Marxist Diplomacy with Hilsa and Prawn
Palash Biswas
Contact: Palash C Biswas, C/O Mrs Arati Roy, Gosto Kanan, Sodepur, Kolkata- 700110, India. Phone: 91-033-25659551
Email: alashbiswaskl@gmail.com">palashbiswaskl@gmail.com
Say it with hilsa
Or with spicy prawns from Andhra. Food, especially regional cuisine, is slowly assuming a vital role in politics, reports Anirban Das Mahapatra
The way to a man’s heart, they say, is through his stomach. Trust a politician to know. Joymalya Banerjee, executive chef of the restaurant chain Oh! Calcutta, says he had quite a task on his hands when the call came from 7 Race Course Road the ... | Read..
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1070909/asp/7days/index.asp
Phone Fashion
Times of India - 34 minutes ago
A couple of Mumbaikars including Manish Malhotra too walked in to enjoy themselves at the party hosted by Rocky S. Yesterday , we told you that designer Rocky S took his inspiration - a Nokia phone - to new heights in his fashion show at the Wills ...
Celina steals Varun Bahl's show at WIFW Hindustan Times
Rathore's summer line sets the ramp on fire Khabrein.info
ALAPPUZHA: Reiterating that the India-U.S. nuclear deal would in effect compromise the nation’s sovereignty, Communist Party of India (Marxist) Polit Bureau member and Rajya Sabha MP Brinda Karat on Saturday said the Left would not allow the United Progressive Alliance to go back on the terms agreed to in the Common Minimum Programme (CMP).
Politics was not a child’s game where one could go back on the rules agreed to before the match began, she said speaking at the inaugural of the eighth State conference of the All-India Democratic Women’s Association here.
“This is not the way a coalition government can or should function. The nuclear deal is totally against the CMP, which is the basis of the UPA government’s functioning.
“The UPA is a minority government which cannot rule the country on its own even for a single day. It is the 61 MPs of the Left, with the CMP as the bridge between them and the UPA, who are keeping them in power. We cannot accept a change in the CMP midway,” she said.
Rubbishing the claim that the nuclear deal would help to end electricity shortage and in turn help poor farmers, Ms. Karat said nuclear power would be three times more expensive than thermal or hydro power.
Questioning the morality and ethics of a deal which did not have the support of the majority in Parliament, Ms. Karat said the situation was such that an Indian MP’s vote on an issue concerning India did not have half the value of the vote of an American senator on the same issue.
“We agree that international treaties do not require the ratification of Parliament. But keeping in mind the impact of such treaties, this ratification is necessary. The American Parliament can vote on the treaty, but the Indian Parliament cannot. Even if we cannot vote on this, isn’t there a moral strength in the argument that the opinion of a majority in Parliament should be binding on the government?”
Ridicules navy exercises
Ms. Karat ridiculed the India-U.S. joint naval drills, saying the government, which said it did not have the money to issue ration cards to poor women, somehow found the funds to conduct such expensive exercises and also to import costly nuclear reactors.
US Imperialism: Hands Off India
Jathas Roll Out Against Joint Naval Exercises
Jyoti Basu, flanked by A B Bardhan and Biman Basu, flagging off the Chennai jatha
N S Arjun in Chennai B Prasant in Kolkata
LAUNCHING the Chennai-Vishakapatnam jatha, CPI(M) general secretary Prakash Karat vowed that the Left parties will mobilise the people and fight to ensure that our country does not come under the heel of US imperialism. Underlining that the struggle of the Left parties is not just against Indo-US nuclear deal but the overall process of making our country a junior partner to US, Karat warned this would entail further assaults on the livelihood of people in the form of US-dictated neo liberal economic policies.
At the other end, a crowded rally was witness to the commencement of a jatha from Bengal against the imperialist-led joint naval exercise off the coastal waters of India close Visakhapattanam. Veteran communist leader Jyoti Basu flagged off the 81-member jatha led by CPI general secretary Ardhendu Bhusan Bardhan and accompanied by senior Left Front leaders. Biman Basu himself travelled until Bhubaneswar in one of the two large buses that carried the jatha members.
