Kashmir III: Is it an integral part of India?

To take up a topic like this is equivalent to sitting in one of the meetings that take place between Indian and Pakistan delegations! Irony is that two enemies decide the fate of a third party - Kashmiris!

I see that many Indians believe as if it is a word of God that Kashmir is an 'integral part' of India, and they never question what it actually means. On the other side, Pakistanis believe that Kashmir is a ‘disputed territory’, even though it has been 60 years since Partition. And Kashmiris want to be left alone.

Isn't Kashmir an 'integral part' of India?

Yes, it is- as ratified by the Constituent Assembly of Kashmir in 1956. "The State of Jammu and Kashmir is and shall be an integral part of the Union of India" and it goes onto say that "The territory of the State shall comprise all the territories which on the fifteenth day of August, 1947, were under the sovereignty or suzerainty of the Ruler of the State."

And that's how we get that beautiful map with which we are all familiar with- which includes POK, Northern Regions and Aksai Chin, though Indian troops never put a foot there in the history of Independent India!

But, there is more to it than what is passed by a constituent Assembly. The whole debate stems from the differences in opinion between Pakistan and India, on what is legal- should people of Kashmir decide, or can the constituent assembly make a decision? While the plebiscite (or people’s opinion) was important to India when it annexed both Hyderabad and Junagarh by ignoring the opinion of their leader (the King), how come exactly the opposite logic is applied when it comes to Kashmir?

To know the history and its convolutions better I am taking the reader through some of the events that transpired in the history of Kashmir.

1947- Kashmir accedes to India- with some conditions, the prominent one being that a plebiscite should be held once the normalcy is restored.

Whether the normalcy is restored is a question of debate: India argues that since the demographics changed after the invasion, it is not in a position to hold a plebiscite. According to India, to bring such a normalcy now, in 2006, is completely out of question because the demographics have changed irrevocably. The situation of 1947 can never be attained. India blames Pakistan for this change in demographics due to its incursion in 1947; and after 1989, it blames Pakistan-sponsored Kashmir militancy for the forced migration of Pandits which altered the demographics further.

The argument of Pakistan- and also voiced by present day Kashmiri Muslims is this:
While Pakistan was ready to hold a plebiscite soon after the ceasefire of 1949, India never agreed to it- instead it used a Constituent Assembly to ratify a constitution which made Kashmir
an integral part of India- which is NOT a plebiscite. If the demographics did change in 1989, it’s mainly because India didn't carry out the promises made in 1947, and also because of bad policies of India (like manipulating local elections). If they (Pakistan) could accept its wrong polices in Bangladesh and let it go, though reluctantly- after fighting a major war, why can't India accept its wrong policies and let Kashmir go? According to Pakistan and Kashmiri Muslims, India should take blame for what happened in Kashmir that led to migration of Pandits in 1989, and for the militancy in Kashmir. According to them militancy is nothing is nothing but a freedom struggle which has its origins in 1947. And India should still carry out plebiscite- now, better late than never, so that no further damage happens to Kashmir.

1948- India and Pakistan go to war over Kashmir. They agree to a ceasefire and the mutually agreed ceasefire line (of 1948) is now called LOC (Line of Control).

1952- Constituent Assembly of Kashmir accepted the accession to India, and formed a 'Sovereign state' of Jammu & Kashmir within the Indian Union.

Now, what does that mean? It is unlike any other accession any where in India. This
is unique in many ways. No other accession has been considered 'sovereign'. This word has many legal implications- it actually means they have their own decision making powers, and is practically a country in itself. The state of J&K had its own head of state (a President), called Sadar-i-Riyasat, and a Prime Minister while other states had Governors and Chief Ministers.

The state of J&K had autonomous powers unlike any other state in India. India controlled ONLY the following three things in Kashmir- Defense, External Affairs, and Communications. (Indians cannot go and settle in Kashmir- later enshrined in Article 370 of Indian Constitution). Now, that is something quite unique, right? I mean- no taxes for India, no police from India, and no settlers from India. Do we have any other equivalent state in India like that? NO! But yes, there is a country called Bhutan which has a similar arrangement with India. Bhutan is a sovereign country ruled by a King but India controls Bhutanese Defense, External affairs and Communications. Do we ever think that Bhutan is a part of India? Not Really!

1956- Kashmir prepared its own constitution- called Constitution of Jammu & Kashmir which made Kashmir an integral part of India. But Kashmir retained its autonomous powers for a long time (till 1974)

1965- India and Pakistan go to war over Kashmir second time. Both India and Pakistan agree to a UN resolution and maintain LOC (Line of Control).

1971- Third war between India and Pakistan. India has a decisive victory and it liberates Bangladesh.

1972- Simla Accord signed between Pakistan and India.

This is the document to which Indians refer to as a sacred document when it comes to respecting Line of Control (as seen in during Kargil war). At the same time this document is completely ignored by India when it comes to another statement in the same accord- "Both Governments agree that ..., the representatives of the two sides will meet to discuss further the modalities and arrangements for ..., a final settlement of Jammu and Kashmir ..."

The implicit meaning of this statement is what Pakistan is most obsessed about and this is what pains them the most- that the issue of Kashmir has ‘not been resolved’- and hence they
label it as a 'disputed region' as agreed by India and Pakistan in this accord. This accord gives Pakistan a role to play in Kashmir issue- this is where they agree to work ‘bilaterally’ rather than use any international forum. They also agree to respect LOC till the issue is resolved. Why did India include Pakistan into Kashmir affairs especially when it just had secured a decisive victory against Pakistan to liberate Bangladesh (December, 1971)?

1974- Kashmir Accord signed between Kashmir and India.

Now, things get interesting! In 1974, only after the third war with Pakistan, did Indian Government under Indira Gandhi, decide to make this accession a legal entity (as a ‘constituent’ unit) through Kashmir Accord. And how did she do it? She first incarcerated Sheikh Abdullah, and then released him to make him sign an accord called ‘Kashmir Accord’, which strips Kashmir of all its autonomous powers. But Kashmir still enjoyed Article 370 (which doesn't allow settlers in Kashmir). So, in one way, she goes onto make Kashmir an integral and ‘constituent’ unit of India without any autonomous powers but retains Article 370 which still gives this state special privileges compared to most other states.

So, India signed Simla Accord in 1972, then did a volte face to sign another document called Kashmir Accord in 1974, thus overriding Simla Accord in some respect, with no participation from Pakistan. Kashmir Accord states- "the State of Jammu and Kashmir which is a constituent unit of the Union of India...". And how did India do this? It led a leader sign an accord under coercion, seeking no mandate from people!

After that it’s all history- we Indians know Kashmir as constituent and integral part of India. And to help all those who want to fight for Kashmir to the finish, here's another one:

1994- India passes a Parliament Resolution on Kashmir- "The State of Jammu & Kashmir has been, is and shall be an integral part of India and any attempts to separate it from the rest of the country will be resisted by all necessary means;"