sign in sign up
<<
Home , Ajit Bhattacharjea, Badruddin Tyabji, Balraj Madhok, Hari Singh, Mridula Sarabhai, Romesh Thapar

REC•NSIDERATI•NS is a historian living in Bangalore. His books include Environmentalism: A Global History and A Corner of a Foreign Field: The Indian History of a British Sport. He writes the fortnightly “Past and Present” col- umn for The Hindu of .

Opening a Window in Ramachandra Guha

We here recall a forgotten incident Other visitors were more celebrated, but in the history of - rela- no other visitor—at least no other male tions, the visit of to visitor—had such an intense, emotionally Rawalpindi and in 1964. charged relationship with his host. Once a The story is of interest to the historian, close friend of Nehru’s, this guest had spent and to the policymaker as well. Forty much of the past decade in an Indian prison, years on, the contours of the Kashmir having been accused of plotting the breakup dispute have scarcely changed. Now, as of the Indian union. Now he was free, and then, its solution must satisfy the con- had come to visit the prime minister whose ditions laid down in 1964 by Sheikh government had put him behind bars. Abdullah: namely, that it must not lead The visitor was Sheikh Abdullah, the to a sense of victory for either India or Lion of Kashmir, among the most enigmatic Pakistan; that it must make the minori- figures of modern Indian history. He was at ties more secure in both countries; and various times a student leader, peasant mo- that it must satisfy the aspirations of bilizer, worker for interfaith harmony, and the people of Kashmir themselves. crusader for international peace. But this —The Editors rebel had also held office. From 1947 to 1953, he ran the government of and I Kashmir (as he would again from 1975 to The grandest residence in New is 1982); ran it, it must be said, in less-than- Rashtrapati Bhavan (formerly the Viceregal democratic ways. He was both greatly loved Lodge); the second grandest is Teen Murti and much derided; a hero to many Kash- House. Once occupied by the commander in miris, he was also defamed as an Indian chief of the British , it became agent by Pakistan, and as a Pakistani agent the home of the founding prime minister of by India. free India, . In the 16 years There is still no biography of a man who that Nehru lived there, many distinguished for half a century personified the “Kashmir visitors stayed in Teen Murti House, not problem.” We know far too little about the only heads of state but also writers, musi- key incidents in his political life, which cru- cians, scientists, and artists. cially affected the , and Helping Nehru play host was his of India and Pakistan as well. This essay daughter, Indira , and a well-trained focuses upon one such forgotten incident, staff. Of the hundreds of their guests per- which unfolded during a few weeks in haps the most special was the prominent 1964. It is also of topical interest since In- Kashmiri who came in the summer of 1964. dia and Pakistan have commenced a “com- I suspect that his arrival made Nehru, and posite dialogue” on the matters that divide even Indira, rather more nervous than usual. them: namely, trade, the movement of peo-

Opening a Window in Kashmir 79 ple, and above all, Kashmir. The mood now tribal raiders entered Kashmir, hoping to recalls the halcyon summer of 1964, the last galvanize support for Pakistan, but Maha- time India and Pakistan talked seriously raja instead chose accession to about the prospects for peace in Kashmir. India. Wisely, he also released Sheikh Abdullah. II Abdullah and his followers played a cru- Born in 1905, the son of a shawl merchant, cial role in keeping the peace as the raiders Sheikh Abdullah took a master’s degree in were repulsed. His National Conference science from the Aligarh Muslim University. took the lead in promoting amity between Despite his qualifications, he was unable to Kashmir’s religious communities in Srina- find a government job in his native Kash- gar. A journalist writing from the Kashmiri mir. He became a schoolteacher and, soon capital expressed the common view: “Hin- enough, a political activist. In 1932, he was dus and moved about with complete a mover behind the Jammu and Kashmir unselfconsciousness among who Muslim Conference, which aimed to chal- constitute the vast majority of the popula- lenge the rule of Maharaja Hari Singh, a tion of the town; they marched shoulder to Hindu who was excessively autocratic even shoulder with them down ’s streets by princely standards. Six years later, the as volunteers engaged in a common task.... I sheikh changed the name of this organiza- could scarcely believe my eyes when I saw tion to the National Conference, to make the miracle the Sheikh had wrought.”1 An- plain that it represented all Kashmiris, re- other reporter was struck by the the cordial gardless of religion. relationship between the National Confer- At six feet, four inches in height, Ab- ence and the military, as characterized by dullah was an imposing presence. He was the automobile drives conspicuously taken also a witty and compelling orator. And together by Sheikh Abdullah and the army’s outspoken: in the 1930s and 1940s, he was divisional commander, Major General frequently in and out of the maharaja’s jails. Thimayya.2 In 1946, he called on the ruler to “Quit Otherwise, the turbulence in 1947–48 Kashmir,” and was duly imprisoned on implacably divided Kashmir. Its predomi- charges of sedition. From , Jawa- nantly Muslim northern and western regions harlal Nehru, then leader of the came under Pakistani control when a cease- Party, rushed to his defense, only to be fire line was demarcated. India retained con- barred from even entering Kashmir by the trol of the Hindu-dominated Jammu dis- maharaja’s border officials. trict, the high mountains of , with Nehru had first met Abdullah in 1938. its Buddhist peasants and pastoralists, and Despite the difference in age (Nehru was 16 the Vale of Kashmir, often referred to sim- years older) the two hit it off instantly. Both ply as the Valley. Of all these regions, the were charismatic and impulsive, both com- Vale proved the most contentious. Under mitted socialists who also despised chauvin- the logic of partition, it should have gone to ism of all kinds. From the beginning, Neh- Pakistan, since a majority of its population ru looked upon Abdullah as his man in was Muslim. But these Muslims were in the Kashmir. main followers of Sheikh Abdullah, a secular In August 1947, the British departed politician who abhorred the idea of a theo- India, leaving behind two sovereign nations. cratic state. Under the terms of partition, Kashmir’s ma- After the maharaja chose accession to In- haraja was given the authority to decide dia, Nehru asked him to turn over the ad- whether to join India or Pakistan, but ini- ministration of the state to Sheikh Abdul- tially he equivocated. That October, Muslim lah. “He is obviously the leading popular

