Abolition of autonomy and Demographic threats against Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh

Abstract:

History of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh has seen many highs and lows. Throughout history the Kashmiris have been subjugated to deplorable and inhabitable conditions. In 1846, they witnessed three of their master’s changing in a spate of about one week, without their hands in selecting any. This was the time when the dawn of the modern civilisation appeared in many parts of the world particularly where the Western people desired so but that was in the West, Kashmir is in the East and everything about decency was not thus considered and the people of Kashmir were sold into slavery by those who among the nations claimed to have paved the way for the abolition of the slavery from the West. This may be the only instance in the history of mankind where not only the land and its soil, the resources and its natural abundance but also the people and their fortunes were sold into slavery. This contemptuous act had many effects, particularly political and psychological- Kashmiris lost everything, land, soil, ownership rights, valour, honour, dignity and physical appearance. This commotion makes the understanding of this period and the changes that took place after 1846 much more significant and important. In order to understand the analogy between what happened in 1846 and what is happening presently we are writing these series of paper’s and try to address certain critical question ranging from

1. The difference in the revolutionary standpoints of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh from that of Independence movement of India.
2. Signing of Document of Accession with India and Inception of Article 370 and the special status to princely state. 
3. Legal changes introduced in Article 370 leading to its present abrogation and its implication on demography and politics
4. Present legal Stand of Kashmir Vs India in Supreme Court of India for Abrogation of Special status

Key Words:  Dogra Rule, Treaty of Amritsar, Two Freedom Movements, All Jammu and Kashmir Muslim Conference, India Freedom for Struggle, All Jammu and Kashmir National Conference, Agreement of Accession.

Introduction

To quote, Dr. Stein “Kashmir can claim the distinction of being the only region of India which possesses an uninterrupted series of written records of its history, going back beyond the period of Mohammedan conquest and deserving the name of real chronicles[1]”.

The indigenous Persian chronicles of Kashmir consist of the Tarikh - e -  Kashmir by Mullah Shah Muhammad Shahabadi, Baharistan - e - Shahi, Tarikh - e - Haidar Malik, Tarikh - e - Narayan Kaul, Waqiyat - e - Kashmir by Muhammad Azam, Mukhtasar Tarikh - e - Kashmir by Birbal Kachru, Gulzar - e - Kashmir by Dewan Kirpa Ram, Tarikh - e - Kashmir by Maulvi Hassan, Tarikh - e - Kabir - e - Kashmir by Haji Mohi - ud - din Miskin, and Tarikh - e - Jadwali of Maulvi Saif - ud - din. Each of these chronicles starts from the legendary origin of Kashmir[2].

From the detailed and well documented chronicle of Kashmir our focus in this section of series will be specially on the tyrannical regime of Dogra rules that lasted a little over 100 years (1846-1951). Till 1846, geographically the region of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh were three separate entities ruled autonomously by different rulers. The Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh as we see today gained certain sense of political and geographical homogeneity only in the middle of the 19^th century when Maharaja Gulab Singh of Jammu consolidated the Treaty of Amritsar on 16^th March 1846. However, Arthur Brinckman, a Christian clergy on missionary duty in Kashmir describes this treaty as a disgraceful, undignified and cruel act of Britisher’s. In his words:

“It was a tamasha, a drama behind the curtain. Sikh lost war in the Punjab against Britisher’s. Raja Gulab Singh of Jammu, a beneficiary of the Sikh’s, deceived the Sikhs and helped the Britisher’s in this fraudulent fight. For the war indemnity, the Sikhs were made to hand over Kashmir, which then formed the part of the Lahore government, to the Britisher’s. They in turn diabolically sold the Kashmir to the wily Dogra, Gulab Singh for his help to them, and deceit and treason to the Sikhs[3]”.

During this oppressive time, Dogra ruler under the suzerainty of British government saw the administration of state of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh under four rulers

1. Maharaja Gulab Singh (1846 -1857)
2. Maharaja Ranbir Singh (1857 – 1885)
3. Maharaja Pratap Singh (1885 – 1925)
4. Maharaja Hari Singh (1925 – 1949)
5. Karan Singh (1949 – 1951) (as the reagent)

The reason as to why one should thoroughly dissect and disseminate what happened during this particular period of Kashmir history is to understand the correlation between the Dogra rule and what orchestrated in 1947 -1950.

Dogra Rule:

The population of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh at the time of Amritsar treaty of 1846 was Muslim majority, Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists (minorities). The ruler was from a minority section while the mass population were Muslims. However, the Dogra rulers were ruthless and the Muslims were subjugated to extreme atrocities. This is, as will be seen later, an important factor as far as Kashmir’s autonomous status, as it initially had, is concerned.           