Flagging off the jatha, at exactly 10 in the morning of 4 September Jyoti Basu was strongly critical of the manoeuvres and designs of US imperialism that wanted a military base near India. Jyoti Basu pointed out that very soon joint exercise of the three wings of the armed forces as such would well be conducted given the shape of things to come and the outlook of the UPA government. The jathas and the demonstrations organised against all such designs comprised the beginning of a ‘big battle against imperialist forays said the former chief minister of Bengal. Jyoti Basu called upon the UP government to recall the Common Minimum Programme and adhere to an independent foreign policy.
A corss section of massive rally that set off the Chennai jatha
In Chennai, addressing a huge public meeting organised in Chennai by CPI(M), CPI, Forward Bloc and RSP Tamilnadu state units on September 4 – the day the joint naval exercises of India, US, Japan, Australia and Singapore began off the coast of Vishakapatnam in Bay of Bengal – Prakash Karat said the Kolkata-Vishakapatnam and Chennai-Vishakapatnam jathas being conducted by the Left parties against these naval exercises will send a signal to the world that there are patriotic, democratic and secular people in India who are fighting against efforts to compromise the country’s sovereignty.
Karat accused the UPA government of betraying its promises made in the CMP, particularly that of pursuing an independent foreign policy. Ever since independence, our country never opted to become a military ally of any power and pursued non alignment as a policy. Going against this 60 year record, the UPA government has decided to make India a strategic ally of USA and signed a 10-year Defence Framework Agreement with the US. The current joint naval exercises were also an illustration of how US is making India its strategic ally. He charged the government of not telling the truth when it tried to portray the exercises as a routine one. The reality was that our armed forces were getting integrated with US forces.
Among the 13 US warships participating in these exercises included USS Nimitz, a notorious ship which was used for launching air strikes and cruise missiles against Iraq in 2003, which resulted in the slaughter of thousands of Iraqi people. “Our government is shamelessly hosting that ship now”, said Karat. He reminded the audience that when this ship came to Chennai port in July this year, the CPI(M) had opposed its docking. “Granting of refuelling and restocking option for such killer ships so that they can continue their bombardment missions – is this the role we want Indian armed forces to play”, questioned Karat.
Refuting the accusations that the Left stand is motivated by its anti-Americanism, he clarified that the Left is not against the people of US or US as a country. However the Left is definitely against US imperialism. He criticised the government for reaching an agreement with Bush, who is the most hated man in the world today. As part of our new found alliance with US, we would have to accept their economic partnership also. Along with nuclear reactors would come Wal-Mart and other notorious US companies, further ruining our people’s livelihood. Karat said that today in our country all sections of working people are fighting to protect their livelihood. All neo-liberal economic policies ruining their lives are being fought against. The closer embrace with US would entail intensification of these policies. Therefore the Left parties are insisting that India must have its own path of development, which serves people’s interests rather than those of US imperialism.
On the Indo-US nuclear deal, Karat made it clear in his speech that the UPA government must not go to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to finalise the safeguards agreement. “You might have made a timetable with George Bush. But as a minority government you are duty bound to heed the voice of people and the majority in parliament. Among the people, there is a widespread opposition to the deal. Even a majority in the parliament oppose the deal saying it is not in the interests of the country. So do not proceed. Examine all objections, particularly those relating to Hyde Act. Till then do not go to IAEA to finalise safeguards agreement”, warned Karat. He welcomed the announcement of formation of a committee of UPA-Left and asked the government to take the forthcoming debate in parliament seriously.
Karat rubbished the government’s propaganda of the nuclear deal meeting our energy needs by giving out statistics. As on today, nuclear power constitutes a mere 3 per cent of our country’s energy requirements and that even going by government’s most optimistic scenarios by 2020 it will only be able to meet 7 per cent of our energy needs. He pointed out the high cost of nuclear power and asserted that nuclear power is not the answer to our energy needs.