80 WORLD POLICY JOURNAL • FALL 2004 personality in Kashmir,” insisted Nehru. who was visiting Kashmir. The content of “The way he has risen to grapple with the these conversations was not disclosed, but crisis has shown the nature of the man. I Indians assumed independence was the sub- have a high opinion of his integrity and ject. A Bombay journal known to be sympa- general balance of mind. He has striven thetic to America reported that Stevenson hard and succeeded very largely in keeping had assured Abdullah of more than moral communal peace. He may make any number support. A loan of $15 million could be of mistakes in minor matters, but I think available if Kashmir became sovereign; be- he is likely to be right in regard to major sides “the Valley would have a permanent decisions.”3 Shortly afterward, Abdullah population of at least 5,000 American fami- took over as head of Kashmir’s administra- lies,” houseboats and hotels would be filled tion. He stayed in that post from the end to capacity, Americans would buy the crafts of 1947 until the middle of 1953. In view output of dexterous Kashmiri artisans, and of the state’s special status under the Indian within three years every village in Kashmir Constitution, he was called “prime minis- would be electrified, “and so on and so ter,” rather than “chief minister.” In this forth.”4 period, he joined the Constituent Assembly Rumor had it that Abdullah would de- of India and represented India at the United clare independence on August 21, 1953— Nations. New Delhi needed the sheikh in the day of the great Id Festival, following the event that a U.N.-proposed plebiscite which he would seek the protection of the to determine Kashmir’s status was con- United Nations against “Indian aggression.” ducted. But Nehru apart, the Indian politi- New Delhi took this seriously enough to cal establishment did not trust the sheikh, move preemptively. On August 8, Abdullah and he certainly did not trust it. He par- was deposed as prime minister and jailed. ticularly worried about the strength of The coup was carried out with the complic- Hindu communal forces in India. So long ity of his erstwhile deputy, Bakshi Ghulam as Nehru was in power these could be kept Mohammed. The bakshi now assumed the in check, but what might happen after his post of prime minister, and a majority of departure? Abdullah’s former cabinet colleagues chose The sheikh feared that India would be- to serve alongside him.5 come a Hindu Pakistan, its polity and poli- cies dominated by the wishes of its religious III majority. But Abdullah at no stage contem- After Sheikh Abdullah was arrested, Jawa- plated joining Pakistan. Instead he weighed harlal Nehru stayed quiet, even as his gov- the merits of Kashmir carving out an inde- ernment held the sheikh in detention with- pendent existence, as a sort of Switzerland of out formal charges. But that Nehru felt the East. For that to happen he would need deeply guilty is suggested by an extraordi- American support. This was not implausi- nary letter he sent to a party colleague in ble, since Kashmir shared a frontier with Rajasthan, asking him to look after Abdul- Communist and its borders were near lah’s son, Farooq, then studying in a medical those of the . In the Cold War, college in Jaipur.6 As telling, he stayed away this mountain state could acquire strategic from his beloved Kashmir, where his own significance. ancestors had lived, for four years after his Abdullah broached the idea of an inde- friend’s arrest. pendent Kashmir in 1950 with Loy Hen- While Abdullah was detained, the state derson, then the U.S. ambassador to India. of Jammu and Kashmir was governed, In 1953, he had extensive discussions with almost brutally, by Bakshi Ghulam Mo- Adlai Stevenson, a heavyweight Democrat hammed. Elections were blatantly rigged,

Opening a Window in Kashmir 81 dissent was crushed. So rife was nepotism Pakistan rioters harassed the minority and corruption that the state’s government Hindu community, of whom hundreds of came to be known as “the BBC,” the Bakshi thousands fled to India. A week after it had Brothers Corporation. mysteriously vanished, the relic as mysteri- No formal charges were brought against ously reappeared in the mosque. No one Abdullah, and in January 1958 he was re- knew how or why it was returned, but re- leased. He was greeted by rapturous public spected clerics testified that it was the real meetings in Srinagar, including one at the article. Calm returned to the Valley. The mosque, famous in the Islamic better to prolong that peace, New Delhi world for its sacred relic, a hair from the replaced Shamsuddin with G. M. Sadiq, a Prophet. His reception evidently alarmed Kashmiri known for his left-wing views, the state government, and in April he was but also for his integrity. arrested once more. Now he was charged During this time, Sheikh Abdullah with conspiring with Pakistan to break up could only watch events from his cell. India. In formal legalese, he was accused of Meanwhile, these were also troubling times attempting “to facilitate wrongful annexa- for his friend Nehru. The prime minister tion of the territories of the State by Pak- was badly shaken by China’s armed occupa- istan; create communal ill-feeling and tion in 1962 of frontier territories claimed disharmony in the state and receive secret by India. Nehru’s popular standing, once so aid from Pakistan in the shape of money, sure, was further eroded by the tension in bombs, etc.”7 Kashmir. The charges were, to put it mildly, ab- The China debacle gave Nehru a fresh surd. Although the sheikh contemplated in- incentive to seek a final resolution of the dependence for Kashmir, he never sought to Kashmir question. India could not afford join Pakistan. Very probably the idea of be- two hostile fronts. Accordingly, during ing the uncrowned king of a free Kashmir 1962–63, India and Pakistan engaged in appealed to him, but he viewed all the peo- several rounds of talks. Nehru was repre- ple of the state, regardless of religion, as his sented by the experienced Swaran subjects. Even his political opponents ac- Singh, and Pakistan’s president, Field Mar- knowledged that he did not have a commu- shal , was represented by the nal bone in his body. young and ambitious Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. As the sheikh was subjected to a some- However, no one represented Kashmir. what farcical trial, conditions in Kashmir As the Hazratbal incidents confirmed, it deteriorated. In elections held in 1962, was scarcely prudent to neglect the senti- Bakshi Ghulam Mohammed fraudulently ments of the people at the center of the dis- “disqualified” the candidacy of opposition pute. And who better to take their pulse politicians. This was too much even for an than Sheikh Abdullah? By the end of 1963, indulgent New Delhi. The central govern- Nehru was already weighing the release of ment deposed the bakshi as prime minister, the sheikh. Then in January 1964, he suf- replacing him with a man simply called fered a stroke while addressing a Congress Shamsuddin, commonly regarded as a pup- Party session in Bhubaneshwar. Nehru un- pet of his predecessor. derstandably wondered if he would have a These were the circumstances on De- last shot at resolving the Kashmir crisis be- cember 27 when a fresh crisis developed: fore he was gone. Thus, it was by order of the theft from the Hazratbal mosque of the the that Sheikh Abdul- hair of the Prophet. For weeks, there were lah became a free man on April 8, 1964. In demonstrations in the Valley that reverber- all, he had been in jail for more than ten ated throughout the Islamic world. In East years.

