azad jammu infooo

8/14/2019 Azad Jammu infooo

1/21

Azad Jammu & Kashmir 29

Refugees settled in Pakistan 12

Ladies 05

Ulama and Mushaikh 01

Overseas Kashmiris 01

Technocrats 01

Total 49

Legislative Assembly comprises of 49 members out of which 41 are directly elected

and 8 are indirectly elected. This Assembly comprises of 49 members and the

distribution of seats is as under:

Azad Kashmir is divided into three divisions (Muzaffarabad, Mirpur & Poonch) and

eight administrative districts with Muzaffarabad as the capital of the state. TheMuzaffarabad Division comprises of Muzaffarabad and Neelum, Rawalakot Divisioncomprises of Bagh, Poonch & Sudhnuti districts whereas districts of Mirpur Divisionare Mirpur, Kotli & Bhimber. These eight districts are further divided into 27subdivisions. The people's participation in the political and socio economicdevelopment is ensured through the elected institutions of the AJK LegislativeAssembly comprising 41 directly and 8 indirectly elected members and the AJKCouncil with six elected members.

Administrative Setup

Administrative Setup

Divisions 03

Districts 10

Sub Divisions 27

Thana / Police Stations 43

Development Authority 05

Markaz Council 31

Dehs Village 1654

Municipal Committees 11

Municipal Corporation 02

Union Councils 189

District, Subdivision, Union Council & Village Wise


2/21

District Subdivisions Union Councils Villages

Muzaffarabad 4 38 538

Neelum 2 09 84

Bagh 4 27 196

Poonch 4 25 115

Sudhnuti 4 12 60

Kotli 4 38 227

Mirpur 2 22 227

Bhimber 3 18 207

Total 27 189 1654

Road Length (KMs)

Year Metalled Fair-Weather Road Density Total

1947 100 165 -- 265

2008 5983.49 6119.50 0.45 12103.44

Kashmir issue

The Kashmir dispute is the oldest unresolved international dispute in the worldtoday. Pakistan considers Kashmir as its core political dispute with India. So doesthe international community, except India. The exchange of fire between theirforces across the Line of Control, which separates Azad Kashmir from OccupiedKashmir, is a routine affair. Now that both India and Pakistan have acquired nuclearweapons potential, the possibility of a third war between them over Kashmir, whichmay involve the use of nuclear weapons, cannot be ruled out. Kashmir may be acause to a likely nuclear disaster in South Asia, which should be averted with anintervention by the international community. Such an intervention is urgentlyrequired to put an end to Indian atrocities in Occupied Kashmir and prepare theground for the implementation of UN resolutions, which call for the holding of a

plebiscite to determine the wishes of the Kashmiri people.Cause of the Kashmir DisputeIndias forcible occupation of the State of Jammu and Kashmir in 1947 is the maincause of the dispute. India claims to have signed a controversial document, theInstrument of Accession, on 26 October 1947 with the Maharaja of Kashmir, inwhich the Maharaja obtained Indias military help against popular insurgency. Thepeople of Kashmir and Pakistan do not accept the Indian claim. There are doubtsabout the very existence of the Instrument of Accession. The United Nations alsodoes not consider Indian claim as legally valid: it recognizes Kashmir as a disputed


3/21

territory. Except India, the entire world community recognizes Kashmir as adisputed territory. The fact is that all the principles on the basis of which the Indiansubcontinent was partitioned by the British in 1947 justify Kashmir becoming a partof Pakistan: the State had majority Muslim population, and it not only enjoyedgeographical proximity with Pakistan but also had essential economic linkages withthe territories constituting Pakistan.

History of the DisputeThe State of Jammu and Kashmir has historically remained independent,except inthe anarchical conditions of the late 18th and first half of the 19th century, or whenincorporated in the vast empires set up by the Mauryas (3rd century BC), theMughals (16th to 18th century) and the British (mid-19th to mid-20th century). Allthese empires included not only present-day India and Pakistan but some othercountries of the region as well. Until 1846, Kashmir was part of the Sikh empire. Inthat year, the British defeated the Sikhs and sold Kashmir to Gulab Singh of Jammufor Rs. 7.5 million under the Treaty of Amritsar. Gulab Singh, the Maharaja, signed aseparate treaty with the British, which gave him the status of an independentprincely ruler of Kashmir. Gulab Singh died in 1857 and was replaced by RambirSingh (1857-1885). Two other Maharajas, Partab Singh (1885-1925) and Hari Singh

(1925-1949) ruled in succession.

Gulab Singh and his successors ruled Kashmir in a tyrannical and repressive way.The people of Kashmir, nearly 80 per cent of who were Muslims, rose againstMaharaja Hari Singhs rule. He ruthlessly crushed a mass uprising in 1931. In 1932,Sheikh Abdullah formed Kashmirs first political party the All Jammu & KashmirMuslim Conference (renamed as National Conference in 1939). In 1934, theMaharaja gave way and allowed limited democracy in the form of a LegislativeAssembly. However, unease with the Maharajas rule continued. According to theinstruments of partition of India, the rulers of princely states were given the choiceto freely accede to either India or Pakistan, or to remain independent. They were,however, advised to accede to the contiguous dominion, taking into consideration

the geographical and ethnic issues.In Kashmir, however, the Maharaja hesitated. The principally Muslim population,having seen the early and covert arrival of Indian troops, rebelled and things got outof the Maharajas hands. The people of Kashmir were demanding to join Pakistan.

The Maharaja, fearing tribal warfare, eventually gave way to the Indian pressureand agreed to join India by, as India claims, signing the controversial Instrument ofAccession on 26 October 1947. Kashmir was provisionally accepted into the IndianUnion pending a free and impartial plebiscite. This was spelled out in a letter fromthe Governor General of India, Lord Mountbatten, to the Maharaja on 27 October1947. In the letter, accepting the accession, Mountbatten made it clear that theState would only be incorporated into the Indian Union after a reference had beenmade to the people of Kashmir. Having accepted the principle of a plebiscite, Indiahas since obstructed all attempts at holding a plebiscite.In 1947, India and Pakistan went to war over Kashmir. During the war, it was India,which first took the Kashmir dispute to the United Nations on 1 January 1948 Thefollowing year, on 1 January 1949, the UN helped enforce ceasefire between the twocountries. The ceasefire line is called the Line of Control. It was an outcome of amutual consent by India and Pakistan that the UN Security Council (UNSC) and UNCommission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP) passed several resolutions in yearsfollowing the 1947-48 war. The UNSC Resolution of 21 April 1948 one of the


