Many unfair myths about the ‘accession’ & the state of J&K have been allowed to survive for over 7 decades. “Koyi bhi duniyaan ka aadmi nahin hai jo Jammu Kashmir ko Kashmir State ke naam se nahin janta” said former J&K CM Ghulam Nabi Azad in 2021. The region of Ladakh, thus, was not even reflected in the name of the erstwhile State of J&K. 

To dispel the myth regarding accession, it’s necessary to understand that it was the right only of the Prince of a Princely State & not of ‘his subjects’ to take this decision. Those who have been cultivating the myth of ‘no merger’ have taken advantage of the term ‘Vilay’ used for Accession. In this regard, “Valley leaders”, unfortunately, were not checked for wrongly projecting Art 35A & Art 370 as ‘distancing’ symbols. Government of India (GoI) must at least now draw a clear line between separatist & mainstream ideologies. J&K Accession Day (Adhimilan Divas) is observed to undo myths otherwise spread about J&K. Once these myths are washed away, there will be no need to observe J&K Accession day.

The Maharaja of the then princely state of J&K had not taken any decision before the 15th of August 1947 in favour of accession and it was carried out only on the 26th of October 1947 after Pakistan brazenly, under the garb of ‘Tribals’, had already initiated an attack on the princely state of J&K. State forces were too few to stand against this aggression. Maharaja Hari Singh did later explain the reasons for the delay in acceding to either / India Dominion in his letter dated 26th October 1947 ( the day he also signed the Instrument of Accession) addressed to Lord Mountbatten, the then Governor General of India. The said letter is in the public domain. The subject of J&K’s accession is still discussed, even in 2021, whereas the accession of other princely states is not discussed and is scarcely even asked in the public discourse.

There have been some myths about J&K which have been and are still prevalent in the expressions / opinions / narrations in debates/ discussions that have been cultivated over the years. The statements and expressions made by ‘some people’ from within and outside the region, projecting very conservative geographical boundaries and identities of the people of J&K and opinions / aspirations depicting concerns ‘only’ from the Valley of Kashmir have for all these years after 1947, not been seriously responded to either by the local or national leaderships. So, people in J&K ( and even those outside J&K) have been made to live with a number of uncontested myths. Some examples of which are –  expressions like J&K having its ‘own/separate constitution’; the erstwhile Indian state of J&K having its own flag parallel to the Indian national flag; Article-370- acting as a bridge between India and J&K; J&K having a ‘special status’ in the Constitution of India; ‘people’ of J&K having been given an assurance for constitutional autonomy in return for the majority Muslim Kashmiris having agreed to accede to the Indian dominion and the like. Myths, particularly related to the 1947 Accession of J&K to the then India Dominion, have been floated / carried not only by an enemy country like Pakistan and separatist groups / elements but also by the leadership that has been accepted as mainstream by national parties like the Congress ( 2002) and the BJP (2015).

Some of the prime indicators that could be used for affixing the reasons for the unending socio-political turmoil in J&K (Valley in particular), the inter-regional & inter religious instability and the administrative as well as economic mismanagement in which the people of J&K have been living in, even after the October 1947 accession of J&K with independent democratic Indian Republic possibly could be :- :

(1) The partition of India was done along communal lines. In this regard, the J&K princely state was a Muslim majority one and its Maharaja had delayed the decision regarding accession for he had under consideration multiple options. This has also been spelled out by him in his letter of 26th October 1947, addressed to Lord Mountbatten (then Governor General of India). Alongside this, it is important to recollect that political activism for independence (from the British & the local ruler) and in favour of greater democratic rights was comparatively more vigorous in the Kashmir region as compared to other Princely States. Pakistan had attacked the then Princely State of J&K openly on 22nd October 1947 from the side of the Kashmir valley alone( Muzaffrabad side), considering that the population there being more than 95 %  Muslim and the forces of the Maharaja being minuscule and depleted, it would easily conquer the region. Yet, Pakistan failed to get support from the Muslim population of the Kashmir valley. The J&K National Conference cadres found reasons/opportunities to score political points by claiming commendation for playing a ‘vital role’ in saving the Kashmir Valley / ‘State’ from the Pakistani aggressors (although some areas were lost). They also ‘made claims’ of preserving the local socio-communal environment. With the local environment in Kashmir valley having comparatively remained ‘nearly’ free from communal riots in 1947, the local Kashmiri leadership and the Muslim community earned appreciation from the all India leadership. Otherwise also, J&K was often addressed as ‘Kashmir state’ during the times before 1947 . Most of the time, issues pertaining to the State of J&K were addressed as issues pertaining to ‘Kashmir’ even when they related to the Ladakh Region. Even the Maharaja of J&K State, during the pre 1948 times, addressed himself as the Maharaja of Kashmir. 