82 WORLD POLICY JOURNAL • FALL 2004 IV journalist noted, the Sheikh evinced “no Sheikh Abdullah’s release was preceded by a personal bitterness, no rancour,” rather he statement from , a cabi- was imbued with “a strong sense of mis- net minister without portfolio and a confi- sion,” a compelling desire to seek a solution dant of Nehru’s. Abdullah’s detention, said for Kashmir. Asked at one meeting what he Shastri, was “a matter of pain to the Gov- now felt about Nehru, Abdullah answered ernment, and particularly to the Prime Min- that he bore no ill-will, for “misunderstand- ister.”8 As the sheikh stepped out of jail in ings do occur even among brothers. I shall Jammu, he was surrounded by a huge crowd not forget the love Mr Nehru has showered of slogan-shouting admirers. After an hour on me in the past.... I will meet him as an of hugging and back slapping, he adjourned old friend and comrade.” for a quiet cup of tea with Judge M. K. On April 18, a week after he had left Tikoo, who had presided at his trial. For Jammu, Abdullah drove in an open jeep in- years Tikoo’s court had reconsidered the to Srinagar. The 30-mile route was lined by charges of conspiracy against Abdullah. a “near-hysterical crowd” a half-million They were finally dropped, assuredly to the strong. The road was covered with daisies great relief of the judge, himself a Kashmiri, and tulips, and festooned with arches and who had been pressured by circumstances to buntings. When he finally entered the city, try Kashmir’s favorite son. the entire population of over 300,000 After tea with the judge, Abdullah jammed the streets, “which were so richly lunched with the staff of the jail in Jammu. decorated that even the sun did not pene- Driving in an open car through that city, trate the canopy of Kashmir silks, carpets the sheikh was garlanded with bouquets. and shawls.” The next day he gave his first public speech. Two days later, Abdullah addressed a According to the , “Sheikh mammoth rally in Srinagar. Some 250,000 Abdullah said the two pressing problems people heard his tribute to Nehru, whom he facing the subcontinent—communal strife described as a “fearless freedom fighter.” and Kashmir—should be solved during The sheikh said he preserved this image of Prime Minister Nehru’s lifetime. He de- the Indian prime minister even though he scribed Mr Nehru as the last of the stalwarts held Nehru “principally responsible” for his who had worked with Gandhiji and said imprisonment. Abdullah also recalled that after him a solution of these problems Nehru saying, back in 1947, that “Kash- would become difficult.” mir’s future is the concern of Kashmiris Nehru invited Abdullah to New Delhi. alone.” After consulting with friends and support- Meanwhile, back in Delhi, the prospect ers, the sheikh set off to nearby Srinagar, of talks between Nehru and Abdullah stopping at towns and villages on the way. alarmed many members of the ruling Con- Wherever he halted, he also spoke. Thou- gress Party. Senior ministers issued state- sands turned up to hear him, and in these ments insisting that the question of Kash- gatherings, women outnumbered men. His mir was “closed,” and that the state was, speeches stressed the need for communal and would remain, an integral part of India. harmony in Kashmir. He likened the state Still more critical were members of the Jana to a bride cherished by two husbands—In- Sangh, an opposition party that sought to dia and Pakistan—neither of whom “cared represent the Hindu interest. The party’s to ascertain what the Kashmiris wanted.” general secretary, Deen Dayal Upadhyaya, He said he would meet Jawaharlal Nehru deplored the sheikh’s recent speeches, where with an open mind, and implored Indians he seemed to have “questioned even the ax- not to make up their minds either. As a iomatic facts of the Kashmir question” (such

Opening a Window in Kashmir 83 as its final accession to India). “Instead of , popularly known as stabilizing the political situation of the “JP,” the former radical socialist who for the State,” complained Upadhyaya, “Sheikh Ab- past decade had been a leading light of the dullah has tried to unsettle every issue.” An- movement, which, inspired by grier still was V. K. Malhotra of the Delhi Gandhi, worked for religious harmony and unit of Jana Sangh, who claimed that in rural uplift through nonviolent, nonstate other countries speeches such as those made methods. Writing in the Hindustan Times, by the sheikh would be punishable by JP deplored the threats to send Abdullah death. back to jail if he went “too far.” “It is re- The opposition from the Hindu right markable,” he commented acidly, “how the was predictable, but the Left was also suspi- freedom fighters of yesterday begin so easily cious of Abdullah. The Communist Party to imitate the language of the imperialists.” thought he was in danger of falling into an What alarmed politicians in Delhi was “imperialist trap” designed to detach Kash- the sheikh’s talk about ascertaining afresh mir from India. Nehru was also barraged by the wishes of the Kashmiri people. JP criticism in Parliament. In one exchange, a thought this eminently reasonable, since young Jana Sangh representative, Atal Behari the elections in Jammu and Kashmir in Vajpayee (who would later become India’s 1957 and 1962 had been anything but free prime minister), commented that Abdullah and fair. In any case, if India was “so sure believed not in the “two nation theory” but of the verdict of the people, why are we so the “three nation theory”—that is, in a sov- opposed to giving them another opportu- ereign state of Kashmir. Nehru replied that nity to reiterate it?” To those who feared he had been told the published accounts of that a plebiscite in Kashmir would lead to Abdullah’s speeches were not entirely accu- a Balkanization of the nation, JP answered rate, but in any case “he hoped to see Sheikh that this was to assume that “the states of Abdullah soon and discuss matters with him India are held together by force and not by without reference to press reports.” the sentiment of a common nationality. It More accurate, one hopes, was a report is an assumption that makes a mockery of of an interview granted by Nehru and Indira the Indian Nation and a tyrant of the In- Gandhi to French television, in which the dian State.” A satisfactory settlement of the prime minister answered in English, his Kashmir question would greatly improve daughter in flawless French. According to relations between India and Pakistan. JP an English translation, “Mr Nehru ex- hoped that India’s leaders would “have the plained to the French why the Kashmir vision and statesmanship that this historic problem had become such a burning subject moment demands.” He added, “Happily, the in India.” On the other hand, “Mrs Gandhi one sane voice in the ruling party is that of said since the National Conference party had the Prime Minister himself.”9 More surpris- been elected three times in succession it is ing perhaps was the endorsement received clear that no plebiscite is needed in Kashmir by Nehru from C. Rajagopalachari (“Raja- as the people have obviously made up their ji”), the veteran statesman who had once minds.” So had Mrs. Gandhi, and so, as we been an intimate associate of Nehru’s but have seen, had most members of the Con- had latterly become a political opponent. As gress Party and the opposition. the founder of the , Rajaji Among members of the Indian political had savaged the prime minister’s economic establishment, it seemed, only Nehru’s and foreign policies, his attacks sometimes mind remained open. But he received unex- coming with a sharp personal tinge. Thus, pected support from two stalwarts who in an essay published in January 1964, Ra- had also worked with Gandhiji. One was jaji had spoken of “megalomania and narcis-

