Skip to main content

The Kashmir Accord

One of the most hypocritical moments of JKNC and Farooq Abdullah’s history was pleading to Pervez Musharaf about Kashmir’s international resolution when he was on a visit to India. It is an irony that a political party claims to represent the aspirations of suppressed subjects who have championed to gimmick the myriads of one of the most brutal political history in the world which Kashmir has been a product of. They have also forgotten the historic facts of Kashmir Accord where the party’s ideologue insincerely juggled between resolution and internal autonomy and upheld the tenets of plebiscite which are hailed by UN on humanitarian grounds. “There is no quarrel with the Government of India over accession; it is over structure of internal autonomy. One must not forget that it is we who brought Kashmir to India, otherwise Kashmir could have never become part of India.”

In 1971 the Plebisite Front had been banned. The Indian Government associated the the Front with the activities of the group, Al Fatah. 'Over a million politically conscious people were conveniently removed from the field to clear the path for a walk over for the Congress. The doors of democratic processes were thus been banged against the real representatives of the people. When Bhutto spoke for self determination of Kashmiri people, JKNC and Abdullah spoke against any intervention of the Kashmiri state with the Dominion. In a series of negotiations, Indira Gandhi chose to capitalise on Abdullah’s more favourable stance towards India – which Kashmir and the world popularly know as Indira Abdullah accord. 

Kashmir’s international mediation suffered a blow.  Pakistan lost war with India, the emergence of independent Bangladesh gave Kashmir little hope for the future.  Infact, the tragedies, the psychological despair in regional politics has been a product of this development. The six point Indira Abdullah accord did retain Article 370, but the Indian State “was able to make laws relating to prevention of activities, directed towards disclaiming, questioning or disrupting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of India, or ceasing insult to Indian National Flag, the Indian national anthem and the Constitution. “ There was no return to pre-1953 status. The autocratic Maharaja’s accession was confirmed by Sheikh Abdullah after thirty years. From an Indian standpoint, the movement of freedom came to an end. But on moral grounds, it didn’t. There came violence where thousands of Kashmiris were killed years after and it revitalised anarchy in cyclical phases. 

Although JKNC, which was not directly in power, Prem Nath Bazaz described JKNC ‘the new baby’ born out of Plebiscite Front - as a party, its power was brought to existence through intimidation and terror.’ Indira Gandhi’s presence in Kashmir in October 1975, was a reminder to people about civil liberties throughout India, which muzzled the press and arrested her political opponents. But for JKNC and his fanbase, it was a moment of cheer around the banks of Dal Lake.

Signing the accord was a futile exercise. Indira Gandhi’s two year emergency rule after the accord that was signed was ended. It also gave reasons of NC’s deteoriation at the State level. For example, him and his party members relied on taped speeches. 

Abdullah, also did not want to play the wild card of Pakistan to his advantage. He most of his life juggled on the rhetoric designed to assure Kashmiri people of their culture identity, without asserting any real change in Kashmir’s destiny.

© Naveed Qazi, Insights: Kashmir

Popular posts from this blog

Kashmir's Geo-Strategic Position

Also published on viewpoint, Rising Kashmir

Kashmir is gifted with strategic leverages for emerging nations. That’s why, it’s is a vale of caged aspirations. The current geo strategic position for Kashmir is dictated by three emerging nations, which are bred with Secular, Islamic and Communist ideologies.
Kashmir is a mountainous valley and is surrounded by a hilly and mountainous terrain. The land of Jammu, Muzafarabad, Gilgit, Baltistan and Ladakh constitute an area of highlands. They border Pakistan, Afghanistan, Xinjiang, and some parts of Chinese administered Tibet. Kashmir also has proximity to Central Asian Republics. With the nature of increased arm strengths developed by India, Pakistan and China, the geo strategic position of Jammu and Kashmir continues to get importance.
Throughout history, all the political changes that have occurred outside of Kashmir, have had a direct strategic impact on the territorial integrity. The wars of foreigners throughout centuries intensified th…

Scanning The Dixon Plan

Sir Owen Dixon was a judge from the Australian High Court, whose meticulous report drafted to UN in 1950 received a commendation for the obstinacy of his analysis of the Kashmir resolution from the Security Council. He is regarded as an Australian scholar of impeccable credentials. 

Infact Major William Alan Reid, who was an observer with the U.N Military Observers Group in  Kashmir (UNMOGIP) got inspired by his work for his B.A Honours thesis titled “Sir Owen Dixons Mediation of the Kashmir Dispute” (July 2000) for which the writer is greatly indebted.  Reid is currently working on the doctoral thesis for the same subject. He has even consulted his notes, some of his fifty interviews, his diary and personal correspondence as well as the Australian archives, besides other published works.  To add more facts, there has been a tradition of Australian scholarship on India represented by Professors like Robin J Moore, Ian Coplan and B. Millar to name a few. 
Academia studying Kashmir confl…

Calling Off Kashmir Dispute

There has been no transparency in discussions arising from bilateral talks on Kashmir. From the last few years, calling off the Kashmir dispute has been the favourite argument arising out of Indian media commentators and political leaders. It is because of existing narration of implanting fervent Indian nationalism inside Kashmir valley.
Economic development, financial incentives and being part of India’s GDP growth have been other reasons given to call off Kashmir dispute. But is it fair? Why did India and Pakistan make attempts to reconcile through international agreements in the past at the first place, despite several wars fought on the borders?
British research has also deemed instrument of accession controversial. Importantly, what makes India run away from its moral responsibility when thousands of innocent civilians have been killed in the conflict? When were economic grants more sacrosanct than human lives? Maybe, when it comes to Kashmir, all humanist ideals, which Indian poli…