All these years, we have been often using the term ‘Kashmir to Kanayakumari’ while talking about the lands & people of India. This forced ‘outsiders’ to take every word that was said by a Kashmir Valley person of any class / community for or against India / India government as the word / feeling / aspiration/ opinion of citizens from all the regions of J&K State (Kashmir valley, Ladakh region, Jammu region).

Therefore, any negative statement made by Kashmir Valley leaders or any outsider in relation to J&K was taken by the world community as representing the whole of J&K. These included issues surrounding the LOC/IB. Hence, most people were developing misconceptions about J&K, particularly about accession related issues.

Since in 1947 India had yet to finally draft & accept a constitution for democratic governance, the leaders belonging to the Kashmir valley of J&K started projecting their views in terms of rights to claim credit for the accession of J&K State to the India dominion out of the wish of the people. It was here that the States’ Department of the Government of India and others in the leadership of India, failed to take serious notice of this and did not start undoing the myths at least about the right to accede.

(2) Even after the Princely state of J&K had acceded to the India Dominion on the 26th of October 1947 (post independence) and the Constitution of the democratic republic of India having been drawn up, the Indian leadership / governments still appeared confused about regarding J&K as being a part of ‘total’ India. So some people ( particularly from the Kashmir region) who were not in favour of Pakistan or the two nation theory sensed the weakness of the government and worked to use the Muslim majority character of the Kashmir Valley in particular and J&K in general,  for their own personal political ambitions. They tactically sold and even cultivated the ‘belief’ that despite the erstwhile princely State of J&K being a Muslim majority one, the people of the “Kashmir Valley” had still decided to accede to the India dominion but only in return of the then Indian government / socio-political leadership having made some special promises to the Kashmiris before the accession. No rejection of such absurd claims has been pointedly made by Governments in New Delhi over the years. Even the most patent facts were not publicised. For instance, it was never emphasised that it was the right of the Prince of a princely state only to take any decision regarding accession with the subjects having no say in such a decision. The reasons behind the delay in the decision were explained in Maharaja Hari Singh’s letter dated 26th October 1947.

Such Kashmir Valley leaders succeeded as power hungry leaders from outside Kashmir valley too walked in lockstep with them. Kashmir Valley centric ‘impressions’ got so well cultivated that even the outside world recognised the Indian state of J&K only as Kashmir State and understood the lands/people/J&K State through the perspective offered by the political / community leaders from Kashmir Valley through their statements/expressions. 

(3) Going by the environment that prevailed immediately after 1947, in the early 1950s, local leaders from the Kashmir Valley had successfully woven their web of strategies for keeping their grip on the democratic governments that were to follow in the independent Indian State of J&K with the help of strings like – 

(i) trumpeting that the Kashmir valley is a huge Muslim majority area,

(ii) asking why the then Prince of Jammu & Kashmir had not signed in normal course the instrument of accession before 15th August 1947, 

(iii) the Pakistani invaders having openly attacked in October 1947 from the Kashmir region side and having failed there to a great extent,

(iv) the Maharaja having left Srinagar on 25th October 1947,  

and

(v) ‘successfully’ even cultivating the myth that due to ‘their’ contributions, J&K had been given ‘Special Status’ by /in the Constitution of India through Art-370 (whereas constitutionally no such status has been bestowed upon the region,) 

The Government of India, despite being late to respond, did clearly say only on 11-03-2015 through a written reply to Rajya Sabha *Q. No: 138 ( “whether it is a fact that through Article 370, the Constitution gives special status to Jammu and Kashmir;”) that “in the Constitution of India, there is no mention of ‘Special Status to Jammu and Kashmir’ and Article 370 provides for ‘Temporary provisions with respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir’”. Yet we may still find some senior leaders from across all parties at occasions saying that J&K had a special status and that it has been taken away/ removed after 5th August 2019.