84 WORLD POLICY JOURNAL • FALL 2004 sism” as being among the prime minister’s picted the sheikh as an agitator for a pleb- weaknesses.10 But, to the surprise of his fol- iscite, and hence anti-Indian. Moreover, lowers, he now strongly favored Nehru’s the chicanery of the bakshi’s regime had tar- initiative in releasing Abdullah. He de- nished the image of India among Kashmiris. plored the threats to put the sheikh back in Abdullah found that the pro-Pakistani ele- jail and found it fortunate that “the Prime ments were now perhaps in a majority in Minister may be ill but he preserves his bal- the Valley. Sensing the mood on the ground, ance, and has evidently refused to take any he sought gradually to win over the people foolish step and degrade India.” The freeing to his own view. He met the influential of Abdullah, argued Rajaji, should be a cleric Maulvi Farooq and urged him to prelude to allowing “the people of Kashmir support a “realistic” solution, rather than [to] exercise their human right to rule claim that Kashmir should accede to Paki- themselves as well as they can.” In words stan in pursuance of the two-nation theory.13 that ring as true in 2004 as they did in On April 23, two weeks after his release, 1964, Rajaji asked, “Are we to yield to Sheikh Abdullah addressed a prayer meeting the fanatical emotions of our anti-Pakistan in Srinagar. A solution to the Kashmir dis- groups? Is there any hope for India or for pute, he said, must take into account its Pakistan, if we go on hating each other, sus- likely consequences for the 50 million Mus- pecting each other, burrowing and building lims in India, and the 10 million in up armaments against each other.... We . Three days later, in his last shall surely ruin ourselves for ever if we go speech before leaving for Delhi, he urged on doing this.... We shall be making all Kashmiris to maintain communal peace, hopes of prosperity in the future, a mere mi- and thus set an example for both India and rage if we continue this arms race based on Pakistan. “No Muslim in Kashmir will ever an ancient grudge and the fears and suspi- raise his hand against the minorities,” he cions flowing from it.11 proclaimed. This concern for the fate of the minorities, thought the Hindustan Times, V suggested that the sheikh had changed his Back in Kashmir, meanwhile, Sheikh Ab- mind about a plebiscite in Kashmir, which, dullah was conferring with his colleagues if held, “might cause an upheaval in the and associates. He discovered that while he subcontinent.” was away in jail, the pro-Pakistan elements As Abdullah prepared to leave for Delhi had gained much ground in the Valley. In- and his talks with Nehru, the Hindu right deed, the sheikh himself had come to be as- sought to undermine the meeting. One Jana sociated with the Pakistan party. In his trial, Sangh ideologue, , said that Abdullah had insisted that he never ex- to talk to Abdullah would “open the flood- pressed a desire for Kashmir’s accession to gates of treason” among separatist elements Pakistan. India or independence: those were in Assam, Nagaland, , and Kerala. An- the only two options he had ever counte- other prominent Jana Sangh spokesman, nanced.12 But the proceedings of his trial Deen Dayal Upadhyaya, insisted that on no never reached the people of the Valley. They account should Nehru meet Abdullah. In- knew only that he was being tried for con- stead, the Kashmir issue should be sorted spiracy against the Indian nation. Would out by a committee consisting of Congress not that make him, by default, a friend of ministers who, unlike the prime minister, Pakistan? were prone to see the state’s accession to In- This assumption was bolstered by the dia as final and closed. On April 28, the day propaganda of Bakshi Ghulam Mohammed’s before Abdullah was due to arrive in Delhi, government, which for a decade had de- the Jana Sangh mobilized a mass march on

Opening a Window in Kashmir 85 the capital. The marchers shouted anti- gether.” Reminded that he had himself once Abdullah and anti-Nehru slogans, and supported Kashmir’s accession to India, the demanded that the government declare sheikh answered: “Yes. But it is not bring- Kashmir to be an “integral and indivisible” ing peace to the subcontinent.” part of India. Abdullah’s remarks, suggesting as they The following day, Abdullah disem- did that the question of accession was to be barked at Palam airport with his principal reopened, alarmed the pro-Indian chauvin- associates. They were met by , ists. The president of Jana Sangh in Jammu and those with her on the tarmac included and Kashmir said angrily that if the sheikh a deputy foreign minister, representing wanted to go to Pakistan, let him go there the government, and the sheikh’s articulate for good. Others railed on about the “ap- champion, Jayaprakash Narayan. The party peasement” of an unreliable ally. Even mem- drove to Teen Murti House, where Nehru bers of Nehru’s own party said they hoped was waiting to receive Abdullah. This was the discussions would go nowhere. A senior the first time the two had seen one another minister, T. T. Krishnamachari, assured Par- since Nehru’s government had incarcerated liament that the talks would be restricted the sheikh in August 1953. Now, as one to the “nuances” of the Kashmir question. eyewitness wrote, “the two embraced each They would not deal with fundamentals other warmly. They were meeting after 11 “because the fundamental issues had already years, but the way they greeted each other been decided.” reflected no traces of embarrassment, let Krishnamachari was speaking for him- aside bitterness over what happened in the self and not, so far as we can tell, for his intervening period.” The sheikh presented prime minister. However, his comments re- Nehru with almonds, honey, saffron, and flected the views of many other members of flowers from Kashmir, and the duo posed the Congress Party. Thus Home Minister for the battery of photographers and televi- G. L. Nanda insisted categorically that the sion cameramen before going inside. “maintenance of the status quo [in Kashmir] Abdullah stayed five days. He and was in the best interests of the subconti- Nehru met at least once or twice a day, nent.” Twenty-seven Congress members of usually without aides. While the prime Parliament issued a statement arguing that minister was otherwise occupied, the sheikh “you can no more talk of self-determination canvassed a spectrum of . He in the case of Kashmir than in the case of, placed a wreath on Gandhi’s samadhi in Raj- say, Bombay or Bihar.” ghat, and addressed a prayer meeting at Within his own party, the only senior Delhi’s greatest mosque, the Jama Masjid. figure who appeared sympathetic to Nehru’s The contents of the talks at Teen Murti efforts was Lal Bahadur Shastri, a future House were kept secret, the press being prime minister. Some opposition politicians told only that the two had discussed “the did see the point of speaking seriously with background to the Kashmir problem” as Abdullah. Thus the Swatantra Party leader well as “the communal problem and its urgently wired the veteran effect on the country as a whole.” But a Congress sage Rajaji: “Understand Nehru clue as to specifics was elicited by a sharp and Lalbahadur endeavouring to find solu- reporter when he asked the sheikh whether tion with Sheikh Abdullah but are up he intended also to visit Pakistan to meet its against confused thinking within Congress president. Abdullah first quipped, “Why? Party alongside of Jan Sangh Communist I am getting good meals here.” Then he combination. If you think telegram or letter said, “Every sane person will say that it is to Jawaharlal from yourself encouraging him desirable to bring India and Pakistan to- [to] do the right thing and assuring your