Pointing out that it was not the Left parties but the entire opposition which is against the deal, he however noted that the BJP is a pro-US imperialist party. Karat called for continuation of efforts to mobilise people in order to prevent the government from taking steps to make India a strategic ally of US imperialism. He concluded by expressing confidence that many other parties, including DMK and PMK in Tamilnadu who know the dangers of imperialism, would come together, rise up and protect our country.
Speaking next, CPI secretary D Raja made a forceful speech in Tamil. Forward Bloc general secretary Debebrata Biswas in his speech said that the country is today at a crossroads – whether we will surrender our sovereignty or fight to save our country from US imperialism. Calling this a historic moment, he said the Left parties will be in the forefront of the struggle to save our country.
RSP secretary Abani Roy accused the UPA government of being keen to please Bush rather than solve the problems being faced by the people.
CPI(M) state secretary N Varadarajan, CPI state secretary T Pandian also spoke. CPI(M) central committee members A K Padmanabhan, W R Varadarajan and T K Rengarajan were present on the dais. The proceedings of the meeting were conducted by CPI(M) North Chennai district secretary while CPI Chennai district secretary welcomed the leaders.
SIDELIGHTS
Before commencement of the meeting, the central leaders of the Left parties were felicitated on the dais with shawls. An interesting part of the meeting was the grand reception given to Prakash Karat on his arrival at the venue. Just before he began his speech, there was a firework display for few minutes, forcing him to pause and giving the press corps a few uneasy moments as they feared the falling embers of the firecrackers.
A booklet on the nuclear deal brought out in Tamil was released by CPI(M) state secretary N Varadarajan who handed copies to the central leaders.
The entire surroundings of Purasawalkam in North Chennai were decked with Red flags, festoons and huge flexiboards depicting various crimes of US imperialism across the world, right from Vietnam War to Palestine to Iraq etc. An anti-imperialist exhibition organised on this occasion evoked good response from people who keenly watched the posters and cartoons. There were also huge cutouts of Prakash Karat, one of which had a caption: “We Shall Fight; We Shall Win”. The top of the dais had a blazing slogan: “American Devils Out Of Bay of Bengal” with an image of a US-flag draped skull.
KOLKATA
A B Bardhan said that the US was keen to create a NATO-like alliance in Asia and to pull India into it. The naval exercise was little more than an instance of sabre-rattling and little else. Why India should become a part of what is an imperialist conspiracy for domination and hegemony, was how the CPI general secretary would put it. The CPI leader also pointed out that the nuclear deal between the US and India, would compromise India’s sovereignty, and if the UPA government sought to go ahead with the deal, the Left would escalate the struggle against the move.
Other speakers at the rally included Biman Basu and Benoy Konar both of whom said that the UPA government should move away from the ‘lean’ it had towards the US and stand form with an independent foreign policy for the interests of the country and the people. Senior Left Front leader who addressed the rally included Debabrata Bandyopadhyay (RSP), Bir Singh Mahato (F
, Kironmoy Nanda (SP), Prabodh Sinha (DSP), Pratim Chatterjee (FB-M) and Subhas Roy (RCPI).
http://pd.cpim.org/2007/0909/09092007_arjun.htm
Uma Khurana and the role of the media
Md Mudassir Alam
09 September 2007, Sunday
Views: 1087 Comments: 4
The unedited tapes of the ‘Sting’ operation conducted on Uma Khurana, mathematics teacher of Sarvodaya Kanya Vidyalaya, reveal that she may have been framed. The episode puts a question mark on the role of media today.