(4) The sort of understanding that has been prevailing and is prevalent even today well demonstrates that the Kashmir Valley leadership of the J&K State has succeeded in making people (even in the outside world) identify the Indian state of J&K only in the name of Kashmir and that has been the reason for India finding difficulties in making the world community understand that what is being said by some Kashmiri leaders / writers about the region’s history, culture, aspirations, the mindset of the locals, the constitutional needs & status of J&K State, the 1947 accession, etc. represents a very small constituent of the Indian State of J&K.

Mr. Ghulam Nabi Azad ( an extremely senior Congress leader from the Jammu Region) while addressing a function (Peace Sammelan) organised by Gandhi Global Family at Jammu on 27th February, 2021 too appeared as seeing his and the erstwhile J&K State’s identity only in the Kashmir Valley when he said, “… … hamari pehchaan khatam ho geyee .. .. mere sathiyon ko maloom hai meine Parliament mein bola , ki duniyaan mein jitney bhi Rashtrpati ya Pradhanmantri hain oon se agar poocho ge.. – Africa ke Prime Minister se agar pooch ge – Bartaniyaan , America … Bartaniyaan ke Prime Minister se aur Australia ke Prime Minister se , China ke Prime Minister se , Canada ke Prime Minister se , America ke ab neye neye President aeye hain lekin sab se pehle oonhon ne Kashmir ki baat ki .. oonhon ne Madhya Pradesh ki baat nahin ki – oonhon ne Bombay ki baat nahin ki – oonhon ne Dilli ( Delhi) ki baat nahin ki – toe koyi bhi duniyaan ka aadmi nahin hai ya leaders nahin hai jo Kashmir ko Kashmir ke naam se nahin janta ya Jammu Kashmir ko Kashmir State ( ke naam se) se nahin janta .”

(5) Indian leadership that mattered, in power as well as outside the power arena, had been keeping and continue to keep their focus more on expressions, narrations and ‘leadership’ from Kashmir Valley where after October 1947, the percentage of local non Muslims had fallen to less than 5%. There is nothing wrong in focusing on the Kashmir valley, its people and lands but it was / is not in the interest of the affairs related to the erstwhile state of J&K when the Governments ‘read’ the affairs and issues concerning the state only from the pages of a few ‘chapters’ and what a leader/ writer belonging to the Kashmir valley has been saying.

(6) The Kashmir valley centric mainstream leadership cultivated more local and regional controversies for their vote bank game than even the neighbouring countries which are inimical to our interests. These leaders went to the extent of misusing the very existence of Art-35A which could otherwise have been utilised for giving extraordinarily preferential treatment to Indian citizens of the class of permanent residents of J&K. Instead, the shelter of that article was used more to harm the interests of some permanent residents of J&K and to simply project Article 35A as a distancing symbol along with Article -370 whereas in actuality both were constitutionally not alien. (Now Article – 35A has been in a way rescinded / shed by a Presidential Order like it had been added in the Constitution of India. Article – 370 has also been amended/ modified using constitutional provisions, thereby weakening the myths on which some leadership / opinions survived. This is surely going to help in the process that the present NDA Modi led Government has initiated for remedying the ideological maladies that had grown around the innocent masses over the last 7 decades.)

(7) In a way, it can also be inferred that so far the Indian leadership / Government of India (GoI) have not been able to even draw a clear line between the separatist and mainstream ideologies. To exemplify this, one could read into the political behaviour demonstrated so far by those who have held the reins of governance. For the Congress and the BJP, for instance, the Self Rule Framework for Resolution doctrine of the PDP is within the framework of the Constitution of India even when it talks of joint control of India & Pakistan on certain affairs concerning J&K. To quote certain sections – 

(i) Clause-77 of PDP’s Self Rule Framework for Resolution says  “The Regional Council of Greater Jammu and Kashmir will have 50 members. The respective state assemblies of J&K and Pakistan Administered Kashmir shall elect 40 members. The remaining 10 members will be nominated, five each, by the Governments of India and Pakistan”

(ii) Clause- 58 demands Autonomy for J&K from the Indian nation state. So also is the position of those who long for the future of J&K / Kashmir in achievable nationhood. In case, some innocent people in the Kashmir valley (J&K) get carried away by these separatist ideologies w.r.t accession under such type of an environment, how could they be tagged with ‘anti national’ labels from an Indian point of view ?.