4/21

principal UN resolutions on Kashmir stated that both India and Pakistan desire thatthe question of the accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India or Pakistan should bedecided through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite.Subsequent UNSC Resolutions reiterated the same stand. UNCIP Resolutions of 3August 1948 and 5 January 1949 reinforced UNSC resolutions.Nehrus Betrayal

Indias first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru made a pledge to resolve the Kashmirdispute in accordance with these resolutions. The sole criteria to settle the issue, hesaid, would be the wishes of the Kashmir people. A pledge that Prime MinisterNehru started violating soon after the UN resolutions was passed. The Article 370,which gave special status to Jammu and Kashmir, was inserted in the Indianconstitution. The Jammu and Kashmir Constituent Assembly was created on 5November 1951. Prime Minister Nehru also signed the Delhi Agreement with thethen ruler of the disputed State, Sheikh Abdullah, which incorporated Article 370.In 1957, the disputed State was incorporated into the Indian Union under a newConstitution. This was done in direct contravention of resolutions of the UNSC andUNCIP and the conditions of the controversial Instrument of Accession. The puppetState government of Bakshi Ghulam Mohammed rushed through the constitutional

provision and the people of Kashmir were not consulted.In 1965, In 1965, India and Pakistan once again went to war over Kashmir. A cease-fire was established in September 1965. Indian Prime Minister Lal Bhadur Shastriand Pakistani President Ayub Khan signed the Tashkent Declaration on 1 January1966. They resolved to try to end the dispute by peaceful means. Although Kashmirwas not the cause of 1971 war between the two countries, a limited war did occuron the Kashmir front in December 1971. The 1971 war was followed by the signingof the Simla Accord, under which India and Pakistan are obliged to resolve thedispute through bilateral talks. Until the early 1997, India never bothered to discussKashmir with Pakistan even bilaterally. The direct foreign-secretaries-level talksbetween the two countries did resume in the start of the 1990s; but, in 1994, theycollapsed. This happened because India was not ready even to accept Kashmir a

dispute as such, contrary to what the Tashkent Declaration and the Simla Accordhad recommended and what the UNSC and UNCIP in their resolutions had stated.

The government of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, after coming to power in February1997, took the initiative of resuming the foreign secretaries-level talks with India.

The process resumed in March 1997 in New Delhi. At the second round of thesetalks in June 1997 in Islamabad, India and Pakistan agreed to constitute a JointWorking Group on Kashmir.But soon after the talks, India backtracked from theagreement, the same way as Prime Minister Nehru had done back in the 1950s byviolating his own pledge regarding the implementation of UN resolutions seekingKashmir settlement according to, as Mr. Nehru himself described, the wishes of theKashmiri people.

The third round of India-Pakistan foreign secretaries-level talks was held in NewDelhi in September 1997, but no progress was achieved as India continued ditheringon the question of forming a Joint Working Group on Kashmir. The Hindu nationalistgovernment of Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpaee is neither ready to accept anyinternational mediation on Kashmir, nor is it prepared to seriously negotiate theissue bilaterally with Pakistan. Popular uprising since 1989, the situation inOccupied Kashmir has undergone a qualitative change. In that year, disappointedby decades-old indifference of the world community towards their just cause andthreatened by growing Indian state suppression, the Kashmiri Muslim people rose in


5/21

revolt against India. A popular uprising that has gained momentum with everypassing day unlike the previous two popular uprisings by Kashmiris (1947-48, firstagainst Dogra rule and then against Indian occupation; and 1963, against Indianrule, triggered by the disappearance of Holy relic), which were of a limited scale.

The initial Indian response to the 1989 Kashmiri uprising was the imposition ofGovernors Rule in the disputed State in 1990, which was done after dissolving the

government of Farooq Abdullah, the son of Sheikh Abdullah. From July 1990 toOctober 1996, the occupied State remained under direct Indian presidential rule. InSeptember 1996, India stage-managed State Assembly elections in OccupiedKashmir, and Farooq Abdullah assumed power in October 1996. Since then, thesituation in the occupied territories has further deteriorated. Not only has the Indianmilitary presence in the disputed land increased fundamentally, the reportedincidents of killing, rape, loot and plunder of its people by Indian security forceshave also quadrupled.

To crush the Kashmiri freedom movement, India has employed various means ofstate terrorism, including a number of draconian laws, massive counter-insurgencyoperations, and other oppressive measures. The draconian laws, besides severalothers, include the Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act, 1990;

Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Act (TADA), 1990; the Jammu & Kashmir PublicSafety Act, 1978 (amended in 1990); and the Jammu & Kashmir Disturbed AreasAct, 1990.Most Densely Soldiered Territory

The Indian troops-to-Kashmiri people ratio in the occupied Kashmir is the largestever soldiers-to-civilians ratio in the world. There are approximately 600,000 Indianmilitary forces including regular army, para-military troops, border security forceand police currently deployed in the occupied Kashmir. This is in addition tothousands of counter-militants the civilians hired by the Indian forces to crush theuprising. Since the start of popular uprising, the Indian occupation forces have killedthousands of innocent Kashmir people. There are various estimates of these killings.According to government of India estimates, the number of persons killed in

Occupied Kashmir between 1989 and 1996 was 15,002.

Other Indian leaders have stated a much higher figure. For instance, former HomeMinister Mohammad Maqbool Dar said nearly 40,000 people were killed in theValley over the past seven years. Farooq Abdullahs 1996 statement estimated50,000 killings since the beginning of the uprising. The All-Parties HurriyatConference (APHC)-which is a representative body of over a dozen Kashmirifreedom fighters organizations also cites the same number. Estimates of worldnews agencies and international human rights organizations are over 20,000 killed.

Indian human rights violations in Occupied Kashmir include indiscriminate killingsand mass murders, torturing and extra judicial executions, and destruction of

business and residential properties, molesting and raping women. These have beenextensively documented by Amnesty International, US Human Rights Watch Asia,and Physicians for Human Rights, International Commission of Jurists (Geneva),Contact Group on Kashmir of the Organization of Islamic Countries and, in India, byPeoples Union for Civil Liberties, the Coordination Committee on Kashmir, and the

Jammu and Kashmir Peoples Basic Rights Protection Committee. Despite repeatedrequests over the years by world human rights organizations such as the AmnestyInternational, the Indian government has not permitted them any access to


6/21

occupied territories. In 1997, it even refused the United Nations representativespermission to visit there.Settling the Kashmir IssueFor decades, India has defied with impunity all the UN resolutions on Kashmir, whichcall for the holding of a free and fair plebiscite under UN supervision to determinethe wishes of the Kashmiri people. Not just this. A massive Indian military campaign

has been on, especially since the start of the popular Kashmiri uprising in 1989, tousurp the basic rights of the Kashmiri people. Killing, torture, rape and otherinhuman practices by nearly 600,000 Indian soldiers are a norm of the day inOccupied Kashmir. The Kashmir problem will be solved the moment internationalcommunity decides to intervene in the matter to put an end to Indian stateterrorism in Occupied Kashmir and to implement UN resolutions.