THE PRESS IN INDIA is regarded as the fourth pillar of democracy and it is an institution made for the welfare of the country and its people. According to Article 19 (1) A of Indian constitution, all citizens shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression. So, the press enjoys this freedom of speech and is considered an authentic medium through which people of the country can ask for their rights. This past week a TV channel did a sting operation in which Uma Khurana, mathematics teacher in a Delhi government school, was allegedly forcing her own students into prostitution. Following the telecast of the video on the TV news channels, huge chaos was created in Old Delhi’s Daryaganj and nearby areas. The sting operation conducted by a correspondent of a TV channel and an aspiring journalist, cost Uma Khurana her job and reputation last week. However, after the police investigation some other facts have been revealed that are really surprising.
In fact, in last few decades the press has been questioned several times for wrongdoing or for not fulfilling its duties properly, which is really a matter of concern for all. Since its origin till date, the times have changed and so has the mindset of people and along with it, the modus operandi of press has also transformed with the changing scenario.
First let us take a look at the history of press in India. Beginning with the Bengal Gazette, the first Indian English daily, launched by Raja Ram Mohan Roy, till today’s thousands of publications and dozens of news channels, the Press in India has witnessed many changes over the years. We find that print media, has always had its influence on the common people. However in the nineties, with the arrival of satellite television, a major change came in the press, in the form of 24 hours news channels. Earlier radio news and Doordarshan news were the only two sources, to represent the press in electronic form. Way back in 1995, a 20-minute news programme called ’Aaj Tak’ started on DD Metro. Very soon, the Aaj Tak became famous due to its nice presentation in crispy Hindi. From that 20-minute weekdays spot, Aaj Tak grew into a 24 hours News Channel within 5 years on 31st December 1999.
Following the start of 24 hours news channel Aaj Tak, a major revolution came in the field of Electronic media and a number of channels came over the years, that included NDTV, Star News, Zee News, IBN7 and India TV. Now there are over fifty news channels in India in various languages such as Hindi, English, Urdu and other regional languages. In fact, electronic media has given a tough fight to the print media, with several 24 hours news channels, who have neck-to-neck competition amongst them. For getting TRP (Television Rating Point) some news channels go to any extent - breaking news, sting operations, exclusive reports are the few terms that have been used by the news channel to attract the viewers. Apart from these, frequently, some news channels unnecessarily create controversy over some topics, like the recent rebirth story of a 14-year-old boy Rajesh.
Now coming back to the sting operation against Uma Khurana. Last week, after watching the report on the TV news channels all thought that what was shown was authentic. Eventually, the teacher was converted to a notorious criminal for the parents of the children studying in the school and the people living across the nation as well. Uma Khurana was sacked from the job and was badly abused and assaulted by a mob near the school. Later she was arrested and remanded in judicial custody for her alleged involvement in the prostitution racket.
On Friday a surprising development occurred in this case, when Delhi Police arrested the correspondent of the TV News Channel, Prakash Singh. Besides, Rashmi Singh, who writes for a Hindi newspaper, posed as a schoolgirl and the victim of the prostitution racket in the sting operation, was also taken in judicial custody till 15th September.
While talking with IANS (Indo-Asian News Service), a senior official of police said, "We have arrested Prakash Singh, reporter of Live India channel, for carrying out a fake sting operation, which showed that Uma Khurana, mathematics teacher of Sarvodaya Kanya Vidyalaya was forcing her students into prostitution. Further the official added "We are currently interrogating him and it seems that he conducted the sting to ensnare Khurana, who had some financial disputes with his friend Virender Arora."
Meanwhile, Live India Channel CEO Sudhir Chaudhary said, "The entire sting is not fake but yes there are weak links, which we also came to know after reading media reports and after police started investigating."
On Friday, the Delhi High court issued strict orders in response to the media reports and asked the Delhi government and the Delhi Police to reply on the authenticity of the sting operation by Monday. However, according to current investigation, it appears that Uma Khurana, was framed and there are chances that the allegations against her may not be true. So, the issue has once again raised a number of questions against the functioning of the media in our country.
