Thursday, February 7, 2013

In search of the first martyr

There are three generations of martyrs which must not be forgotten, Dr. Sheikh Showkat Hussain questions the very authenticity of documenting Robert Thorpe as the first martyr

The question as to who is the first martyr of Kashmir has intrigued Kashmiris in general and a student of Kashmir history in particular. Robert Thorpe is believed to be the first in this chain of martyrs. About the biography and the contribution of Thorpe we need to authenticate the details. The veracity of the very statement of his being the first martyr can be put to a profound historical analysis. This forms the subject of this article whereby the study reveals some more facts which we must not forget for seeking a better understanding of history. A study, which the author carried out reveals that prior to Thorpe’s death we had three generations of martyrs.

First generation:
In 1846 Britishers sold Kashmir valley to Maharaja Gulab Singh. Sheikh Imamudin the last governor of Sikh dynasty to Kashmir resisted this deal with the support of natives. There was a direct confrontation between Kashmiris supporting Sheikh Imamudin and the army of Gulab Singh in Srinagar. The Gulab Singh’s army was defeated near Sheikh Bagh and compelled to retreat from Kashmir. Kashmir remained independent for a period of six months. Those who got martyred in the battle of Sheikh Bagh were buried in vicinity of Sheikh Imamudin’s residence and the area was named as Saheed Gunj. The graves disappeared with the passage of time but the name Saheed Gunj still continues to be there. The word Saheed Gunj should have been sufficient to provoke us to go for a research on raison detre of this name but our self styled historians are pre occupied in providing grist to the mill of Kashmiriyat and syncretism. For others history of Saudi Kings remained a priority. Britishers came to the rescue of Gulab Singh and dispatched their army for his support. The natives were no match to the British army Sheikh Imamudin had to leave Kashmir and Gulab Singh got possession of Kashmir in November 1846.

Second generation:
With the advent of Gulab Singh and departure of Imamudin people of the valley were coerced to submission. Gulab Singh faced another rebellion. Muslims of Poonch refused to accept his rule. He ruthlessly suppressed this rebellion. In his Travels, Vigne narrates that some of the rebels were flayed alive “under his own eyes…He ordered one or two of the skins to be stuffed with straw. The figures were then planted on the wayside so that passers by might see it. Gulab Singh called his sons attention to it and told him to take a lesson in the art of governing”. The Poonch thus contributed second generation of Kashmiri martyrs against dynastic rule of Gulab Singh.

Third generation:
Gulab Singh was succeeded by Raja Ranbir Singh in 1857. It was during his times that Robert Thorpe came to Kashmir. He narrates an incident when Shalbafs of down town Srinagar assembled out side the house of Raj Kak Dhar. Dhar was minister of Ranbir Singh and notorious for his oppressive policies. The Shalbafs carried a mock coffin of Raj Kak. Dhar summoned three to five hundred police men to disperse them. During the ensuing stampede several Shalbafs were drowned in Zaldagar kanal. There are some reports which suggests that about forty shalbafs died in this stampede but according to Thorpe the number is six. Raj Kak Dhar died within few months of this mock funeral.

Robert Thorpe
After defeating Sikhs, Britishers passed on Kashmir to Gulab Sigh. Primary reason for conferring title of the state upon Gulab Singh was that Britishers didn’t wish to overburden themselves with defense of inhospitable terrain of Jammu and Kashmir. They were pre-occupied with consolidating their power in Punjab. Once they controlled Punjab they were scared of Russian expansion in Central Asia. Britishers developed a new interest in J&K wanted to get a pretext for intervention. For this purpose they dispatched a fact finding mission to Kashmir. Gulab Singh managed to portray a better image of his administration with the help of Raj Kak Dhar. Britishers motivated some locals to come forward with materials on misgovernment on the part of Dogras. Kashmiri Pandits being prime beneficiaries of his rule were siding with Maharaja. Muslims being uneducated were unable to render this job. Britishers handed over the assignment to some of their own nationals. These included some missionaries and army officers. Robert Thorpe was one of them. Robert Thorpe prepared a detailed account of sufferings and miseries of Kashmiris in the form of a book “Kashmir Misgovernment”. He did so not because he was worried about Kashmiris, but to provide a justification for British intervention. The book was product of his commitment to expansion of the British Empire. He wanted them to take over control of the state directly. Britishers were scared of direct intervention lest it may lead to an open confrontation with Russians who were in vicinities of the state. Thorpe tried to pacify these fears. He pleaded that there was no scope for such an eventuality as relations between Britain and Russia “will be those of peace, not war, and that we shall, at no distant period, so-cooperate with her in spreading the blessings of civilization and settled Government among oppressed peoples and savage tribes…… an amicable division between Russian and England is quite practicable. What has not been conquered by one power might with out any opposition be conquered by the other.” Thorpe died in mysterious circumstances. It was alleged that his death was because of poisoning but a British doctor who examined his dead body ruled out poisoning and attributed it to rupture of heart a natural reason. The work of Robert Thorpe achieved the objective for which it was written. Maharaja Ranbir Singh was made to accept deputation of a British Resident to Kashmir. Soon after his death resident assumed his functions influencing almost all functions of the Dogra dynasty including the one that landed Kashmir into lap of India in 1947.
After going through these accounts one can easily understand who were the first martyr’s of Kashmiri resistance against the dynastic rule of Gulab Singh and his progeny. It were none other than the martyr’s of Saheed Gunj, Poonch and Shalbafs of down town Srinagar. Why then portrayal of Robert Thorpe? Inspite of the fact that his death remains a mystery and his loyalties were to none other than the British imperialism? Is it reflection of our mental slavery or true depiction of a Kashmiri proverb “Kashur Chu Par Daruk”. Whatever be the reason it speaks volumes about our alienation from our own self, our own history and roots of Kashmir resistance movement. If none of the above is true then it can be nothing other than an attempt to distort our history and portray those who have sold us and have been instrumental in facilitating our occupation as our emancipators .