These resolutions recommend demilitarization of Kashmir (through withdrawal of alloutside forces), followed immediately by a plebiscite under UN supervision todetermine the future status of Kashmir. The intervention of the internationalcommunity is all the more necessary, given the consistent Indian opposition to bothbilateral and multilateral options to settle the Kashmir issue. Such an intervention is

also urgently required to stop the ever-growing Indian brutalities against theinnocent Muslim people of Kashmir, who have been long denied their just right toself-determination.Averting a Nuclear DisasterIf the world community failed to realize the gravity of the Kashmir problem now,there is the very likelihood of Kashmir once again becoming the cause of anotherwar between India and Pakistan. And, since both the countries have acquired overtnuclear weapons potential, and since India led by Hindu nationalists has clearlyshown its aggressive intentions towards Kashmir after declaring itself a nuclearstate, a third India-Pakistan war over Kashmir is a possibility, a war that may resultin a South Asian nuclear catastrophe. The world community, therefore, has all thereasons for settling Kashmir, the core unresolved political dispute between

Islamabad and New Delhi.Like many other international disputes, the Kashmir issue remained a victim ofworld power politics during the Cold War period. When the dispute was first broughtto the UN, the Security Council, with a firm backing of the United Sates, stressed thesettlement of the issue through plebiscite. Initially, the Soviet Union did not dissentfrom it. Later, however, because of its ideological rivalry with the United States, itblocked every Resolution of the UN Security Council calling for implementation ofthe settlement plan. In the post-Cold War period when cooperation not dispute isthe fast emerging norm of international politics, a factor that has helped resolvesome other regional disputes the absence of any credible international mediation onKashmir contradicts the very spirit of the times.An India-Pakistan nuclear war overKashmir? Or a settlement of the Kashmir issue, which may eventually pave the wayfor setting up a credible global nuclear arms control and non-proliferation regimes?

The choice is with the world community, especially the principal players of theinternational system.

Jinnah and Kashmir

The Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah thanked the National Conferenceleadership for the right royal reception given to him but at the same time said thatit was not a reception for his person, but to the All India Muslim League, the party of


7/21

ten crore Muslims of India of which he was President. This annoyed the Hindu leaderso much that he left the stage in distress. According to Mr. Justice Yusuf Saraf,author of "Kashmiris Fight for Freedom" the Quaid-e-Azam and his wife seemed tohave had visited Kashmir for the first time before 1929. Though this visit wasprivate in nature, yet as a great Muslim leader he felt concerned at the appallingconditions of the Kashmiris at that time too.

The second visit of the Quaid-e-Azam was in 1936 during which he hinted to his firstvisit, saying that he had visited Kashmir ten years earlier too. In 1936 the Quaid-e-Azam addressed a meeting held in connection with Milad-un-Nabi, the birthday ofthe Holy Prophet (SAW) at the Mujahid Manzil, Srinagar. The Muslim Conference (atthat point of time was led by Chaudhry Ghulam Abbas and Sheikh Abdullah) inwelcome address to Jinnah appreciated his role as lover of Hindu-Muslim unity. Mr.

Jinnah reciprocated the sentiments and said that the Muslims were in majority inKashmir but it was their duty to ensure that the minority community that is, theHindus of Kashmir would get justice and fair play at the hands of the majoritycommunity of Kashmir.Mr.Jinnah, who was once proclaimed as ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity, hadbeen disillusioned by that time and in his speech regretted that some of the leaders

of the majority community in British India had not been able to give such anassurance to the Muslim minority. That showed that the Quaid-e-Azam was notsatisfied with the concept of Hindu-Muslim unity in British India.

The Muslim Conference, which represented the Muslims of the State 1936, wasconverted into National Conference in 1939 as its leaders had come under theinfluence of Nehru. Chaudhry Ghulam Abbas, who had joined hand with SheikhAbdullah in 1939 to found National Conference, realized his mistake within threeyears. He returned to the Muslim Conference, which had been revived by 14 otherleaders from Jammu and Kashmir. Soon many others joined the revived MuslimConference and once again it became a force to reckon with.

The main and the last visit of the Quaid-e-Azam to the State of Jammu and Kashmir

took place in 1944. During this visit he attended a reception by the NationalConference headed by Sheikh Abdullah. Sheikh Abdullah had thought that with thehelp of Dogra administration and the active and crafty Hindus he would suppressthe pro-Muslim League elements in the State and assure Mr. Jinnah that theKashmiris, Hindus as well as Muslims, were believers in One Nation Theory of theCongress. A Hindu nationalist Jialal Kilam presented the address of welcome to theQuaid-e-Azam. The Quaid-e-Azam thanked the National Conference leadership forthe right royal reception given to him but at the same time said that it was not areception for his person, but to the All India Muslim League, the party of ten croreMuslims of India of which he was President. This annoyed the Hindu leader so muchthat he left the stage in distress.One Voice With KashmirAfter the reception of the National Conference, the Quaid-e-Azam moved toDalgate, Srinagar where the reception of the Muslim Conference and KashmirMuslim Students Union was waiting for him. The Quaid spoke out his heart at thisreception. His clarion call was "Oh ye Muslims, Our Allah is one, our Prophet (SAW)is one and our Quran is one, therefore, our voice and PARTY MUST BE ONE". In theMuslim Conference annual session at Muslim Park, Jamia Masjid, Mr. Jinnah wasmore explicit. He asked the Muslims of Kashmir to beware of the trap of secularismand nationalism of the Congress brand.

The Quaid-e-Azam stayed in Kashmir for two months and a week, which showed his


8/21


9/21

point.The river Jhelum has its source in Verinag in southern Kashmir, at a height of nearly6000 feet, where it begins in the shape of small stream but by the time it reachesBaramula town, a distance of 102 miles it assumes the shape of a big river onaccount of having joined by its more important tributaries Sindh and Lidder. Thetowns of Islamabad, Srinagar, Sopore, Do-ab-gal, Baramula, Uri and Muzaffarabad

are towns at its bank in the State. The river passes through Woolar Lake where Indiaplans to construct a barrage, which if completed will starve Pakistans irrigatedLands. By the time Jhelum reaches Mangla it has a vertical fall of 4000 feet, whichhas been made use of by Pakistan by building a multiple purpose Dam Project.