Whether Uma Khurana was involved in the prostitution racket or not, for the truth we would have to wait for the order of the court. After Friday’s development in the case, a number of questions arise in my mind that have also been raised earlier by a media critic Ganti Suryanarayan Bhargava. In his book ’The Press in India: An Overview’, he has put up many questions related to functioning of media such as - is the missionary zeal with which the press started in India giving way to crass professionalism? Is the outer glamour of the press becoming more pronounced than its content? Is the media, as an opinion maker, playing more of a negative role than a positive one? In his book, G S Bhargava has raised and addressed many such significant questions while tracing the evolution of the press as an industry and the way it redefines itself with the changing times.
Broadly speaking, raising fingers against the functioning of the press, only due to a few irresponsible reporters or correspondents is not fair. Even today, a couple of centuries since its birth, the press is fair, fulfilling its duties very well and has maintained its credibility in the country and amongst its people. Most importantly, questions will always be raised against the press and it’s functioning. It is the duty of each and every person related to journalism how they understand and fulfill their responsibilities and keep themselves away from controversies.
The President's New Clothes
By J. Sri Raman
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Wednesday 05 September 2007
Hans Christian Andersen was not thinking of
Pakistan some 200 years hence, when he wrote his
immortal "The Emperor's New Clothes." But the Danish
master's fairy tale may be enacted in a different way
in the far-off land of General Pervez Musharraf.
After months, even a child in Pakistan may be able
to see that the president is not really wearing the
promised new clothes. Musharraf may indeed doff his
military uniform, but very few can be expected to take
his civilian clothes and their symbolism seriously.
The majority public perception may not change, even if
he changes his political philosophy along with his
formal attire.
The revolution in the presidential wardrobe may
cause some instant rejoicing in the streets,
particularly by political parties that may call it
their victory. But the people of Pakistan will not
read too much into a merely sartorial change so long
as the power behind the throne remain the same. And
they would expect it to remain the same in each of the
three possible changes.
* The first of these is the one envisaged in what
was reported some months ago as a post-Musharraf
"contingency plan" of Washington and subsequently
revealed as a scheme backed by the general as well.
Under this plan, Musharraf was to yield his place to
another Bush-friendly army officer. There could be no
better example of a non-change.
* The second scenario, which many currently
contemplate, has the president changing his heavily
bemedaled, beribboned persona for a homely image in a
civilian suit. By doing this, of course, Musharraf
will be taking his long-due retirement from the army,
giving up his dual post without the courts acting to
clip his wings.
No one is certain whether or when this will
happen. The latest we hear is that Musharraf's own
Pakistan Muslim League (Qaid-e-Azam) is now for his
doffing the uniform, though it strongly opposed some
days back the idea of bending to Benazir Bhutto on
this issue. The former prime minister and chief of the
Pakistan People's Party herself sounds non-insistent
on uniform-shedding now, though she had earlier ruled
out any relenting on it.
What is certain, however, is that, by becoming a
"civilian" in this technical sense, Musharraf will not
become any less of a military-backed president. The
army will still remain his main constituency, and it
will still call the shots. The Pakistan Muslim League,
or PML (Q), founded by Musharraf in 2001 (two years
after he took over power), has yet to prove it
represents anyone but him.
* The third possibility is what may immediately
appear a triumph for the pro-democracy movement in
Pakistan. A transfer of power from a military dictator
- which Musharraf remains despite the independence
asserted by Pakistani media and the street protests
the soldiers and the police cannot quell - alone will
not constitute such a triumph.
As every Pakistan-watcher knows, the army has
almost always been the dominant power in the country -
even during its spells of civilian rule, accounting
for less than half of its post-independence life. The
army holds this formidable power because it is far
more than a mere army. As Ehsan Masood, London-based
Pakistani journalist and writer, puts it: "The
Pakistan military is not just an apparatus of the
state: it is the state."