86 WORLD POLICY JOURNAL • FALL 2004 personal support would help please move in Evolve Kashmir Formula: A Proposal to Be the matter.”14 Discussed with Prime Minister.” Rajaji did Rajaji chose not to write to Nehru, per- not say a word to the press, but Abdullah haps because he was too proud, or because was more forthcoming. Speaking with the he feared a rebuff. But he did write to Lal wise old man, he said, “had helped clear his Bahadur Shastri, urging that Kashmir be mind about what would be the best solution given some kind of automonous status. As which would remove this cancer from the he saw it, “self-determination for Kashmir is body politic of India and Pakistan.” Pressed as far as we are concerned a lesser issue than for details, the sheikh said these would have the aim of reducing Indo-Pak jealousy.” He to await further talks with Nehru. He let thought that “the idea that if we ‘let Kash- on, however, that Rajaji and he had worked mir go,’ we shall be encouraging secessions out “an honourable solution which would everywhere is thoroughly baseless.... I hope not give a sense of victory either to India or you and Jawaharlalji will be guided by Pakistan and at the same time would ensure Providence and bring this great opportunity a place of honour to the people of Kashmir.” to a good result.”15 While Abdullah was in Madras, word Rajagopalachari was now 85, and out reached him that President Ayub Khan had of active politics. But he had once been invited him to visit Pakistan. On returning called (by an Australian governor of ) to Delhi, the sheikh went straight to Teen the “wisest man in India.” Many still re- Murti House and spent 90 minutes with spected his intellect, not least Sheikh Ab- Nehru, apprising him of what was being re- dullah himself. Shortly after his release Ab- ferred to, somewhat mysteriously, as “the dullah had expressed his wish to “pay my Rajaji formula.” The prime minister next respects personally to Rajaji, and have the directed Abdullah to an informal committee benefit of his mature advice.”16 Now, after of advisers. This consisted of the foreign sec- his conversations with Nehru, he set off to retary, Y. D. Gundevia, the high commis- meet the prime minister’s friend-turned- sioner to Pakistan, G. Parthasarathi, and the rival. He planned to stop at en vice chancellor of the Aligarh Muslim Uni- route, to pay his respects to the veteran versity, . Gandhian leader . As he jok- Over two long days, Abdullah and ingly told a journalist, he would discuss Nehru’s committee discussed the Kashmir “spirituality” with Vinoba and “practical issue threadbare. All options were discussed: politics” with Rajaji. a plebiscite for the entire, undivided state of On May 4, Lal Bahadur Shastri wrote to Jammu and Kashmir as it existed before Rajaji urging him “to suggest to Sheikh Sa- 1947; the maintenance of the status quo; heb not to take any extreme line.... Sheikh and a fresh division of the state, in which Saheb has just come out and it would be Jammu and Ladakh went to India, Azad good for him to give further thought to the Kashmir to Pakistan, with a plebiscite in different aspects of the Kashmir question the Valley to decide its future. Abdullah and come to a judgement after full and ma- told the officials that while they could work ture introspection and deliberation. It will out the specifics of the solution, he sought be most unfortunate if things are done in a one that would: (1) promote Indo-Pakistani hurry or precipitated.”17 friendship; (2) not weaken the secular ideal This was an airmail letter, but one does of the Indian Constitution; (3) not weaken not know whether it reached Madras before the position of the minorities in either Abdullah finally met Rajaji. They spoke for country. He asked them to give him more nearly four hours, provoking this headline than one alternative, which he could take in the Hindustan Times: “Abdullah, CR, with him to Pakistan.

Opening a Window in Kashmir 87 The sheikh’s conditions essentially ruled , to be presumed to out a plebiscite, whose result, whatever it be integrated to India without was, would leave one country dissatisfied, question. and minorities on both sides more vulnera- ble. What about the Rajaji formula? This, it This reduced shape of the problem is appears, was to establish a condominium good enough, if solved as we desire, over Kashmir between India and Pakistan, to bring about an improvement in with defense and external affairs being the the Indo-Pakistan relationship. And joint responsibility of the two governments. being of reduced size, would be a Another possibility was of creating a con- fitting subject for UN federation between India, Pakistan, and partial or complete.”19 Kashmir.18 The three people advising Nehru were Indeed, as Rajaji was writing these selected for their ability and knowledge; it words, news came of a combative speech de- is noteworthy nonetheless that they came livered by Ayub Khan to the Bar from three different religious traditions. It Association, where he spoke of “India’s per- is noteworthy too that they were all career fidious annexation of Jammu and Kashmir,” government officials. Why the prime minis- and claimed that India was “set on persecut- ter shunned his cabinet ministers in this ing and driving out Indian Muslims.” regard is made clear in a letter written to Sensibly, Nehru and Abdullah disre- Rajaji by one of his Swatantra MPs, B. Shiva garded the outburst. The sheikh traveled Rao: “There is a clear attempt both from around the country, speaking to groups of within the Cabinet and in Parliament to Muslims about his proposed visit to Pa- prevent the Prime Minister from coming to kistan. A lasting solution, he reiterated, terms with Sheikh Abdullah if it should would be one that gave neither India nor mean the reopening of the issue of accession. Pakistan a sense of victory; did not weaken Many of these Ministers have made public India’s ; satisfied the sense of statements while the discussion between the honor of the people of Kashmir; and did not two are going on. It’s a sign of the dimin- result in displacement or forced migration ishing prestige and influence of the P. M. of individuals or communities. Speaking in that they can take such liberties.” Srinagar, he said that that “one visit to Pa- Rajagopalachari’s reply was more inter- kistan will not do. I may even have to shut- esting still. It gave more flesh to the “Rajaji tle between New Delhi and Rawalpindi.” formula,” while putting Nehru’s predica- On the Indian side, the best, and most ment in proper perspective: likely the last, hope for peace was Jawaharlal Nehru. On May 11, the sheikh told re- Asking Ayub Khan to give a com- porters that “I do not want to plead for mitment in advance about Azad Nehru but he is the symbol of India in spite Kashmir now will break up the of his weakness. You cannot find another whole scheme. He will not and can- man like him.” He added that “after Nehru not give it. He is in a worse situa- he did not see anyone else tackling [the tion than Nehru in regard to public problems] with the same breadth of vision.” pressures and emotional bondage.... For his part, Nehru was also prepared to Any plan should therefore leave the give his old comrade and sometime adver- prizes of war to be left untouched.... sary a sterling certificate of character. Speak- Probably the best procedure is for ing to the All-India Congress Committee in Sheikh to concentrate on the valley Bombay on May 16, he declared that the leaving Jammu as a counterpoise to sheikh was wedded to the principles of secu-