Chanab descends from Lahole in the Chamba range of the Himalayas. It takes leaveof the mountains at Akhnoor in Jammu and Kashmir State. It enters Pakistan atKhairi Rihal in Gujrat District. At Salal, a place 7 miles from Reasi India hasconstructed a Dam. The Lake thus formed is being used not only for generation ofelectricity but also for irrigation purpose, which would reduce the quantity of waterthat flows in Pakistan. In times of War, it can be used to inundate large areas of

Land in Sialkot, Gujranwala and Sheikpura. Parts of its water stands alreadydiverted at Akhnoor to feed the Ranbir canal, which irrigates large areas in Jammu,Sambha and Ranbirsinghpura.Under the Indus Basin Treaty out of five rivers of the Punjab two rivers namely

Jhelum and Chanab came to Pakistans shared and three namely Ravi, Sutlej andBeas went to Indias. But all the three Pakistan rivers (Indus included) either rise inor traverse the State of Jammu and Kashmir and the agriculture of the Punjab andSindh to a great extent depends upon the melting snows of its mountains. The greatMangla Dam, so important to the economy of Pakistan, lies in the territory, whichwas once part of the State of Jammu and Kashmir.

The valleys of the major Kashmiri Rivers, now so vital to the economy of Pakistanalso provided until very recently the main lines of communications between the

state and the outside world. The road to Srinagar started at Rawalpindi and followedthe course of the Jhelum into the vale of Kashmir. The valley of upper Indus gaveaccess to the hill State of Gilgit region. The Line of the beds of the rivers whichcreated links between the western part of the Punjab (now Pakistan) and Kashmiralso made communications between eastern part of (India) and Kashmir extremelydifficult. The only road within the State of Jammu and Kashmir, for example, whichlinked Jammu (the winter capital of the State) with Srinagar (the Jammu capital)involves the crossing of Pir Panjal Range by means of Banihal Pass, over 9,000 feethigh and snow bound in winter the easiest route between Jammu and Srinagar laythrough west (Pakistan) Punjab by way of Sialkot and Rawalpindi at the moment ofPartition in 1947 there existed but one road from India to Jammu, by way ofPathankot (which was again a tehsil of Gurdaspur District, a Muslim majority District

with Pathankot tehsil having marginal Hindu majority); and this was then of poorestquality and much of it un-surfaced. Thus Kashmir has been described as the Jugularvein of Pakistan.

Hindu IntriguesKrishna Menon wrote a private letter to Mountbatten on 14 June 1947 warning himwith dire consequences for the future of Anglo-Indian relations, if the State of

Jammu and Kashmir were permitted to go to Pakistan. The gist of the argumentseemed to be that it might be perceived that British policy, while accepting


10/21

abandonment of India, was to make Pakistan, strengthened by accession of theState of Jammu and Kashmir, into the eastern frontier of a British sphere ofinfluence in the Middle East. Such development would not be at all popular in thenewly independent India: and it might put at risk the extensive British intereststhere. It was essential n Menons view that the State of Jammu and Kashmir bebrought within the Indian fold.

According to British Transfer of Power papers, Menon had asked Mountbatten not tokeep this letter; it had however survived among the Mountbatten papers. About thesame time Mountbatten requested Nehru to prepare a Note on Kashmir for him,which Nehru did. Nehru in the Note said: "Kashmir is of first importance to usbecause of the great strategic importance of the frontier state".Nehru concluded: "If any attempt is made to put Kashmir into the Pakistanconstituent assembly there is likely to be much trouble because the NationalConference is not in favor of it and the Maharajas position would also becomedifficult. The normal and obvious course appears to be for Kashmir to join theconstituent assembly of India. This will satisfy both the popular demand andMaharajas wishes. It is absurd to think that Pakistan would create trouble, if thishappens.".

Mountbatten disliked the prospect of independence for the State of Jammu andKashmir after the Transfer of Power. While publicly declaring that Maharaja wasperfectly entitled to accede either to Pakistan or India, he personally favored asolution where Maharaja left the decision to Sheikh Abdullahs National Conferenceas Nehrus note suggested, Sheikh Abdullah would surely opt for India.Sheikh Abdullah along with Chaudhry Ghulam Abbas was in prison. So the firstimportant thing was to get him released. For this Nehru himself was keen to go toKashmir. It was with great difficulty that Mountbatten was able to dissuade him onthe ground that Nehru must " really look to his duty to the Indian people as a whole.

There were four hundred million in India and only four million in Kashmir". It wasrather irresponsible of the future Prime Minister of India, Mountbatten observed, tospend so much time on what was but one of the many grave problems confronting

him.Mountbatten himself did visit Srinagar but was unable to persuade the Maharaja todiscuss serious matters. Alastair Lamb has however, interpreted the record on thediscussion as implying that the Maharaja would be well advised to join India if heentertained any hope of retaining his position in the State. The Congress wouldkeep him on his throne. Mr. Jinnah and his Muslim League would make sure that hissubjects brought about his overthrow.

Jawaharlal Nehru, was however, disappointed that Mountbatten had been "unable tosolve the problem of Kashmir" for he observed, "that the problem would not besolved until Sheikh Abdullah was released from the prison". It was eventuallyagreed that Mohan Das Karam Chand Ghandi should go to Kashmir in Nehrus placeto take up the "question of Sheikh Abdullah" and Mountbatten wrote to Maharaja topave the way.Incidentally Ghandis visit was not the only visit to the Maharaja by leadingpersonalities of Indian side on the eve of the Transfer of Power. There were Kashmirexcursions by Acharya Kriplani, the then President of Congress and the Sikh rulersof Patila, Kapurthala and Faridkot States of East Punjab which had decided toaccede to India. Kapurthala was of course, a State with a Muslim majority (at leastuntil the massacre that accompanied Partition) and a non-Muslim ruler. Jinnah


11/21

desired to visit Kashmir but Maharaja did not agree. There is no evidence ofconsultation with Jinnah on Kashmir by Mountbatten as record shows with Nehru.

Mountbatten BiasAccording to official British Transfer of Power papers Mountbatten had told theNawab of Bhopal and the Maharaja of Indore on 4 August 1947, the state of Jammu

and Kashmir was so placed geographically that it could join either dominion,provided part of Gurdaspur District was put into East Punjab by the BoundaryCommission- in other words only by giving Gurdaspur to India, would the Maharajaof Jammu and Kashmir be presented with a free chance; to give Gurdaspur toPakistan was effectively to guarantee that the State of Jammu and Kashmir wouldsooner or later fall to that dominion.