Writing in April 2007, Masood talks of the mega
slice of the country's economy the army controls
(prompting Pakistani security analyst Ayesha Siddiqa
Agha to refer to Musharraf's and other uniformed
rulers' constituency as "Military Inc.") along with
other major areas of national life. Masood points out
that companies administered by serving military
personnel provide Pakistan with a broad variety of
goods and services - ranging from breakfast cereal,
banks, insurance, oil and gas, radio, TV, an airline,
airport services, construction, agriculture, real
estate, as well as schools and universities. "
While the estimated total worth of this economy is
over $100 billion, the army has also become the
leading Pakistani landowner over the years. By abusing
the provisions of colonial laws, allowing military
takeover of public land, the army has appropriated an
estimated 11.58 million acres or 12 percent of the
total state land. The land so acquired is distributed
to military personnel at nominal rents. This
essentially fraudulent practice has made the military
a quasi-feudal class of formidable social clout.
The army has needed political power to retain its
socioeconomic dominance. As noted before, it has
remained the power behind the throne, ascending it
only when civilian proxies seemed unable to serve its
purpose any more. At all times , however, it has
retained old political connections, while seeking to
cultivate new contacts in the political structure and
domain.
The army has been obliged to adopt, pursue and
promote an ideology that has not served the cause of
stability in Pakistan and peace in South Asia. It has
carefully preserved its close ties with religious
clerics and parties, and ensured that anti-India
rhetoric remains an essential part of the repertoire
of every political player. It made the breakup of
Pakistan inevitable with the birth of Bangladesh in
1971, and it made the country's acquisition of an
"Islamic bomb" inescapable.
The fate of Musharraf's uniform will make no
difference to the fundamental fact of the military's
place in Pakistan's power structure. The movement for
civilian rule and democracy in the country will have
to go beyond the general. Enlightened leaders of the
movement will have to proceed into the particulars of
the steps needed to ensure that the 550,000-strong
army is restricted to its professional role in the
future.
By all accounts, conditions are conducive for such
an extension of the anti-Musharraf campaign. Weeks
ago, the president was widely expected to proclaim a
state of emergency and to unleash an army offensive
against the pro-democracy agitators. This did not
happen. One explanation, reportedly heard in
knowledgeable Pakistani circles, is that the military
advised Musharraf against the step, pleading its
preoccupation with the increasingly nasty situation on
the Afghan border.
Some see in this signs of a weakening of the
army's loyalty to Musharraf. Many more, however, see a
certain sagging of the military's morale, with the
popular tide appearing to turn unmistakably against a
continued political role for the army. Now may be the
time for Pakistan to move towards a real transfer of
power - a real triumph.
A freelance journalist and a peace activist in
India, J. Sri Raman is the author of "Flashpoint"
(Common Courage Press, USA). He is a regular
contributor to Truthout.
Remembering Syama Prasad
Mookerjee saved W. Bengal and Kashmir for India
By Dr Dibakar Kundu
The Indian army could send the intruders away but Nehru, misguided by Mountbatten, sent the case to the United Nations to keep it as a permanent problem. Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, too, did not want it. I.G. Patel wrote: “Pundit Nehru, then, on the advice of Lord Mountbatten, entrusted the question of Kashmir to the UNO.”
Dr. Syama Prasad Mookerjee’s thinking, intelligence, futurist thought, firmness, realistic knowledge and above all patriotism had made him an extraordinary national leader.
He called upon the youth of India to take the fullest advantage of the military training, which the government felt necessary to offer primarily in the advancement of its own interest. In his words, in the modern age, freedom cannot be maintained by any nation even for a single day unless there is an adequate armed strength available at its disposal.
The British had kept India unarmed and untrained, because they could not trust Indians. Dr. S.P. Mookerjee said that a highly specialised training in modern warfare cannot be obtained by India’s solitary efforts. And yet we need this training not in British interest but for our own sake and for the sake of our future stability.