UN Mission: A Minaret of Hope

Presence of the mission symbolizes the commitment of the international community that it will not allow India and Pakistan to divide Kashmir among themselves

DR. SHEIKH SHOWKAT HUSSAIN

India and Pakistan clashed on Tuesday, 22nd January 2013 in UN on the relevance and mandate of United Nations Military observer group in Kashmir. It is not for the first time that India and Pakistan have clashed on the relevance and mandate of the UN observers group. Same type of clashes occurred soon after Shimla Agreement of 1972. After the agreement India formally requested UN to withdraw its observer’s mission from Kashmir. Indian demand was based on the ground that the Cease Fire Line which it was supposed to monitor has been replaced by the Line of Control (LoC) and the parties have agreed to resolve all their mutual issues including Jammu and Kashmir bilaterally. United Nations refused to oblige India and made it clear that the decision to depute military observers’ group in Kashmir has been taken by the Security Council and it’s only the Security Council which can decide about the future of this group. Since India is against any discussions on Kashmir issue in United Nations it didn’t wish the issue to be raised within the council thus the observers’ mission continues to be in Kashmir. India however refused to cooperate with the group since 1972 while Pakistan continues to facilitate the monitoring activities of the group on its side of the LoC. Since the issue has cropped up at this juncture it will not be out of place to have a look on United Nations observer group’s activities and its implications on Kashmir issue as such.
After securing instrument of accession from Maharaja in October 1947 India proceeded to United Nations in January 1948 on account of the perception it will be impossible for it to sustain a military operation in Kashmir which remained inaccessible for 6 months because of snow and cold weather. India approached the United Nations under Chapter VI of the UN charter. United Nations adopted a resolution establishing United Nations’ Commission for India and Pakistan to investigate and mediate the dispute. In April 1948 by its resolution the Security Council decided to enlarge the membership of UNCIP and to recommend various measures including use of observers to stop fighting. In 1949 as a result of mediation of the group India and Pakistan signed Karachi agreement establishing a Cease Fire Line to be supervised by the observers. In 1949 following the termination of UNCIP the Security Council through its resolution decided that United Nations observer group should continue to supervise and monitor the ceasefire in Kashmir. Its assignments included observance, reporting, investigation and submission of its findings to the Secretary General. Presence of UN observers group in Kashmir has invoked a lot of interest not only because of its functions but also because of certain legal issues which are associated with its presence. First and foremost among these issues remains the nature of UN involvement in Kashmir. No doubt United Nations was approached by India under Chapter VI. Under this chapter, however, United Nations does not have any mandate to depute military observers’ mission at any place. It’s only Chapter VII of the UN charter which authorizes United Nations to depute military observers’ mission. So it’s obvious that UN engagement in Kashmir have not been confined to Chapter VI of the Charter under which it was approached by India but also other portions of the UN charter including Chapter VII. This is in line with the perception that once a forum whether judicial or non-judicial is approached by a party for certain remedies the forum itself can award any other remedies relevant to the case at its disposal. No doubt it was Karachi agreement between India and Pakistan that brought into existence the Cease Fire Line. The agreement however could not create an obligation of deputation of military observers’ mission for United Nations. The United Nations once approached did act in accordance with its charter which under Chapter VII provided for deputation of a military mission anywhere. This opinion is not a fiction of imagination of author of this piece but an opinion which has been held by Higgins & Roselyn, and Bowett, two renowned authorities on the subject of peacekeeping by United Nations. Those who have been arguing that United Nations couldn’t act decisively in context of Kashmir because the Issue was referred to it under Chapter VI by India forget that the United Nations on several occasions tried to act decisively on the issue but couldn’t do so because of the Veto of the Soviet Union.  Since 1972 India has been demanding withdrawal of United Nations Observers’ Group from Kashmir on the ground that Shimla agreement has made the issue bilateral. Given the fact that power of withdrawal exclusively remains vested with the UN Security Council where India doesn’t wish the Kashmir issue to be debated it was obvious that new efforts of India to get the mission out of Kashmir were destined to fail. Clarification of the Secretary General has confirmed it. Insistence of India on this account will surely lead to a renewed discourse of Kashmir issue in United Nations. United Nation Observers Group has thus stuck within the throat of India same way as they depict the situation of a small snake who wishes to digest a prey without being able to swallow it or vomit it back. For ordinary Kashmiris the observers’ mission in Srinagar symbolizes a minaret of hope towards which they rush whenever they are in acute distress with the hope that world community has not abandoned them. Presence of the mission also symbolizes commitment of the international community that it will not allow India and Pakistan to divide Kashmir among themselves irrespective of the wishes of its people. Presence of the Observers Mission with its offices in Delhi, Rawalpindi, Muzzafarabad and Srinagar remain a reminder to the parties concerned that Kashmir is yet been disposed off in accordance with the wishes of its people and United Nations is fully authorized to take an action in this regard even under Chapter VII of its Charter. Such a decisive action could not be possible in past because of cold war and rivalry between Veto holders within Security Council. Our leadership however has failed to pursue for enhancement of mandate of the mission to the monitoring of human rights abuses which it could have done.