1. Baron Schonberg who travelled to Kashmir during Gulab Singh’s rule observed

“I have been in many lands but nowhere but nowhere the conditions of human beings present a more saddening spectacle than in Kashmir. It vividly recalled the history of Israelite’s under the Egyptian rule when they were flogged at their daily labour by their pitiless task masters[4]”.

2. Another author

“The rule under Maharaja Gulab Singh was the rule of one man in whom were vested all powers, legislative, judicial and executive, and who in order to stabilise his position, inflicted exemplary punishments on his people[5]” .

3. Another author explains the economic situation of Kashmir when they were at the peak and considered experts in the export of Shawl business.

“Raj Kak Dhar who was made the governor of the Kashmir by Maharaja Gulab Singh used his exploitative measures and increased the tax revenue for Daag –e – shawl Hundred thousand rupee to twelve hundred thousand a year[6]”.

4. Navnita Chadha Behra states about the Dogra rule

“Dogra rule was marked by a string rational bias against Kashmiris and religious discrimination against the Muslims. Kashmiri’s were subjugated and denied the right to possess arms. The lot of Muslims was even worse: they were excluded from state services, the Muslim peasantry and industrial workers were heavily taxed and trade, business and banking were monopolised by Punjabi’s and Dogra’s. without access to modern education, Muslims sank into a deep distrust of rule under the Hindu Dogra[7]”.

 After keen analysis of these various scholarly statements and many more, the prolonged and persistent oppression of the Kashmiri’s especially the Muslim population under the Dogra Rule becomes very clear.

This being said, it brings us to a very important time frame in history of Kashmir and India, period where we observe two freedom movement joined together by space and time but different to one another in every other aspect.

Two Freedom Movements:

Ather Zia and Javaid Iqbal Bhat drafts this particular period as

“The hundred years of Dogra rule were ruthless for the majority of Muslim population. Interestingly, even though Kashmiri’s have been burdened by centuries of slavery, they had a resilient spirit and a long history of resistance. By the early nineteenth century while India was fighting to oust the British, Kashmiri’s were fighting to overthrow the Dogra feudal rule[8]” 

In reaction to this exploitation of Dogra Rule, the local population started a protest and in one way, an Indigenous freedom movement was started by the local population of Kashmir. Many scholars and researchers sometimes refer to this indigenous Kashmir Freedom movement against Dogra similar to India’s struggle for freedom against British, but this is not the case and a complete misnomer particularly because subsequently to post 1950 period, a narrative has been generated and circulated whereby the people are not being allowed to talk about this indigenous Kashmir freedom movement against the Dogra’s. This makes the Kashmir Freedom movement very important from the point of formulation of special status and as to why it never acceded to India from the very beginning. However, the Indian Freedom movement did have a deep impact on the Kashmiri Freedom movement and it was in 1932 when this freedom movement took a concrete shape in the form of a political organisation by the name of Jammu and Kashmir Muslim Conference. It was founded with the mandate to “work for social, economic and cultural betterment of Muslims and to secure for them a larger share in civil services and army jobs”.

All Jammu and Kashmir National Conference

After the inception of Jammu and Kashmir Muslim Conference, Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah was elected as its first president and it was intended to be used as a platform to speak against the tyranny of the Dogra regime particularly to put forth the interests of Muslims before the government. Although initially formulated along religious lines, Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah, who was influenced by India’s struggle for Freedom and on advice from Jawaher Lal Nehru with whom he shared close friendly relationship, in 1939 expanded this political movement to pan Kashmiri movement. This conceptualised to a unique Kashmiri Nationalist identity signified by the transformation of the Muslim Conference into the All – Jammu and Kashmir National Conference. The agenda behind such action was to achieve a united Kashmiri front and strengthen the indigenous Kashmir Freedom movement against the oppressive Dogra rule. It was also important to avoid any sectarian violence among the population that could be detrimental to this cause. However, this action didn’t bear much fruits for unity as the growing association of Sheikh Abdullah with Nehru and Indian National Congress splinted the All Jammu and Kashmir Muslim Conference into two factions. Chaudhry Ghulam Abbas the then secretary of All Jammu and Kashmir Muslim Conference separated from National Conference and revived the Muslim Conference with Agha Shaukat Ali. The Muslim Conference demanded Kashmir affiliation to Pakistan on 19 July 1947. This caused a tripartite break, Muslim who supported Muslim Conference in Azad Kashmir, Muslims who supported National Conference and Kashmiri Pundits as opposed to a united front against the oppressive tyrannical regime.