The geographic and economic links between Jammu and Kashmir and Pakistan werebetter than those with India, particularly if in the actual process of Partition theGurdaspur District of Punjab with Muslim majority were awarded to Pakistan. APakistani Gurdaspur would mean that direct Indian land access to the State (whichwas by no means ideal even across the Gurdaspur District) would have to be

through Kangra District of Punjab (now in Himachal) over extremely difficult terrainprovided foot hill of the Himalayas by either direct into Jammu or by way ofPathankot tehsil of Gurdaspur District (where there was a small Hindus majority) ifthat tehsil alone went to India; and all this would involve new roads which wouldtake considerable time to construct.

The theory of partition was that all Muslim Majority districts contiguous to theMuslim core of Punjab would go to Pakistan. In the event, with the awarding of threeout of four tehsils of Gurdaspur District to East Punjab (that is to say the part ofPunjab, which was to be Indian) the accession to India of the State of Jammu andKashmir became a practical as opposed to theoretical, possibility. Because two ofthese tehsils Batala and Gurdaspur, were with significant Muslim majorities (onlyPathankot tehsil then had a small Hindu majority) this award seemed to go against

the basic spirit of Partition; and the Gurdaspur decision has consequently been thesubject of a great deal of discussion. Mountbatten has been accused, particularly inPakistan, of deliberate intent to favor the interests of India over these of Pakistan.

Within Pakistan there has been a persistent consensus both among the elites andthe masses that the Boundary Commission led by Cyril Radcliffe in 1947 has beenresponsible for most of the India-Pakistan discords with Kashmir leading the list.Pakistanis have maintained all along that last minute changes were made in theBoundary Award under manipulation by Mountbatten and their associates to suitthe Indian geo-strategic imperatives. The cession of Muslim majority areas inFerozepur and Gurdaspur areas (in former eastern Punjab) to India at the lastmoment have always been perceived in terms of Indias long time designs on

Kashmir itself. Even long after Radcliffes Award, such question were raised not onlyin Pakistani and British press but, as the contemporary classified official documentsreveal, inter-departmental concerns dogged the officials in British Foreign Office,Commonwealth Relations Office and their High Commissions in South Asia. In aluncheon meeting arranged by Mountbatten for Radcliffe and attended by LordIsmay, a close confidant of the Viceroy, drastic changes were made in the BoundaryAward. Rao Ayer, the Assistant Secretary to the Commission, the Maharaja ofBikaner and V.P. Menon played a crucial role in influencing the British officialdecisions at this juncture, denying Pakistan Muslim majority areas in Gurdaspur and


12/21

Ferozepur Districts Menon, to the knowledge of all, was the trusted confident ofVallabhai Patel and enjoyed closer access to the viceroy whose personalantagonism to Jinnah was publicly known. On Menons being confidant of the bothPatel and Mountbatten Chaudhry Mahamood Ali in his book Emergence of Pakistan,has observed: "If a Muslim officer had been in V.P. Menons position was known tomaintain contact with Jinnah, no Viceroy could have tolerated it without laying

himself open to the charge of partisanship; in any case, the Congress would havemade it impossible for such an officer to continue in that position". This has alsobeen endorsed by Alan Cambell- Johnson in "Mission with Mountbatten".A senior Muslim official himself had seen an early version of the map in Ismaysoffice in Delhi, which had shown those areas already within India, even before theAward was made public. Radcliffes Secretary, Christopher Beaumont, in a detailedexpose in February 1992, has further provided first hand substance to such long-held suspicion.Radcliffe had prepared his Award about the distribution of territories of the Punjabbetween India and Pakistan by 8 August 1947 by which tehsils of Ferozpur and Zirawere allotted to Pakistan. This was done on the basis of population ration Ferozepur with 55 percent Muslim and Zira with 65 Percent Muslim, but it was

Mountbattens support for a strong post-independence India against a weakenedPakistan, which made Mountbatten to pressurize Radcliffe to give these two tehsilsto India so that India have access to Kashmir. British historian Andrew Robertscomes to believe that "Mountbattens action over delaying the announcement ofRadcliffe Award after 9 August indicate of him guilty of the errant folly as well asdishonesty". He pleads in his book that Mountbatten deserved to be court-martialled on his return to London".

Pakistan Day Celebrated In SrinagarMany Pakistanis, and not only the leaders like M.A. Jinnah and Liaquat Ali Khan,once they appreciated the implications of the Award by Radcliffe Commission of thethree eastern tehsils of Gurdaspur District to India, felt profound sense of betrayal.

It was understandable that some of them should begin to contemplate unorthodoxand unofficial course of action.

While Poonch formally became an integral part of Jammu and Kashmir State in1935-36, its Muslim inhabitants (some 380,000 out of a total 420,000) resented thechange and never reconciled themselves to being subjects of that State an attitude,which was to be of great significance in 1947. Traditionally the people of Poonchhad little indeed to do with their neighbors in the vale of Kashmir across the PirPanjal Range, and even less with Jammu: their links had always been across the

Jhelum, particularly in the Hazara District of NWFP.

Large number of men from Poonch (mainly Sudhans from Sudhnuti tehsil) had

served in the British Indian army during the War; and Poonch men (Poonchis) alsoconstituted the strength of the Jammu and Kashmir State Forces; in 1947 the Jagirof Poonch may have contained as many as 60,000 ex-servicemen who could providea formidable nucleus for any resistance to the Maharaja. In June 1947 there beganin Poonch a "no tax" campaign which rapidly developed into a secessionistmovement from the state greatly reinforced throughout much of Poonch (and inSrinagar as well) when on 14 and 15 August people tried to celebrate "PakistanDay" (which coincided with Kashmir Day which had been observed since 1931) indefiance of Maharajas orders by displaying Pakistan flags and holding public


13/21

demonstrations. Martial Law was introduced. About two weeks after Transfer ofPower there were major clashes between the State Troops in this case and Poonchcrowds resulting in large number of casualties.

Standstill Agreement On 12 August 1947 the new Prime Minister of Jammu andKashmir State, Janak Singh proposed by telegram a Stand Still Agreement both with

Pakistan and India. Pakistan agreed on 15 August. India procrastinated, arguing thatthe matter needed to be negotiated by an official from the State sent to Delhi. Nosuch official was dispatched for this purpose- no Standstill Agreement everconcluded. The Indian response was certainly a departure from the procedure,which Mountbatten had earlier indicated and it suggested that Indian policy afterIndependence was going to set out in hitherto uncharted waters.