88 WORLD POLICY JOURNAL • FALL 2004 larism. Both he and Nehru hoped that “it sheikh] is able to evoke from President would be possible for India, holding on to Ayub,” wrote Masani to Brohi, would “have her principles, to live in peace and friend- a decisive influence in strengthening or ship with Pakistan and thus incidentally to weakening the hands of those who stand for put an end to the question of Kashmir. I Indo-Pakistan amity here.” Nehru’s Pakistan cannot say if we will succeed in this, but it initiative was bitterly opposed from within is clear that unless we succeed India will his party and outside it. For it to make carry the burden of conflict with Pakistan progress, for there to be a summit meeting with all that this implies.” between the prime minister and President Ayub Khan, it was “of the highest moment VI that Sheikh Abdullah should come back On May 20, Sheikh Abdullah returned to with something on which future talks could Teen Murti House for a final round of talks be based....” Masani urged Brohi to use his before traveling to Pakistan. At a press con- influence with Ayub and other leaders, so ference, Nehru declined to disclose details, that their talks with Abdullah would “yield saying that he did not want to prejudice the fruitful results in the interests of both coun- sheikh’s mission. But he did indicate that tries.”22 (Within Parliament, Masani was one his government was “prepared to have an of Nehru’s fiercest critics, but like his men- agreement with Pakistan on the basis of tor Rajaji, he saw that progress on Kashmir their holding on to that part of Kashmir was the key to the subcontinent’s future. On occupied by them.”20 this subject at least he was willing to bat for Nehru’s own papers are closed to schol- Nehru. His was a constructive and princi- ars, but a letter by his foreign secretary of- pled opposition, so rare in that time, and so fers a clue to his thinking. Nehru had ap- completely unfeasible in ours.) parently asked legal experts to explore the Meanwhile, Abdullah proceeded to Pa- implications of a confederation between In- kistan. He hoped to spend two weeks there, dia, Pakistan, and Kashmir “as a possible beginning in the then-capital, Rawalpindi, solution to our present troubles.” Such an moving on to Azad Kashmir, and ending in arrangement would not imply an “annul- East Pakistan, where he intended to test the ment” of partition. India and Pakistan feelings of the Hindu minority. On May 24, would remain separate, sovereign states. he touched down in Rawalpindi to a tumul- Kashmir would be part of the confederation, tuous reception. He drove in an open car with its exact status to be determined by from the airport, the route lined by thou- dialogue. There might be a customs union sands of cheering Pakistanis. The welcome, of the three units, some form of financial said one reporter, “surpassed in intensity integration, and special provisions for the and depth that given to Mr Chou-en-Lai in protection of minorities.21 February.”23 To keep the discussion going, India was Later, talking to newsmen, Abdullah prepared to concede Pakistan’s hold over called his visit “a peace mission of an ex- Azad Kashmir and Gilgit. Would Pakistan ploratory nature.” He appealed to the press concede anything in return? As Abdullah to help cultivate friendship between India prepared to depart for Rawalpindi, Minoo and Pakistan. “He said he had come to the Masani wrote to A. K. Brohi, sometime definite conclusion that the armed forces Pakistani high commissioner to India, who of both the countries facing each other on was a top Karachi lawyer and a certified the cease-fire line must be disengaged and member of the Pakistani establishment that the edifice of a happy and prosperous who had the ear of President Ayub Khan. Kashmir could be built only on permanent “The nature of the response which he [the friendship between India and Pakistan.” As

Opening a Window in Kashmir 89 in New Delhi, here too he emphasized that On May 26, Abdullah met Ayub Khan any solution to the dispute must not foster a again, for four hours this time, and he came sense of defeat for either India or Pakistan, out beaming. The president, he told a must not weaken India’s secularism or the crowded news conference, had agreed to future of its 60 million Muslims, and must a meeting with Nehru in mid-June. The satisfy the aspirations of the Kashmiris meeting would take place in Delhi, and themselves. Abdullah would also be in the city, available The next day, on May 25, Abdullah met for consultation. “Of all the irritants that with Ayub Khan for three hours. The sheikh cause tension between India and Pakistan,” would not touch on the details, saying only said the sheikh, “Kashmir is the most im- that he found in Rawalpindi “the same en- portant. Once this great irritant is removed, couraging response as in Delhi. There is an the solution of other problems would not equal keenness on both sides to come to a present much difficulty.” real understanding....” Later that day, Ab- By this time, enchantment with the dullah addressed a mammoth public meet- sheikh was wearing thin among the Paki- ing in Rawalpindi. He was “cheered repeat- stani elite. Their representative voice, the edly as he spoke for two hours bluntly warn- newspaper Dawn, wrote of how Abdullah’s ing both Indians and Pakistanis from com- statements, “especially his references to In- mitting wrongs which would endanger the dia’s so-called secularism, have caused a cer- lives of the minorities in both countries.” tain amount of disappointment among the The time had come, he said, for India and public in general and the intelligentsia in Pakistan to bury the hatchet. For if “the particular.” Dawn thought that the sheikh present phase of tension, distrust and mis- had been “lured by the outward show of In- understanding continued, both countries dian secularism, obviously forgetting the in- would suffer.” human treatment meted out to 60 million Chairing the meeting was Ghulam Ab- Muslims in the so-called secular state.” But bas, a former president of Azad Kashmir, the newspaper had a more fundamental and an old rival of the sheikh’s. They had complaint: that Abdullah had “taken up the known each other since the 1930s, when role of an apostle of peace and friendship be- they fought for control of the popular move- tween Pakistan and India, rather than that ment against the autocratic rule of the ma- of the leader of Kashmir, whose prime objec- haraja. Abdullah won hands down. As a tive should be to seek their freedom from Indian contemporary recalled, Abbas resented the bondage.”25 fact that the sheikh was “greatly loved by On May 27, Abdullah proceeded to the people of Kashmir at the time.”24 Now, Muzaffarbad, a town he had not seen since 20-some years later, he sought to put a Kashmir was divided in 1947. He had no spoke in the sheikh’s wheel. Thus, said Ab- idea of how Kashmiris on this side of the bas, any settlement of the Kashmir problem cease-fire line would react to his proposals. could not ignore the People’s Republic of Before he could find out, news reached him China. Abdullah took angry exception, in- that Nehru had died. Abdullah at once sisting that “neither India nor Pakistan “broke into tears and sobbed.” In a muffled should look to America, Britain, the Soviet voice he told the reporters gathered around Union or China for help in this matter. him, “He is dead, I can’t meet him.” Later, These countries changed their stands from in a condolence meeting, Abdullah stated time to time to suit their national inter- that “Mr Nehru’s death had made his mis- ests.” This was undoubtedly true, but it also sion more difficult.” For he had “pinned appears that Abdullah would not brook any great hopes in the Nehru-Ayub meeting, third-party mediator—except himself. and expected that they would arrive at an

