The Fundamental Lie of 1947

1] as Nehru declared in the very first session of the First Lok Sabha, on the 7th August 1952 “that the entire Kashmir business is based on a fundamental lie---the lie Pakistan has told in denying that she invaded Kashmir,”[ italics mine]

[2] that the said lie stands exposed through the published confessions, nay , the boast of the principal Pakistani leaders and officers who planned and led that invasion;

[3] that neither the proxy tribals nor the Pak army had any business to be in Kashmir –then or at any time later ;

[4] that it was India who, instead of opting for an escalation into a destructive full-scale Indo –Pak war so soon after the partition holocaust, chose, in its Nehruvian idealism , to seek the good offices of the UN asking it to direct Pakistan to vacate the aggression;

[5] that immediately following the Pak invasion in Oct ’47, the Ruler of Jammu & Kashmir acceded to India, in exactly the same manner & on exactly the same terms and conditions as the rest of 555 princely States;

[6] that the said accession was & is final & irrevocable in the same manner as that of the other States;

[7] that, notwithstanding the fact that the State was predominantly populated by Muslims, the accession was morally justified, being fully supported by the only & overwhelmingly popular political formation of the time ---the National Conference headed by Sheikh Abdullah ;

[8] that Pakistan’s claim that Kashmir represent the unfinished agenda of Partition is belied by the fact that not only were the invaders not welcomed by the Kashmiri populace with open arms; on the contrary, it was the people’s voluntary militia organised by the National Conference that stoutly resisted the invaders till the Indian army arrived at the scene and continued providing unflinching support to the Indian security forces throughout the 14 months of armed conflict with the Pak forces;

[9] that, while accepting the Instrument of Accession, GOI’s suggestion to the Kashmir Maharaja, to the effect that “after Kashmiri soil had been cleared of the invader”, the wishes of the people might be ascertained , was no more than a purely unilateral suggestion from one contracting party [ GOI ] to the other [erstwhile Ruler of the Princely state of Kashmir] ---outside the terms of the contract --- arising from a purely moral sentiment , and not at all dictated by any legal requirements;

[10] that Pakistan was no party to this suggestion;

[11] that this suggestion was fulfilled in letter & spirit when a popularly elected constituent assembly for J & K was constituted and it ratified the accession in the mid-fifties ;

[12] that the resolution of August 1948 proposed by UN Commission for India & Pakistan [ not UN Security Council] that India accepted conditionally ---the principal condition being an unambiguous acknowledgement of the validity of the Accession and India’s complete sovereignty over the entire J & K --- called for [a] a cease-fire, [b] total vacation of areas occupied by Pakistan , followed by their resumption by India, followed by substantial reduction in the quantum of Indian security forces , followed by [c] a UN monitored exercise for the ascertainment of the Kashmiri peoples’ wishes [ erroneously referred to as “plebiscite” ] , with Pakistan having no part to play in this last exercise;

[13] that as Pakistan has failed to vacate its aggression , part [c] of the resolution, namely, ascertainment of the popular will , became academic [ though fulfilled through the convening of the constituent assembly and subsequent assembly elections held from time to time];

[14]that by virtue of non-implementation of part [b] of the August 1948 resolution, the entire resolution lost whatever relevance it might have had ; which is why Mr. Kofi Annan has also termed it as ‘irrelevant’;

[15] that the 1965 war too was based on another “big lie” , as recently admitted by the then Pak Air Chief Air Marshall Noor Khan, of India having started the war whereas it was Pakistan who indulged in another covert military adventure designed to grab Kashmir;

[16] that the Tashkent Declaration OF 10 JAN 1966 essentially sought a restoration of the status quo ante 5th
August 1965 and established the doctrine of bilateralism , eliminating any role for the UN in the settlement of the Kashmir issue

[17] that the Shimla Agreement of 1972 eliminated the role of the UN finally, converted the Cease-fire Line of Jan 1949 into an LOC the sanctity of which both parties committed themselves to respect, pending talks for a final settlement of Jammu & Kashmir [ whatever that might have meant ];
[ the sanctity of the LOC was violated by Pakistan through Kargil 1999, the principal architect of which was none other than Gen. Musharraf ]

[18] that the Lahore Declaration of Feb 1999 [soon to be blown to bits by Pakistan] re-iterated commitment to the Shimla Agreement ;

[19] that , if we still wish to go by the letter of the Shimla Agreement---and Gen Musharraf recently swore by it--- the only issue that remains is a “final settlement of Jammu and Kashmir”