost, the public as well as security personnel. It’s high time the issue was resolved. If not Modiji, who else ? !

  12. It is my considered view that PM Narendra Modi, after getting battered by Dec 11,2018 Five State Assembly Elections, will wake up from deep slumber and to atone for his inaction of 4 1/2 years, for not repealing of Art 35A & Art 370, which were surreptitiously inserted in the Indian Constitution, as a temporary measure, he would resort to withdrawal of the same through a suitable Presidential Order. This will certainly happen before next republic day celebrations of 26-01-2019. Watch out. Keep Patience and don’t lose hopes.

    • Silly guy Mr.Jayasankar. President cant remove articles of constitution. It requires amendment to constitution to be approved by both houses.

      • CHK the context and how the Article 35A was introduced. A simple Presidential proclamation is enough to remove this Article. No need of Parliamentary approval.

Leave a Reply to Vadaken Cancel reply

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here