90 WORLD POLICY JOURNAL • FALL 2004 agreement.” But he would not “lose his zeal This seems to me too cynical by far. For and strive hard to find a solution to Kash- Abdullah’s words, and still more his actions, mir and other Indo-Pakistan problems.” make manifest his commitment to secular- Abdullah drove down to Rawalpindi, ism, his concern for the minorities in both and got on the first flight to Delhi. When India and Pakistan. He was ambitious, cer- he reached Teen Murti and saw Nehru’s tainly, but while in 1953 he seems to have body, “he cried like a child.” It took him fancied himself as the uncrowned king of some time to “compose himself and place Kashmir, in 1964 he saw himself rather as the wreath on the body of his old friend and an exalted peacemaker, the one man who comrade.” To this account from a newsman might bring tranquility and prosperity to a on the spot we must add the witness of a troubled subcontinent. diplomat who accompanied Nehru’s body About Jawaharlal Nehru’s motives there to the ground. As the fire was should be no doubt at all. He was deeply burning the body to ashes, buglers sounded troubled by guilt over Abdullah’s long in- “The Last Post,” and “thus was symbolized carceration, deeply worried about the con- the inextricability of India and England in tinuing disaffection in Kashmir, deeply sen- Nehru’s life.” But before the fire finally died sible of the long-term costs of the dispute down, “Sheikh Abdullah leapt on the plat- to both India and Pakistan. The question form and, weeping unrestrainedly, threw does not concern his motives, but his influ- flowers onto the flames; thus was symbol- ence. Would his colleagues listen to him? ized the inextricability of the Muslim world Thus, as the sheikh prepared to leave for in Nehru’s life and the pathos of the Kash- Pakistan, Rajaji wrote: “I am afraid P. M. mir affair.”26 is not now and will not be in the near fu- ture strong enough to think and act in defi- VII ance of the unfortunate chauvinism ruling How serious were the three protagonists for Delhi.... The only ray of hope now is in Earl peace in April-May 1964? The protagonist Mountbatten who may give Mr Nehru good who did not reveal his mindset, at least in advice when he goes for the Commonwealth public, was Ayub Khan. We know nothing meet. And that advice will go much farther about what he really thought at the time, than any other advice or argument or whether he was indeed serious about a nego- consideration.”28 tiated settlement on Kashmir and whether I think this, too, is excessively cynical. he would have been able to “sell” an agree- For Nehru had made up his mind to bid for ment with India to his people. Sheikh Ab- peace. Still, one cannot be certain that he dullah, on the other hand, was forthcoming could have carried his party and the nation with his views, expressing them to the press with him. His declining health, and the and in countless public meetings and ora- China war, had sharply circumscribed his tions. Some thought his words a mere mask authority. And the veins of chauvinism did for personal ambition. Writing in the Eco- run deep. Had he and Ayub Khan, with a nomic Weekly, one commentator claimed that little help from Abdullah, actually worked “even a superficial study of his political be- out a settlement, would it have passed the haviour convinces that he is embarked on a muster of the Congress Party, or of the Indi- most ramified plan to win an independent an Parliament? State by skilfully exploiting the hates and Possibly not. But even if it had, would the prejudices, conscious and unconscious, it have worked in the long run? The legal and the power political tangles which pro- expert consulted by Nehru’s office on the vide the background to Indo-Pakistan idea of a confederation delicately pointed relations.”27 out that “historically, confederations have

Opening a Window in Kashmir 91 been dominated by one member or united ing. Blame for this state of affairs accrues to under stress.”29 In a proposed South Asian all sides. Both India and Pakistan have be- federation, would India behave like a big haved abominably. So too, it must be said, brother? Relevant here is a cartoon by Puri have the presumed leaders of the Kash- that appeared in the Hindustan Times the day miri people, be they nepotistic and corrupt Abdullah met Ayub Khan. This showed politicians, or bloody and brutal “freedom- Pakistan’s president standing ruminatively, fighters.”32 finger on chin, with the sheikh expansively In this time there has been talk, but gesticulating, and saying: “You’re afraid never serious talk. Between 1971 and 1990, Delhi will try to dominate Pindi? My dear it was India who had no real interest in dia- chap, when Delhi can’t dominate Lucknow logue. Its leaders saw Pakistan as divided or Chandigarh...”30 and weak, and the Vale of Kashmir as sta- Here then were the imponderables— ble, especially after Sheikh Abdullah became Ayub’s motives, Abdullah’s beliefs, Nehru’s chief minister in 1975. Between 1990 and strength, the viability of a condominium or 2001, it was Pakistan that believed it un- a confederation. In the end, it was Nehru’s necessary to look for answers. The insur- strength that gave way, literally. And, as gency was gaining strength in Kashmir. a Pakistani newspaper noted, his passing Bled by a thousand cuts, wouldn’t India meant “the end of a negotiated settlement of have to give up the Valley sooner or later? the Kashmir issue.” For whoever succeeded The events of 9/11 changed all this. Nehru would lack “the stature, courage and Pakistan’s protestations about giving only political support necessary to go against the “moral support” to the Kashmir struggle highly emotional tide of public opinion in became increasingly feeble and unconvinc- India favouring a status quo in Kashmir.”31 ing. Under pressure from Washington, the In May 1965, less than a year after Pakistan government was forced, at least Nehru died, Sheikh Abdullah was back in publicly, to redesignate jihadists as terrorists. jail. He had been to Mecca on a pilgrimage, Meanwhile, faced with widespread allega- stopping en route in Algiers. The Chinese tions of human rights abuses by the army, prime minister Chou-en-Lai was also in India called state elections in Jammu and the city, and he and Abdullah met. This Kashmir in 2002, the first free elections in alarmed the chauvinists in New Delhi, who the state in 25 years. arrested him as soon as he returned home. One is tempted to draw parallels be- At about the same time, Ayub Khan was tween the events of April-May 1964 and fighting a presidential election against Fati- events of our own time. After decades of ma Jinnah, sister of the founder of Pakistan. suspicion and hostility, a conversation has To ensure his victory, he presented himself once again commenced between India and as the man who would liberate Kashmir. Pakistan over Kashmir. Notably, it began in Later in the year he sought to put this claim the last days of the government of Atal Be- into action. A group of irregulars crossed hari Vajpayee, a man who, like Nehru, was the cease-fire line in August, with a view seeking in the evening of his political life to to fomenting an insurrection in the Valley. bring about peace between India and Paki- Soon there was full-scale war between India stan. (As with Nehru, his efforts were criti- and Pakistan, which lasted three weeks, cized strongly by elements within his own and was ended only by international party.) And is Gen. Pervez Musharraf an up- intervention. dated version of Ayub Khan, like his prede- With the 1965 war commenced decades cessor a whisky-drinking ruler who tries, as of uncertainty in Kashmir. These have been best he can, to keep his distance from the years of war, conflict, and above all, suffer- jihadists? And what then of the Kashmiris?