(8) It can not be denied that after the retreat of the British, Kashmiri valley leaders have always talked of Kashmiri (Valley) aspirations (have rarely talked of J&K aspirations) and ‘New Delhi’ too has been ‘sensing’ ‘J&K’ only in the people belonging to Kashmir valley. Kashmiri aspirations have been emphasised to the extent of the nation repeatedly feeling the need to “win” the hearts of Kashmiris. Some ‘permanent residents of J&K’ have gone to the extent of even saying that the 1947 Displaced Families from the areas of ‘J&K’ (1947 POJK DPs) occupied by Pakistan, have nearly remained ‘neglected’ by State Governments / Government of India because ‘they’ mostly belonged to areas outside the Kashmir valley and most of them stayed outside  the valley even after their displacement.

(9) Whenever an effort has been made to understand J&K affairs, the Government of India has always tried to find a solution with the help of messages and suggestions emerging from the politicians, administrators, thinkers, historians and community leaders mostly belonging to the Kashmir valley. This is also reflected well from what Gulam Nabi Azad ‘professed’ on the 27th of Feb 2021 in a rally in Jammu He said,  “.. toe koyi bhi duniyaan ka aadmi nahin hai ya leaders nahin hai jo Kashmir ko Kashmir ke naam se nahin janta ya Jammu Kashmir ko Kashmir State ( ke naam se) se nahin janta . Aaj hamari bo pehchaan chali geyi hai”. So, the Government India and those who are desperately looking for a meaningful way forward must plan their approach taking leads / catching strings out of such pronouncements and work out  strategies / plans to handle/ deal with the affairs and people in a realistic way by taking the truth to those who matter so that issues related to J&K are given a right way forward.

(10) The manner in which affairs regarding J&K have been handled has resulted in even those few people, who otherwise possess no mandate for influencing the decisions to be taken by a Prince of an Indian native state as regards accession of a princely state to either of the dominions or remaining as a buffer in terms of the Indian independence Act 1947, and who were against J&K merging into the India dominion due to their convictions in the communal two nation theory, getting encouraged to spread their tentacles. (ex. Hurriyat, People’s Conference , JKLF etc )

(11) Very little effort has been made even by the Government of India for rectifying inaccurate statements about the relationship of J&K with India. Myths like Art-370 having bestowed constitutionally special status upon J&K, Art-370 being the only link / bridge between India and J&K,  J&K having separate Flag & Constitution drawing parallels with Indian National Flag & the Constitution of India, etc. have been bandied about with impunity. There’s another falsehood which claims that the Prince of J&K signed the Instrument of Accession for India like other princes but unlike other princes who also additionally signed the merger of their states with India, the prince of J&K did not sign a merger of his state with India. The  fact remains that princely states had to only accede to the India dominion and not merge with the erstwhile Indian dominion. Certain ‘special’ claims of some Kashmiri valley leaders about their over-riding of the contributions of Kashmiris ( residents of the Kashmir valley ) making it possible for J&K acceding to India in 1947 remain a part of popular discourse even today.

(12) Those who have been cultivating the myth of ‘no merger having taken place’ have taken advantage of the word ‘Vilay’ being used for Accession (which is synonymous to ‘Merger’) instead of Adhimilan ( as used in constitution of India) in a bid to convince people to heed their opinion. No one appears to have taken notice of that in relation to the interests of the Indian nation. Some may still contest the use of the word/ term ‘Vilay’ for accession but the practice has already done the damage.

On the 10th of August 2016, even Dr. Karan Singh ji ( who was, in 1947, the Yuvraj/ Regent of J&K , then became Sadar-e- Riyasat of J&K, further became a Union Minister & Ambassador to the US and is currently the eldest leader in J&K ) had said in Rajya Sabha quote “With your permission .. last time I spoke from heart today I want to speak from the heart and the head also .. I want to place before this honourable house some factor which perhaps may not be fully known .. may be a little uncomfortable.. what ever I will say is based upon facts … I know I just might make some people uncomfortable …. we say Jammu and Kashmir is integral part of India…. , ofcourse it is , the day my father signed instrument of accession it became integral part of India no doubt about it … .27th October I was in the room … I was in the house…when accession was signed …. However please remember some thing more, my father (Maharaja Hari Singh) acceded for three subjects -defence , communication and foreign affairs — he ( Maharaja Hari Singh ) signed the same instrument of accession that all the other princely states signed but all the other states subsequently merged – Jammu and Kashmir did not merge . Jammu and Kashmir ‘s relationship with rest of India is guided by Art-370 and state constitution and I signed it to law…. We must realise … from the very beginning, right or wrong, Jammu and Kashmir has been given special position” unquote.

