THE HISTORY BEHIND BRUTAL INDIAN OCCUPATION IN KASHMIR -II

Part-II


Letter from Government of India to UN, December 31, 1947.



"... The people of Kashmir would be free to decide their future by the recognised democratic method of plebiscite or referendum, which in order to ensure complete impartiality may be held under international auspices.



" This was also in accordance with Mahatma Gandhi's view, since he had stated that the India Government sent troops by air to Kashmir telling the Maharaja that the accession was provisional upon an impartial plebiscite being taken of Kashmir irrespective of religion".



Gopalaswami Ayyangar at Security Council, January 15, 1948.



"In accepting the accession they [the Government of India] refused to take advantage of the immediate peril in which the State found itself and informed the Ruler that the accession should finally be settled by plebiscite as soon as peace had been restored. They have subsequently made it quite clear that they are agreeable to the plebiscite being conducted if necessary under international auspices".



Gopalasawami Ayyangar, at Security Council, January 15, 1948.



"On the question of accession, the Government of India has always enunciated the policy that in all cases of dispute the people of the State concerned should make the decision."



Gopalasawami Ayyangar, at Security Council, January 15, 1948.



"... We have no further interest, and we have agreed that a plebiscite in Kashmir might take place under international auspices after peace and order have been established".



Gopalasawami Ayyangar, at Security Council, January 15, 1948.



"... Whether she [Kashmir] should withdraw from her accession to India, and either accede to India or remain independent, with a right to claim admission as a member of the UN - all this we have recognised to be matter for unfettered decision by the people of Kashmir after normal life is restored there.



"We desire only to see peace restored in Kashmir and to ensure that the people of Kashmir are left free to decide in an orderly and peaceful manner the future of their State. We have no further interest, and we have agreed that a plebiscite in Kashmir might take place under international auspices after peace and order have been established".



Gopalasawami Ayyangar, at Security Council, January, 1948.



"The question of the future status of Kashmir vis-à-vis her neighbour and the world at large and a further question, namely, whether she should withdraw from her accession to India and either accede to Pakistan or remain independent with a right to claim admission as a member of the United Nations - all this we have recognised to be a matter of unfettered decision by the people of Kashmir after normal life is restored to them".



Gopalasawami Ayyangar, at Security Council, February 3, 1948.



"... As the Security Council is aware, the Government of India is fully committed to the view that , after peace is restored and all people belonging to the State have returned there, a free plebiscite should be taken and the people should decide whether they wish to remain with India, to go over to Pakistan, or to remain independent, if they choose to do so".



Gopalasawami Ayyangar, at Security Council, February 6, 1948.



"... When the emergency has passed and normal conditions are restored, she will be free, by means of a plebiscite, either to ratify her accession to India, or to change her mind and accede to Pakistan, or remain independent. We shall not stand in the way if she elects to change her mind. That, I think, is the proper description of India’s attitude."



Sir Benegal Rau, at Security Council, February 7, 1950.



" It is therefore clear that the admission of representatives from any particular State into the Indian Constituent Assembly did not necessarily imply accession. As I have said, Kashmir had this right to representation ever since April 1947; it acceded tentatively, in October 1947 so that the accession came after the grant of the right and not the other way round".



Telegram from Indian Prime Minister Nehru to UN Representative for India and Pakistan, August 16, 1950.



"We have not opposed at any time an overall plebiscite for the State as a whole but you made some alternative suggestions because you came to the conclusion that there were no prospects of an agreement as to conditions preliminary to such a plebiscite....



"We have always recognised that any plan for a plebiscite should be such that the people concerned would be enabled to express their feelings freely and without fear....



"It has always been our view that, in the event of a plebiscite, the people of Kashmir should decide their future for themselves. Kashmiris who have gone out of the State should, of course, be entitled to return for this purpose. But I do not think that others have any claim to participate in a plebiscite campaign."



B. N. Rao in Security Council, March 29, 1951.



"The Constituent Assembly* cannot be physically prevented from expressing an opinion on this question if it so chooses. But this opinion will not bind my Government or prejudice the position of this Council."



* Which was to be convened by the Kashmir National Conference for deciding the accession issue - ED.



Krishna Menon, Indian Representative at UN General Assembly, referring to Congo Problem, April 5, 1951.



"Irrespective of the voting of this resolution, an abstention or two, the fact is that is the law of the United Nations at the present time.... My government has always taken the view that resolutions, if they are passed, must be implemented."



Letter of September 11, 1951 addressed to the UN Representative for

India and Pakistan.



"As regards paragraph 4, the Government of India not only reaffirms its acceptance of the principle that the question of the continuing accession of the State of Jammu and Kashmir to India shall be decided through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite under the auspices of the United Nations, but is anxious that the conditions necessary for such a plebiscite should be created as quickly as possible."



Letter from Indian Prime Minister Nehru to UN Representative for India and Pakistan, September 11, 1951.



"... The Government of India agree that the Plebiscite Administrator should be appointed as soon as conditions in the State, on both sides of the cease-fire line, permit of a start being made with the arrangements for carrying out the plebiscite. To appoint the Plebiscite Administrator before would be premature.



"The Government of India would, therefore, prefer such a proposal to be omitted from the present document; it would be more appropriately included in proposals that deal specifically and in detail with the holding of the plebiscite and connected matters."



Mrs. Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit, at Security Council, December 8, 1952.



"We do not seek to go behind the UNCIP resolutions, or to ignore the vital elements of principle contained in them... We have always adhered to the UNCIP resolutions.... We cannot be a party to the reversal of previous decisions taken by the United Nations Commission with the agreement of the parties."



Krishna Menon, at Security Council, January 24, 1957.



"... I want to say for the purpose of the record that there is nothing that has been said on behalf of the Government of India which in the slightest degree indicates that the Government of India or the Union of India will dishonour any international obligations it has undertaken."

Krishna Menon, at Security Council, February 8, 1957.

"It is possible, for any sovereign state to cede territory. If, as a result of a plebiscite, the people decided that they did not want to stay with India, then our duty at that time would be to adopt those constitutional procedures which would enable us to separate that territory."

Krishna Menon, at Security Council, February 20, 1957.

"The resolutions of January 17, 1948 and the resolutions of the UNCIP, the assurance given, these are all resolutions which carry a greater weight - that is because we have accepted them, we are parties to them, whether we like them or not."

Krishna Menon, at Security Council, October 9, 1957.

"...These documents (UNCIP reports) and declarations and the resolutions of the Security Council are decisions; they are resolutions, there has been some resolving of a question of one character or another, there has been a meeting of minds on this question where we have committed ourselves to it."

Krishna Menon, referring to Goa, The Statesman, Delhi, January 19, 1962.

" India believes that sovereignty rests in the people and should return to them."