The Maharaja confronted with growing internal disorder (including a full scalerebellion into the Poonch region of the State), sought Indian military help without, ifat all possible, surrendering his own independence. On 25 October 1947, before theKashmir crisis had fully developed and before Indian claims based on so-calledMaharajas accession to India (which is alleged to have had been signed on 26

October 1947) had been voiced, Nehru in a telegram to Attlee, the British PrimeMinister, declared that:"I should like to make it clear that (the) question of aiding Kashmir... is not designedin any way to influence the State to accede to India. Our view, which we haverepeatedly made public, is that (the) question of accession in any disputed territorymust be decided in accordance with the wishes of the people, and we adhere to thisview". An instrument of Accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India is alleged to havebeen signed by Maharaja on 26 October 1947 and the acceptance of this Instrumentwas made by Governor General of India on 27 October 1947.

Another pair of documents consists of letter from the Maharaja to Mountbattendated 26 October, 1947 in which Indian military aid is sought in return for accession

to India (on terms stated in an allegedly enclosed Instrument) and the appointmentof Sheikh Abdullah to head the interim government of State; and a letter fromMountbatten to the Maharaja dated 27 October, 1947 acknowledging the above andnoting that, once the affairs of the State have been settled and law and order isrestored "the question of the States accession should be settled by a reference tothe people".

Fake Instrument of AccessionThe recent research based on the material in archives and sources as the memoirsof Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru of India and Prime Minister Jammu and Kashmirat that time Mehar Chand Mahajan and the recently published correspondence of

Jawaharlal Nehru and V.P. Menons account (The Integration of Indian States) provebeyond any shadow of doubt that these two documents (a) the Instrument of

accession and (b) the letter of the Maharaja to Mountbatten could not possibly havebeen signed on 26 October 1947. By that time Maharaja had fled from the capitaland during October 26, 1947 he was traveling by road from Srinagar to Jammu. HisPrime Minister, M.C. Mahajan who was negotiating with government of India andsenior Indian official concerned in the State matter V.P. Menon were still in NewDelhi where their presence was noted by many observers. There was nocommunication between New Delhi and the traveling maharaja. Menon and Mahajanset out by air from New Delhi to Jammu at about IO A.M. on 27 October and the


14/21

Maharaja learned from them for the first time the result of his prime ministersnegotiations in New Delhi in the early afternoon of that date. The earliest possibletime and date for their signature would have been the afternoon of 27 October1947.

With regard to exchange of letters between Maharaja and Mountbatten, the formerseeking military aid and the latter acknowledging the same and promisingplebiscite, Alastair lamb says " It seems more than probable, both were drafted byGovernment of India before being taken to Jammu on 27 October 1947 (by V.P.Menon and Jammu and Kashmir Prime Minister M.C. Maharan whose movements,incidentally, are correctly reported in the London Times of 28 October, 1947) afterthe arrival of Indian troops at Srinagar field. The case is very strong, therefore, thatthe document i.e. Maharajas letter to Mountbatten was dictated to the Maharaja".Government of India published two documents namely Maharajas letter andMountbattens reply on 28 October 1947. But the far more important document- thealleged Instrument of Ascension was not published until many years later, if at all. Itwas not communicated to Pakistan at the outset of overt Indian intervention in the

State of Jammu and Kashmir, nor was it presented in facsimile to the United Nationsin early 1948 as part of Indian reference to the Security Council. The 1948 WhitePaper in which Government of India set out its formal case in respect to the State of

Jammu and Kashmir does not contain the Instrument of Accession as claimed tohave been signed by the Maharaja. Instead, it reproduces an unsigned form ofAccession such as, it is implied, the Maharaja might have signed.Alastair Lamb writes: "To date no satisfactory original of this Instrument as signedby the Maharaja has been produced; though a highly suspect version, complete withthe false date 26 October 1947, has been circulated by the Indian side since the1960s. On the present evidence it is by no means clear that the Maharaja ever didsign an Instrument of Accession. There are, indeed, grounds for suspecting that hedid no such thing".

Indian Intervention & Pakistan's ResponseIndian official intervention was decided on 26 October 1947 and a massive airliftwas immediately organized to fly two infantry battalions into Srinagar. Over 100Dakota transport aircraft were assembled at various airfields around Delhi.Obviously this airlift had to have been product of much planning which had beenstarted weeks before. There were surely contingency plans somewhere in the Indianarmy. The operation in the State of Jammu and Kashmir presented grave logisticalproblems particularly in winter. Publication of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patelcorrespondence leaves one in no doubt whatsoever that he and his associates hadbeen involved in military planning about Kashmir for more than a month before theoperation which could have had hardly escaped the notice of senior British militaryofficers.

On the other hand, when, late on 27 October 1947 the Quaid-e-Azam instructedPakistani troops to go into the State of Jammu and Kashmir to try and restore orderhe was frustrated by the acting Commander in Chief of Pakistan Army Lt. Gen. SirDouglas Gracey. By the same token, it would be seen that British Commanders onthe Indian side adopted Nelsoniasn approach to Indian preparations for interventionin Kashmir.


15/21


16/21

realization. Those who supported the States accession to India or remainedindifferent at that time now stand disillusioned. The people of Kashmir particularlythe Muslim majority were gradually subjected to economic strangulation. In earlyyears India did pump huge funds for development of the occupied State to show tothe world that rapid economic progress was taking place in the area. Severalwelfare schemes were launched including free education from primary and post-

graduate level. This gave temporary satisfaction to both classes of people namelypro-accession and anti-accession. The former saw in it vindication of their stance.

The latter thanked Pakistan for keeping the Kashmir issue alive forcing India tosiphon more and more money to Kashmir.Simultaneously with spending funds in the State of Jammu and Kashmir cultural andeconomic onslaught was let loose in full swing. Hindi was introduced in almost all-educational institutions; in some it was compulsorily taught. Roads and institutionswere re-christened after the name of Indian leaders. Wherever there was resistancefrom the local population, the move was temporarily suspended. Islamabad townfounded by Islam Khan, a Subedar of Mughal King in 1640, and known forsulphurous springs and black fish was re-christened as Anantnag (plenty of springs).

The local population resisted the official change in the towns name. All shops and

private buses plying to and from the town carried Islamabad signboard. But postOffice took pains to correct the mail address to Anantnag. Local people however,persistently post their letters with Islamabad address.Indian economic tentacles were spread to the farthest corner of the State byopening offices of State Bank of India (which is like National Bank of Pakistan). Onthe roadside one could see signboards of IFFECO (Indian farmers cooperativeorganization for marketing) and All India handicraft Board. Economic domination bynon-Muslim and non-kashmiris mounted. In 80s in Srinagar alone 42,000 Muslimfamilies had mortgaged their immovable property to Indian banks at as high rate as20 percent interest. The Indian banks were liberal in advancing loans for non-productive ventures but very niggardly in case of economically feasible projects.Within years the borrowers were deprived of their belongings through court

decrees.No commercial article reached the consumers without passing through non-Muslimand non-kashmiri agencies. Export business had been monopolized by non-Muslimsand non-kashmiris. In 80s except for one Muslim firm namely Indo-Kashmir Carpet,six other exporters licensed to export carpets from Kashmir were non-Muslim, non-kashmiri firms.