92 WORLD POLICY JOURNAL • FALL 2004 Admittedly, there is no Sheikh Abdullah get the past and repent over the evil they had done. now, no single leader who authoritatively The Hindus and the Sikhs listened to him. Now the embodies the aspirations of his people. The Muslims and the Hindus and the Sikhs...are fighting closest one comes to a representative body is together to defend the beautiful valley of Kashmir. I Kashmir’s All-Party Hurriyat Conference. am glad, therefore, that you are receiving the two of Notably, the Hurriyat has in recent months us with cordiality” (Collected Works of Mahatma Gan- been more open to dialogue and reason than dhi, vol. XC, pp. 122–24). at any other time in the past decade. Even 4. The Current (Bombay), August 26, 1953. within the militant groups, there are indi- Stevenson, however, held that while when they met viduals who see that the armed struggle is Abdullah did seem keen on an independent Kashmir, going nowhere. he did not provide any encouragement—as he put it, In 40 years much has changed in Kash- he did the listening, the sheikh the talking. See mir, in India, in Pakistan, in the world. Sarvepalli Gopal, Jawaharlal Nehru: A Biography, Vol- However, in its essentials the contours of ume II (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1979), the dispute have scarcely changed at all. p.131, n. 65. Now, as then, a solution to this most in- 5. For the circumstances of the sheikh’s dis- tractable of conflicts must satisfy the condi- missal and arrest, see , Autobiography tions specified long ago by Sheikh Abdul- (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1994), pp. 160–64. lah. It must not lead to a sense of victory for The political history of Jammu and Kashmir in these either India or Pakistan. It must make more crucial years, 1947 to 1953, is covered in a number secure the minorites in both countries. And of works. The Pakistani point of view is ably articu- it must satisfy the aspirations of the people lated in Alastair Lamb, Kashmir: A Disputed Legacy, of Kashmir. 1846–1990 (Karachi: Oxford University Press, • 1992); the Indian point of view in Prem Shankar Jha, Notes Kashmir, 1947: Rival Versions of History (Delhi: Ox- 1. Baroo, “Kashmir Interlude,” Swatantra ford University Press, 1996). Relatively detached, so (Madras), November 29, 1947. to say “neutral,” accounts include Josef Korbel, Dan- 2. Ajit Bhattacharjea, Kashmir: The Wounded Val- ger in Kashmir, 2nd ed. (Princeton: Princeton Univer- ley (Delhi: UBSPD, 1994), pp. x–xii. sity Press, 1966); and Michael Brecher, The Struggle 3. Nehru to Hari Singh, November 13, 1947, in for Kashmir (New York: Oxford University Press, S. Gopal ed., Selected Works of Jawaharlal Nehru: Sec- 1953). A particularly valuable work is Sisir Kumar ond Series, Volume V (New Delhi: Jawaharlal Nehru Gupta, Kashmir: A Study in India-Pakistan Relations Memorial Fund, 1987), pp. 324–27. Mahatma Gan- (Bombay: Asia Publishing House, 1966). Sheikh Ab- dhi was also deeply impressed with the sheikh’s secu- dullah’s own version of these events is contained in larism. In the last week of November 1947, Abdul- Flames of the Chinar: , abridged, lah visited Delhi, where he accompanied Gandhi to a trans. from the and introduced by Khushwant meeting held on the birthday of the founder of the Singh (New Delhi: Penguin India, 1995). Sikh faith, Guru Nanak. As Gandhi told the gather- 6. Nehru to Tikaram Paliwal, July 17, 1955, in ing: “You see Sheikh Abdullah Saheb with me. I was H. Y. Sharada Prasad and A. K. Damodaran, eds., Se- disinclined to bring him with me, for I know that lected Works of Jawaharlal Nehru: Second Series, Volume there is a great gulf between the Hindus and the 29 (New Delhi: Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund, Sikhs on one side, and the Muslims on the other. But 2001), pp. 452–53. Farooq had been to see Nehru in the Sheikh Saheb, known as the Lion of Kashmir, al- Delhi, where he told him that his classmates routine- though a pucca Muslim, has won the hearts of both, ly referred to his father as a “traitor.” This prompted by making them forget that there is any difference the prime minister to write to Paliwal, a minister in between the three.... Even though in Jammu, recent- the Rajasthan state government, asking him to en- ly, the Muslims were killed by the Hindus and Sikhs, sure that the boy had “proper living quarters and he went to Jammu and invited the evil-doers to for- some friendly companionship,” so that he did not

Opening a Window in Kashmir 93 develop any “complexes and the like.” As Nehru put 17. Shastri to Rajaji, May 4, 1964, in Subject it, “Some people foolishly imagine that because we File No. 92, C. Rajagopalachari Papers, NMML. have had differences with Sheikh Abdullah, therefore 18. “Kashmir—Talk with Sheikh Abdullah on we are not favourably inclined towards his son and 8th May, 1964, at PM’s House,” Subject File No. 4, his family. This, of course, is not only absurd but is Y. D. Gundevia Papers, NMML. just the reverse of how we feel. Personally, because 19. Shiva Rao to Rajaji, May 10, 1964, and Ra- Sheikh Abdullah is in prison, I feel rather a special jaji to Shiva Rao, May 12, 1964, Subject File No. responsibility that we should try to help his sons and 92, C. Rajagopalachari Papers, NMML. family.” 20. Hindustan Times, May 23, 1964. 7. Aparna Basu, : Rebel with a 21. Y. D. Gundevia to V. K. T. Chari (Attorney- Cause (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1996), chap. General, Madras), May 13, 1964, Subject File No. 4, 9; Hindustan Times, April 9, 1964. Y. D. Gundevia Papers, NMML. 8. The following paragraphs on Abdullah’s re- 22. Letter of May 20, 1964, Subject File No. 92, lease and his triumphant return to the Valley are C. Rajagopalachari Papers, NMML. based principally on the Hindustan Times issues of 23. Hindustan Times, May 25, 1964. Unless oth- April 6–24, 1964. erwise indicated, the rest of this section is based on 9. Jayaprakash Narayan, “Our Great Opportu- reports in the Hindustan Times, May 25–30, 1964. nity in Kashmir,” Hindustan Times, April 20, 1964. 24. Malka Pukhraj, Song Sung True: A Memoir, 10. C. Rajagopalachari, “The Congress Resolu- trans. and ed. Saleem Kidwai (New Delhi: Kali for tion,” Swarajya, January 11, 1964. Women, 2003), pp. 200–01. 11. C. Rajagopalachari, “Am I Wrong?” Swa- 25. As quoted in the Hindustan Times, May 27, rajya, April 25, 1964. 1964 (emphasis added). 12. Cf. the report of the trial proceedings in 26. Walter R. Crocker, Nehru: A Contemporary’s Dawn (Karachi), November 18, 1960. Estimate (New York: Oxford University Press, 1966), 13. See the report in the Hindustan Times, April p. 178. 23, 1964. In the rest of this section, quotes not given 27. Romesh Thapar, “Behind the Abdullah specific attributions come from this newspaper. Headlines,” Economic Weekly (Bombay), May 30, 14. Telegram dated April 29, 1964, in Subject 1964. File No. 92, C. Rajagopalachari Papers, Nehru 28. Letter to B. Shiva Rao, May 12, 1964, in Memorial Museum and Library (hereafter cited as Subject File No. 92, C. Rajagopalachari Papers, NMML). NMML. 15. Letter of April 29, 1964, in Subject File No. 29. V. K. T. Chari to Y. D. Gundevia, May 16, 92, C. Rajagopalachari Papers, NMML. As some other 1964, in Subject File No. 4, Y. D. Gundevia Papers, letters in this file show, most Swatantra Party mem- NMML. bers opposed Masani and Rajaji in their support of 30. Hindustan Times, May 26, 1964. the Nehru-Abdullah talks. K. M. Munshi said that 31. Quoted in the Hindustan Times, May 29, the sheikh should be put back in jail. Dahyabhai Pa- 1964. tel (son of ) said that the only solu- 32. Among the many recent works on the sub- tion to the Kashmir problem was to settle the Valley ject, I would especially recommend Victoria Scho- with Hindu refugees from East Pakistan. field, Kashmir in Conflict: India, Pakistan and the Un- 16. Abdullah to Minoo Masani, April 16, 1964, ending War (: I. B. Tauris, 2003). in Subject File No. 92, C. Rajagopalachari Papers, NMML.

94 WORLD POLICY JOURNAL • FALL 2004