Fw (Links): The Right to Self-determination in Kashmir

Ulhas Joglekar uvj at vsnl.com
Mon Sep 24 08:36:23 MDT 2001


From: Alan Bradley <abradley1 at bigpond.com>
To: <marxism at lists.panix.com>
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 9:55 AM
Subject: Fw (Links): The Right to Self-determination in Kashmir

> THE RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION IN KASHMIR
> by Farooq Sulehria

There is much here that is not accurate. Unfortunately I don't have the time
to explain everything. I will make few remarks.

>The maharaja sought Indian help. India readily agreed to send in
> its army since it also wanted an opportunity to capture Kashmir. Both
armies
> are still there.

Maharaja sought Indian help. India insisted that Kashmir accede to India, if
Maharaja wanted Indian help. Indian army intervened in Kashmir only after
Kashmir joined Indian Union. Kashmir's accession to India is legal.
Plebicite was not legally necessary. The procedure for accession was
determined by India Independence Act, an act of British Parliament. The
accession of Kashmir to India was consistent with this Act.

> The Indian and Pakistani armies engaged in a fully fledged war in Kashmir,
> and India appealed to the United Nations. A cease-fire was arranged, and
it
> was decided that a plebiscite would be held in Jammu Kashmir to determine
> the will of Kashmiris - i.e. whether they wanted to join India or Pakistan
> or wanted independence. Later on, Pakistan got that resolution amended,
and
> Kashmiris were deprived of the option of independence.

India took the dispute to the UN. India offered to hold plebicite, subject
to the fulfillment of certain conditions. When Kashmir dispute went to the
UN, Kashmir had already acceded to India. Parties to the dispute were India
and Pakistan. Kashmir was not a party to the dispute. Kofi Annan has
clarified that UN Resolutions of 1948 are not implementable.

>This not only justifies the big defence
> budget but also "proves" to the world that Kashmir is a border dispute
> between India and Pakistan. But in reality Kashmir is a national
question -
> a question of the liberation of 13 million people.

It will have be shown that Kashmir is a nation. Stalin's notions of
self-determination of nation are not relevant. India is a nation. Various
states of Indian Union are not nations in bourgeois sense of the term, e.g.
Kerala is not a nation. Punjab is not a nation. etc. etc.

>To India, Pakistan and China (which also is a
> neighbour of Kashmir and has control over parts of Kashmir which India and
> Pakistan handed over to settle border disputes) the status quo is the best
> solution.

India has not handed over parts of Kashmir to China. It was Pakistan, which
handed over a part of Jammu and Kashmir's territory to China. China,
Pakistan and US were allies in the cold war. India was a Soviet ally.
Kashmir issue became a pawn in the Cold War.

> Socialists think permanent peace demands independence for Kashmir.

Indian Marxist Left has never supported demand for independence for Kashmir.
You would need to go into the history of India's freedom movement as well as
the history of the Cold War to understand this.

Ulhas


=======
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message



More information about the Marxism mailing list