The original industries for which Kashmir was known for namely carpet-manufacturing, fruit cultivation, wood carving, embroidery and paper mache hadgone in quandary. After occupation Indian Government made it a point to recruit allleading skilled labor as instructors to train persons in Himachal Pradesh in the sametrade. Thus industries like embroidery and fruit cultivation had gradually centered inHimachal Pradesh. With closure of short land routes leading to Pakistan after Indianoccupation, fresh fruits of Kashmir could not reach markets. Kashmir type carpetsstarted to be manufactured in Amritsar (Punjab) and Mirzapur (UP). Wood carvingon Kashmir pattern had been started in Saharanpur (U.P). Himachal, SaharanpurMirzapur and Amritsar products elbowed out the Kashmiri products from market onaccount of being cheaper because of less transport expenses. Patterns of Kashmiriartcraft were fed into Indian machines to make Kashmiri handicrafts uneconomical.

Tourism remained the only industry in the field till the resistance movement wasafoot in late 90s. The clientele was largely Hindu from India. This too posed a


17/21

cultural threat to Kashmiris. Guides and attendants would say "Nomaskar" withfolded hands lest they should be deprived of their tips. In 90s a Muslim guide wasasked what was his name, he replied X,Y,Z". He did not disclose his name and faithtill he found that his addressed was a Muslim.

Even the National Conference elements who supported accession to India in early

years are now disillusioned and repentant in their hearts of heart. In early 80s aNational Conference stalwart admitted: " We had apprehended that by merger withPakistan, Kashmir culture would be eroded under Punjab domination as the Punjabisare of aggressive temperament. But now we feel that Kashmiri culture was to goanyway and our Islamic character would undoubtedly have the Hindu impact. Butnow that the mistake had been done, its rectification will depend on time andcircumstances. " If ballot had been allowed to have a free play Kashmiris wouldhave kept their separate identity intact. But that was not so be so. There may be noimmediate reaction on the surface but after fifteen years or so, Kashmir will be abase for Pakistan provided Pakistan is intrinsically strong at that time", he said afterregaining self-confidence.

As the Kashmiris are keen to keep their religion and cultural ethos intact, the Hinduminority backed by Indian government is equally enthusiast about not letting theMuslim influence spread in areas where Muslims are not in majority, say Jammu andLaddakh. Administrative arrangements are often made at the instance of IndianGovernment so that Hindu majority areas, even at district and tehsil level get asmuch free hand as possible.In recent years Laddakh Hill Council was constituted to give them an internalautonomy. Hindu Pundits of Kashmir valley also staged a drama of leaving theirhearths and homes to shift to Jammu to give communal color to the ongoingstruggle for the right to self-determination by the people of Jammu and Kashmir.

Jammu also has been getting more autonomous as compared to the past. There

used to be one Director Education for the entire Jammu and Kashmir State. Nowthere are two full-fledged Directors of Education separately in charge of Jammu andKashmir with separate funds of equal amount.

A chairman of Jammu and Kashmir State Public Service Commission had to quit hisjob, as he did not oblige to recruit a certain percentage of Hindu teachersirrespective of their low merit for appointment in State schools. Sheikh Abdullah hadbeen told by Indian Government that certain percentage of Hindus had to be takenfor recruitment as schoolteachers. When a Muslim and Kashmiri Chairman was notobliging he was replaced by a Sikh to do the needful.

Similarly there was no longer any Director of Health for the State. Instead there

were two Deputy Directors separately in charge of Jammu and Kashmir. May be theState is ultimately divided into three separate administrative units- Kashmir, Jammuand Laddakh as Indian Punjab was divided into Himachal Pradesh, Haryana andPunjab to save Hindu areas from Sikh domination. Even in the Kashmir valley theMuslim police officers are kept debarred from training in arms handling. The Muslimpersonnel may be promoted to the rank of Deputy Superintendent of police but hissubordinate Hindu sepoy would be trained to handle arms while he would remaindeficient in this field.


18/21

Jammu, culturally and linguistically, is more akin to Himachal Pradesh then toKashmir valley. The atmosphere of the valley is so different that Hindu touristsreturning from Kashmir start feeling at home as soon as they cross Banihal tunnel(now named as Jawaharlal tunnel) and similarly Muslims on entering into Kashmirvalley by crossing the tunnel feel a sense of familiarity.

In 80s this scribe was stationed at New Delhi as A.P.P. correspondent and used PTI(Press Trust of India and Indian counterpart of A.P.P) office for functioning. A friendlyPTI Staffer had been seen in office for a week or so in a summer month. On returnhe said he had been to a hill station. On being asked whether he had gone toKashmir, he candidly stated, "Who would go to Kashmir? Hatred for us is writ largein the eyes of Kashmiris. Militancy had not surfaced by that time.

AutonomySheikh Abdullah is stated to have had a dream of internal autonomy for Jammu andKashmir within India. This unrealistic dream could never come true and indeed didnot. But in the process of dreaming Sheikh Abdullah put the jugular vein of theentire Kashmiri community under the sword of Hindu India. He walked out of prison

to become the so-called Prime Minister of Jammu and Kashmir. His honeymoon withNehru ended soon and he again went to jail in 1953. And for the rest of his life hehad been unsuccessfully clamoring for pre-1953 status for the State of Jammu andKashmir, which was never restored.

Till 1953 a special permission was required for Indians to enter Kashmir. Till 1953accession was considered to be conditional. In 1953 India claimed the fraudulentaccession of Jammu and Kashmir to be final. Till 1953 the chief executive of Jammu

and Kashmir was called Prime Minister and not the chief minister.During his chief minister-ship Sheikh Abdullah did keep senior civil posts in the stateto be held by Kashmiris and projected this as decentralization policy. But this wasmore for his personal convenience rather than by conviction or a matter of policy.Kashmiri bureaucrats obviously desired not to be transferred outside the State.

