From: mece1e3@Jane.UH.EDU (Arindam Ghosh)
Subject: Posted on request:On kashmir
Reply-To: mece1e3@Jane.UH.EDU
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 00:44:25 GMT

*The views expressed below are not mine*

From:	IN%"narain@bu-pub.bu.edu" 15-APR-1992 14:23:05.39
To:	IN%"MECE1E3@Jetson.UH.EDU"
CC:	
Subj:	Kashmir:some questions?

Return-path: <narain@bu-pub.bu.edu>
Received: from BU-PUB.BU.EDU by Jetson.UH.EDU (PMDF #12831) id
 <01GIVO3ZKNEO8ZEOP7@Jetson.UH.EDU>; Wed, 15 Apr 1992 14:22 CDT
Received: from BASS.BU.EDU by bu-pub.bu.edu (5.61+++/SMI-4.1) id AA23787; Wed,
 15 Apr 92 15:22:43 -0400
Received: by bass.bu.edu (5.61+++/SMI-4.1) id AA17579; Wed,
 15 Apr 92 15:22:33 -0400
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 15:22:33 -0400
From: narain@bu-pub.bu.edu
Subject: Kashmir:some questions?
In-reply-to: ARINDAM GHOSH's message of Wed,
 15 Apr 1992 08:34 CDT <01GIVBXL0ATS90ND5I@Jetson.UH.EDU>
To: MECE1E3@Jetson.UH.EDU
Message-id: <9204151922.AA17579@bass.bu.edu>

I actually wanted to post it on the net,but I am new to th whole thing and
looks like I've sent you personal mail.Coming back to your argument:
          I still do not see how kashmir can in any way be equated to
Vietnam,and india's role to that of US' role then(this does not mean that I
condone the atrocities of our security forces there),lets look at the issue
as it was in 1947 and compare the situation with the other two states-Junagadh
and hyaderabad.In Junagadh,the ruler joined pakistan and the people
rebelled openly and spontaneously(even pakistanis acnowledge that),and
about Hyderabad,the nizam unleashed his razakars on the hindu populace so
that he can repress the popular pro indian sentiment in the province.The police
action only quickened what had to happen eventually as the people were 
overwhelmingly in favour of accession to India.Now ,let us come to Kashmir,
     
     You say that the situation in kashmir was similar to that prevailing in   
the other two states.

   1) I disagree,the ruler's vaccilation was similar,the people's sentiments
were not.There is no record of any pro pakistani or pro Indian or anti indian
sentiment or movement prevailing then.

   2)Pakistan Invaded kashmir,the ruler asked for Indian help,India refused
stating that until kashmir accedes to India,nothing much can be done.The Raja
joined India.

   3)there was no well supported movement against this decision of the
king,save some members of clergy and ofcourse sheik abdullah whose antics
were nothing more than that of mischief value.

   4)Agreed that there always has been some(never as in the same proportions
as it is today)support to anti indian sentiment there,but this can be
attributed to few organisations such as jamaat etc which never commanded
much support from the public.

  5)Though a formal plebiscite was never held,the kshmiris have been
demonstrating their acceptance of india in many ways-the 1965 war for
instance,when they enthusiastically assisted indian war effort.

 
 The fact is ,this sudden kashmiri love for independence cannot be traced
to anything which has happened in 1947(I mean directly),It is only in the
last 10 years that the situation has turned this way.I can only link it to
the general revival of religious feelings around.Moreover the situation
was well under control during Jagmohan's first stint there s the governor.
Infact,he ended up becoming very popular with kasmiris.
   I dont think it is possible for a country to accept a state's demand for
indepence just because one fine morning they wake up and ask for it.Country's
dont work tht way.
       I'll be grateful if you can post this on to the net,next time
hopefully I'll do it myself.
Thanks,
Narain.


  
Xref: sparky soc.culture.indian:13983 soc.culture.bangladesh:2300 soc.culture.nepal:189 soc.culture.pakistan:6252 talk.religion.misc:6676