These conditions are assessed and described by Alistair Lamb as

            “Another aspect of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh that requires attention and need to be taken into consideration is that, unlike most Princely state, Jammu and Kashmir possessed an active and complex political life of its own. The Kashmir dispute has all too often been explored in the context of the legal arguments which pay but token heed to the realities of politics and public opinion in the state of Jammu and Kashmir itself around the time of transfer of the power”.      

In 1946 Sheikh Abdullah was sentenced to nine years’ imprisonment for having led the seditious Quit Kashmir Movement against the Dogra Rule. During his infamous Quit Kashmir trial, Sheikh Abdullah attempted to articulate his reasons for opposing autocratic rule.

“Where land is not based on the will of the people, it could lead to the suppression of their aspirations. Such law has no moral validity even though it may be enforced for a while. There is a law higher than that, the law that represents the people’s will and secures their well-being, and there is the tribute of the human conscience, which judges the ruler and the ruled alike by standards that do not change by the arbitrary will of the most powerful. [...]

No state can succeed in raising the standards of its people’s life without educating and training them to pursue creative and productive activities. The percentage of literacy in State is 6, the percentage of higher education is 1, and the average income per capita is Rs.11-/ per annum. This by itself is an eloquent commentary on the structure and government to which the slogan Quit Kashmir is addressed”.   

Conclusion:

The research paper from series “Abolition of autonomy and Demographic threats against Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh” refers to the historical and political reasons around the autonomous special status that the princely State of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh enjoyed against the other princely states of India that signed the accession. It becomes significantly clear from the socio – political stand and the gravitas of the Indigenous Kashmiri freedom Movement that the State of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh had different political, demographic standpoints compared to India’s Struggle for freedom against the British. Another strong statement that draws a stark line among the Muslims of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh with that of Muslims of India and thereby making it clear the different standpoints of indigenous Kashmir Movement was the analogy made by Robert Thorp, an officer of the British Indian Army who is considered as the first Martyr for the cause of Kashmir. In his book “Cashmere Misgovernment” he states

“That Mussulman and Hindoo to a certain extent amalgamate in Hindostan is no evidence to the contrary. They have the common feelings of dislike to the English; and moreover, the Musulmans of Hindostan have lost almost all the distinguishing characteristics of their race and religion. None of the noble qualities which once animated the followers of that creed in so many quarters of the globe are to be found, in the semi-Hindooized, and consequently debased, Mussulman of Hindostan.

The people of Cashmere, however (as I hope to show in a future work), are possessed of many characteristics. both' intellectual and moral which command our respect and admirations. Amongst them the religion of Mohamet (Mohammad. -- the Islam) although sullied by long contact with idolaters, is still kept up with much of its ancient purity, and with a devotion and enthusiasm that would not have disgraced the best days of Islamism[9]”.

In October 1947 Maharaja Hari Singh (last Dogra ruler) signed a conditional temporary treaty of accession with the Indian Government. The condition for signing such treaty was autonomous status for the State of Jammu and Kashmir compared to other Princely state. Based on this special status most of the power like judiciary, legislation, separate Flag were reserved with State of Jammu and Kashmir while the Indian government hold power only in three sections Defense, External affairs and Economics.

The impact of abrogation of this special status by Indian Government on 5^th August 2019 had both socio – political and demographic effects which will be discussed in the upcoming papers

In the next research paper for this series, the inception of special status, signing of conditional paper of accession by the Dogra Rulers and the legal standpoints of that Signed accession will be discussed. 

“Plea for the deliverance of that beautiful country from the slavery a n d oppression under which it is going ruin”.  

Arthur Brinckman Late Missionary in Cashmere

References:

1. Lawrence, Valley of Kashmir, p 179
2. A History of Muslim Rulers in Kashmir, p - 8
3. 1870, Kashmir Oppressed- Wrongs of Cashmere by Brinckman and Cashmere Misgovernment by Thorp’s
4. Baron Enrich Von Schonberg, Travels in India and Kashmir, 2 vol. London1879.
5. G.L. Kaul, Kashmir Through Ages, 1963. 
6. Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah, The Blazing Chinar, (Translated from Urdu by Mohammad Amin. 2013)
7. Navnita Chadha Behra, Demystifying Kashmir, Brookings Institution Press 2016. 
8. Ather Zia and Javaid Iqbal Bhat, A Desolation Called Peace – Voices from Kashmir, Harper Collins 2019
9. 1870, Kashmir Oppressed- Wrongs of Cashmere by Brinckman and Cashmere Misgovernment by Thorp’s.