The Influence of Nehru

Jawaharlal Nehru was wholly opposed to Lord Mountbatten?s 1940s divide and rule tactics. However, shocked by the unprecedented bloodletting between Muslims and Hindus in 1946, Nehru found he had to accept Mountbatten?s plan to divide the subcontinent.

Like many other senior players at the time, Nehru viewed partition as likely to be short-lived. It was thought that Pakistan, short of experienced senior personnel and with a backward economy dependent on India, would surely return to India as it could not survive for long on its own.

Nehru spoke of a ?Noble Mansion of Freedom? in his 1947 ?Awake to Freedom Speech.? This reached out to Pakistan, Kashmir and beyond. It was his assertion that small nations would die out. They might well be able to survive as autonomous regions in terms of culture but not as independent political units.

As matter of fact, Nehru borrowed the fundemental principals of his ?Noble Mansion? and ?India Centred? propositions from the political strategies of the British colonial government. These were to provide the foundations of his thoughts for a post-independence India based on nationalism and regional power politics.

It could well be argued that it was the concept of the British colonialist sphere of influence in South Asia that built the rooms of Nehru?s Noble Mansion. This approach based on Indian culture and the Hindu numerical majority, enjoyed strong support amongst India?s intellectuals. Today not a word is mentioned officially about the Noble Mansion but it still influences the thinking of extreme nationalists in India.

Partition: the Root of Conflict

When the subcontinent gained its independence from Britain in 1947, it was partitioned into predominantly Hindu India and mainly Muslim Pakistan.

In theory on partition, the local rulers of the as yet unaligned ?princely states? had the personal authority to attach their states to either India or Pakistan without taking account of the wishes of their people. However they were generally encouraged to join the fledgling state which was their nearest neighbour while taking account of the wishes of their people. Where a dispute arose, the matter was to be resolved by plebiscite. This was a course of action proposed and endorsed by the India.

Kashmir is that land-locked territory where India, Pakistan, China and a bit of Afghanistan meet in the north of the Indian subcontinent. It is of major strategic value. It was expected to go to Pakistan. After all it had a Muslim majority and a boundary with Pakistan. However, the local ruler was a Hindu who decided the state would go to India and the seeds of dispute were sown.

Right from the very start, India and Pakistan engaged in sabre rattling over Kashmir. Pakistan said the people of Kashmir should be allowed to vote on the matter. India on the other hand, insisted that it should be the Kashmir parliament, dominated by the Hindu Maharajah that should legislate to decide the future of the state.

In Indian eyes, Kashmir was not only a land of major strategic importance but also one of great political and economic significance. What is more, Nehru was born in Kashmir and had a powerful personal interest in seeing it become a part of India. Just as soon as Hari Singh, the Maharajah of Kashmir, signed Kashmir up to India, Nehru sent Indian troops into Kashmir to seize control of the Kashmir capital of Srinagar. This caused the first India-Pakistan war.

The Indian and Pakistani governments were reconciled in 1953. However, the Indian government has continually declined to recognise the wishes of the people of Kashmir expressed through the ballot box, insisting instead that Kashmir was an inseparable part of India.

From then on, Muslims in Kashmir have rioted and engaged in armed struggle. This brought about the second India-Pakistan war in April 1965. In addition Kashmir has been blamed for the war that broke out in December 1971 and led to the split between what were then the two parts of Pakistan.

Ever since the partition of the subcontinent in 1947, there have been countless disputes, border incidents and armed conflicts in Kashmir. The resulting property damage has been immeasurable.

Kashmir has often been the catalyst that led to political instability sometimes in India, sometimes in Pakistan. For instance there was the Kargil conflict which led to a reshuffle of the Pakistani government and returned the military to the political arena.

The Andhra Summit between Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf and Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vaipayee ended without a result in 2001. However it did add further complexity to the Kashmir question and caused difficulties for the Indian government.

India and Pakistan will never be able to enjoy full political stability until the Kashmir issue has been finally resolved. At the same time, the economies of India and Pakistan have been disadvantaged and will continue to be so.

Religion: the Root of Hatred

Developments in the subcontinent have always tended to be closely linked to the different religions practised in India and Pakistan. Historically, religion has been deeply rooted in all walks of Indian and Pakistani life so much so that religion has been at the root of India-Pakistan conflict.

There is a history of confrontation between Hindus and Muslims on the subcontinent that goes back very many years. It can be traced back as early as AD 712. This was when the Islamic rulers of the Mogul Empire first subjected the Hindus to religious persecution. They were deprived of their rights and could expect only hardship and subjugation.

The Mogul Empire did have some wise rulers like Emperor Jellaladin Mahommed Akbar. He reversed the oppression of the Hindus and earned their trust. His successors however soon reverted to the old ways. So Hindus had hatred buried deep in their hearts and conflict with Muslims has been a routine part of daily life.

During that long period from the mid-eighteenth to the mid-twentieth century which saw India as a British colony, the old grievances between Hindus and Muslims were exploited by the colonial power in order to help maintain colonial rule. British colonists continually stirred up trouble between Muslims and Hindus leading to conflict and loss of life.

The deep-rooted blood feud between Hindus and Muslims did not disappear with the independence of India and Pakistan.

On the contrary it has continued to trigger many religious conflicts on the subcontinent such as the Kashmir conflict and Temple disputes in India. The most recent bloody conflict between Hindus and Muslims was caused by the 21st century construction of the Ram Temple in Gujarat. Religion always seems to be found at the root of conflict and crisis in the affairs of India and Pakistan.

(china.org.cn, translated by Zheng Guihong, August 28, 2002)