(13) But Dr. Karan Singh ji had gone uncontested and uncorrected even from the side of the Government of India (Home Minister Raj Nath Singh Ji and Union Minister MoS Dr. Jatinder Singh ji were also present in the Rajya Sabha) as regards the legality of the unfounded ‘merger’ controversy of which leaders like Omar Abdullah too have been making points in the legislature as well as in front of some foreigners. If memory serves, even after that, some speakers were heard in Parliament mentioning the date of Maharaja Hari Singh signing the instrument of accession as 27th October whereas in the records that the Government of India has so far made public, the date of the signing of the instrument of accession by Maharaja Hari Singh is the 26th of October.

Dr. Karan Singh ji’s words regarding the times of 1947 could be perceived as a sermon to the common man. Those who have been initiating unnecessary debates on technically the entire accession could use such quotes in ways that suit them. Of course, to my knowledge, the Government of India has not made any statement / correction ( I may be corrected if it already has ) in this regard, denying or accepting even when the references require immediate attention. What signal such things send to the outside world is worth contemplating.

(14) These are a few quotes which help one take into account how the doubts, controversies and myths about J&K being ‘total’ India, focusing on J&K’s 1947 accession with India, have been allowed to survive all these years. Such are the reasons for feeling the need only with regard to J&K for observing the Accession day even after more than 70 years. This is unlike any other Indian state where the day is not even casually talked about.

The Government of India, in fair wisdom, had initiated some actions in August 2019 which were in a way never the priorities of earlier governments but had become the need of the hour for setting out some paths to be tread for bringing peace and stability in J&K. These steps were needed for alleviating ideological pollution by eradicating the myths about Kashmir’s constitutional status in India and uprooting the separatist ideologies that had also  been helping foreign players in their designs against India. Nearly all the questioning about J&K was raised by the leaders having roots in the Kashmir Valley and those professing all identities only in Kashmiriat. The Kashmir valley is a very small region in comparison to even the Jammu region, let alone the Ladakh Region. The Ladakh region is not even reflected in the name of the erstwhile State of J&K. Political cadres need to work with much more care and commitment, rising above petty political interests, since at the social level much needs to be done and that can be done better by non governmental agencies. The metric for ‘success’ would be nothing other than the return of the ‘migrants’ to Kashmir valley on their own.

With the enactment of THE JAMMU AND KASHMIR REORGANISATION ACT, 2019 NO. 34 OF 2019 in the Seventieth Year of the Republic of India (received assent of the President of India on 9th August 2019 ) at least a message has now gone to the people ‘outside’ that the real dimensions of Bharat Varsh should be considered from Ladakh to Kanayakumari. The Act created the following Union Territories – (i) Union territory of Ladakh comprising territories of the existing State of Jammu and Kashmir, namely:— “Kargil and Leh districts” (ii) Union territory of Jammu and Kashmir comprising the territories of the existing State of Jammu and Kashmir other than those specified for UT of Ladakh. Previously, suggestions had been made to show the areas occupied by Pakistan /China in the Jurisdictions of Divisional Commissioner Kashmir/ Divisional Commissioner Jammu/ Deputy Commissioner Leh/ Kargil. However, there still are some occupied areas that need to be formally mentioned under the jurisdictions of the Divisional Commissioner Jammu / Divisional Commissioner Kashmir .

Undoubtedly, some people in J&K have expressed unhappiness over the enactment of THE JAMMU AND KASHMIR REORGANISATION ACT, 2019 NO. 34 OF 2019 that reorganised the then existing Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories. Objections have come more from the people of the Jammu Region and those from Kashmir region whereas the people of the Ladakh Region are in general happy with the status of a Union Territory ( in fact, they are often found expressing thanks to the present government of India for having brought the reorganisation bill in Parliament ). Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been regularly assuring, both inside as well as outside the Parliament, that at an appropriate opportunity, the Government of India will approach the Parliament for according the status of a State to the present UT of J&K and people should have no qualms about it.

The facts, needs and references that have been discussed here will have to be taken to the masses in a well meaning way and with as few streams of political oneupmanship as possible, rising above any and all regional and religious controversies.

So these myths need be uprooted / undone in a humble and realistic manner so that the confusion / doubts in the minds of innocents, cultivated over a period of 7 decades are washed away and thereafter there will be no need for anyone to observe the J&K Accession Day since those who have been concocting falsehoods shall have lost their standing in the public eye.