Thus they were more submissive and willing to do any dirty job for the chiefminister while Indian Administrative Service officers consulted Delhi beforeexecuting any apparently extraordinary orders from the chief minister.As regards Article 370 of the Indian constitution giving special status to the State of

Jammu and Kashmir, it has been amended so many times that it has lost the importit was intended for. Autonomy had been consistently eroding. Earlier this year Hindunationalist party BJP won parliamentary polls in India with election promises to do

away with whatever was left of Article 370 for the State of Jammu and Kashmir,repealing personal Law for Muslims in India, constructing Rama temple in place ofBabri Mosque pulled down by Hindu fanatics seven years back in Ayodhya andmaking India a nuclear weapon state. Within 40 days of coming into power of BJP,India with a series of underground nuclear tests had already become the sixthnuclear power state in the world with BJP redeeming one of the pledges.

Sheikh Abdullah had returned to power in Jammu and Kashmir State in 1976, ofcourse, without winning anything extra for state subjects or repairing any damage


19/21

done to the States autonomy. His duplicity was more than exposed. In Jammu andKashmir he was described at clever and cunning man and his slogan of States self-assertion as mere stunt.

Demographic ChangesThe people of the State of Jammu and Kashmir however, remained one and

determined to resist any attempt to destroy their distinct Muslim entity. Therestrictions imposed by the late Maharaja on granting state subject certificate toany outsider remained in force on paper but with scant respect by the powers thatbe. In early 80s Dr. Mehboob Beg, son of Afzal Beg who had founded InquilabiNational Conference after falling apart form Sheikh Abdullah in 1976, alleged that1500 domicile certificates were issued over signatures of Sheikh Abdullah chiefMinister alone. The number of the subjects certificates issued at tehsil level wasimmensely large. This had upset the ratio of population of Muslims vis a vis non-Muslims. Corruption was rampant in the state and the entire administration fromtop to bottom was involved in it. Dr. Mehboob, physician by profession had left his

job to step into his fathers shoes.

The Congress (I) circles alleged that Sheikh Abdullah and his family members wererolling in millions. There was hardly a metropolitan place in India where Sheikh orhis family members did not own real estate, mostly in form of picture houses.

Through various factors, the complexion of population was changing in the State tothe disadvantage of the Muslims. According to early 80s census figures the growthrate in Muslim population was dwindling as compared to Hindus, According toofficial explanation more Muslims were taking to family Planning.

The census (1981) figures were as follows:Kashmir Valley------27 Lac (Including Hindus)

Jammu ---------------- 24 Lac (there is a Muslim belt in Jammu too)

Laddakh---------------3 lac.

Thus the population of Kashmir valley was equal to that of Jammu and Laddakh puttogether. So the Muslims have only a thin edge majority. While attempts were beingmade to save as many Hindus from Muslim cultural influence, an effort was alsobeing made to cut cultural moorings of the Muslim. Well to do persons particularlyupstart families were taking to western type of education, which in any case takethe young generation away from its cultural heritage.

New inscription mostly in Hindi were being put on the tombs of old Muslim saints tosay that they had equal followings among Muslims and Hindus in a bid to appeaseand attract Hindu tourists and at the same time inculcate among Muslims a feelingthat they had no separate spiritual heritage. A Muslim Malik teamed up with HinduPundits to organize "Charri Mubrarak and Amar Nath cave pilgrimage and share theofferings. Hindi was replacing Urdu in many educational institutions to be taughtalong with Kashmiri language. The intention was that with the passage of time Urdu


20/21

disappears and its elimination might cause a communication gap betweenKashmiris and Pakistanis.

Ploy of Resettlement BillA private bill Jammu and Kashmir Grant of Permit for Resettlement (PermanentReturn to the State) Bill 1980 piloted by Abdul Rahim Rathor was adopted by the

Indian occupied Jammu and Kashmir legislature with the support of the rulingNational Conference. This was an enabling provision to grant for permit forresettlement in the State of any person who had been a State subject and migratedto the territories now forming Pakistan (it did not apply to Azad Kashmir) betweenMarch 1947 and May 14, 1954. Ostensibly it was intended to give a deceptiveimpression to the general public that there were many Kashmiri Muslims who hadmigrated to Pakistan were but now being repentant and dissatisfied with livingconditions in Pakistan and wanted to return to the State, which was still paradise onEarth. Indeed it was a camouflage in the sense that under its garb the motive wasto give permit of residence to those Hindu migrants from Pakistan at the time ofIndependence and from other places in India subsequently to offset Muslim majoritycomplexion of the state.

According to the some Srinagar citizens the real purpose of the bill was to distributethe property left by Muslims in Jammu among favorites of Sheikh Abdullah. Theevacuee property had already been given to Hindus and lacks of rupees were beingreceived by way of rent and the Bill aimed at finally distributing the booty amongthe favorites. A provision of the Bill lay down that the applicant for resettlement wasto take an oath of allegiance to the Constitution of India and to undertake tofaithfully observe the laws of the State and India.

In early 80s militancy was not visible on surface, yet the youth looked consciousand determined to fight their own battle. They admitted that Pakistan had done itsoutmost for them and had suffered in return. The people in the valley were on the

whole Islam-loving and pro-Pakistan. It was a privilege to parade as a Pakistani.They love you. Every body would offer you a cup of tea. You do not have tointroduce yourself. Their just coming to know that you are a Pakistani was enough.Even not very bold persons would come to whisper in your ear: We know you. Weare pleased to see you here. They did not wait to be introduced or to introducethemselves and would disappear in the crowd.An attendant in a tourist bungalow said, "We too were very keen on Pakistan.Probably it was not our luck to be Pakistanis". Love for Islam is inexhaustible. Onoccasion of Shab-e-Barat mosques were full for the entire night for what they called"Shab" which included Zikar, Naatkhwani and Waaz. In early 80s too there wasmassive Indian military presence in the State. But even bus drivers were boldenough to defy military officers instructions. The bus driver that drove the scribe

and family members from Srinagar to Jammu ignored the signals of a militarysergeant on a bridge and later talked to him with his head high.

He probably defied the traffic signal in a bid not to waste time since I had told himthat we were to catch Jhelum Express train the same evening at Jammu for Delhi. Inspite of the heavy odds created by landslides on the main road and diversions, thedriver reached Jammu well in time for the train. At Jammu he saluted me and said"Saab aap ka khadim hen, aap ke kam khadim hen, Pakistan ke ziada khadim hen"


21/21

(we are your servants, More of Servants to Pakistan that to you).The people of Kashmir are engaged in a heroic resistance struggle and have laindown and continue to lay supreme sacrifices to relieve jugular vein of Pakistan andthat of their own from enemys sword as willed by the Quaid-e-Azam.May Almighty Allah bless them with success- Ameen.

azad jammu infooo

Documents