“We demand the right to defend our country, the right to arm ourselves just as free citizens of every free country are being allowed today in other parts of the world.”
He stressed that nation must first be physically strong and adequately armed before it can proclaim and defend moral doctrines. That nation is truly great which has force and strength at its disposal but never abuses them for the advancement of self-interest or self-aggrandisement.
Dr. Syama Prasad Mookerjee spoke of undivided India. But when he came to know that partition was imminent, he divided Bengal to create West Bengal. He told Jinnah: “You have divided India but I have divided Bengal.” Suhrawardy tried to confuse Sarat Bose, Gandhiji, Sardar Patel and many other senior leaders with his plan of ‘undivided Bengal’. But Syama Prasad could make out that the plan of Suhrawardy was terrible. Firstly, it would remain undivided but later it would be joined with Pakistan through Muslim majority in the election. Obviously Suhrawardy wanted to create independent Bengal. But Syama Prasad opposed this proposal with subtlety. He created a strong movement taking Dr. Jadunath Majumder and many other scholars and intellectuals. The Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court, Phanibhushan Chakraborty thus commented: “...it was then that Syama Prasad Mookerjee interviewed and harnessed all the mighty powers he possessed to an organised and determined opposition to that plan and he forced a partition within a partition...”
The turmoil that shook the state of Kashmir in October 1947 was unprecedented. Maharaja Hari Singh of Kashmir appealed to India for inclusion in the republic, but that appeal was ignored initially by Nehru, who dethroned him to empower his friend Sheikh Abdullah. Nehru delayed the march of the Indian army to Srinagar, so much so that Pakistanis were almost at the gates of Srinagar, and the extraordinary heroism of the Indian army somehow saved the situation. Nehru unnecessarily referred the Kashmir case to the United Nations. Nehru agreed to ceasefire at a time when Pakistanis were on the run, thereby gifting one-third of Jammu and Kashmir to Pakistan. Even today the Kashmir issue has not been solved properly. But Nehru did not pay any attention to the precautionary words uttered by Syama Prasad. Dr. Syama Prasad felt it very well from the beginning that the weak stance taken by Nehru on this particular issue had created a grave crisis. Firstly the Indian army could send the intruders away but Nehru, misguided by Mountbatten, sent the case to the United Nations to keep it as a permanent problem. Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, too, did not want it. I. G. Patel wrote: “Pundit Nehru, then, on the advice of Lord Mountbatten, entrusted the question of Kashmir to the UNO.”
On the Kashmir issue, Syama Prasad pointed out that we should withdraw the Kashmir case from the UNO and try to settle the matter through our own efforts. The dispute still continues about the one-third territory of Kashmir which is in occupation of the enemy. On August 7, 1952, in the Lok Sabha, Dr. Mookerjee raised the question that “Kashmir is a part of India and we say it. It is so, a part of India today in the occupation of the enemy and we are peace-lovers, no doubt. But peace-lovers to what extent? That we will even allow a portion of our territory to be occupied by the enemy? Is there any possibility of our getting back this territory?” And he gave the answer that “we shall not get it through the efforts of the United Nations; we shall not get it through peaceful methods by negotiations with Pakistan. That means we lose it unless we use force” [Lok Sabha Speech 1952].
Nehru gave a special and separate status to Kashmir. There was no governor there but only ‘sadr-i-riasat’. The chief of the cabinet there was known as the prime minister, unlike the chief minister of other states. It had its own constitution, separate ganaparishad, and many safeguards. A permit was necessary to enter into Kashmir. Durga Das Basu wrote: “The state of Jammu and Kashmir holds a peculiar position under the Constitution of India.” It was given a special place through Art. 370. Dr. Syama Prasad protested against it strongly. His logic was that if Kashmir was regarded as an Indian province, there could not be any rule of permit and if the rule existed, it should not be regarded as a state within India.
At that time, hoisting tricolour in Kashmir was a crime, and for Abdullah this holy work was illegal. Some patriotic youth op