Tribal
invasion - some more facts, Dr Shabir Choudhry
History
is written by conquerors, or those who control and dominate society. Result of
this bitter fact is that even those who are conquered, oppressed and
subjugated, by and the large, are influenced by what is taught to them through
books or other medium of communication and education. Although new technology,
astonishing rise of media and access to mass communication allow more and more
people to find out facts, but still ‘official’ version normally prevails.
Call
it a ‘seasonally adjusted and re-branded history’, as my one critic puts it,
but truth is history is always revised, as new facts and new versions come to
light because researchers with conscience, and especially belonging to the
oppressed and subjugated community with their hard work and dedication dig out
more facts; and give new perspective to any given event.
Researchers have to find time to
read many books, make comparisons and look at other circumstantial evidence or
interview other scholars and experts of the topic and then write something. But
some critics do not read, and they are ‘programmed’ to criticise without giving
any logical reasoning or evidence. I am not above criticism, in fact, I welcome
positive criticism as it helps me to improve myself; but I detest those who
make irrational allegations when they have no logical arguments left.
When
we talk of history and assert that it is written by those who control the
society, we need to take example of Ganga Hijacking, which was carried out by
two Kashmiri young men namely Hashim Qureshi and Ashraf Qureshi in 1970. After
the initial heroes welcome to the hijackers, the rulers of Pakistan thought the
event was not in their ‘national interest’; and they presented it as a
conspiracy of India against Pakistan and arrested the hijackers and many other
people.
As
a suspected ‘agents’ of India they suffered brutal torture and humiliation in
the Pakistani torture cells; and despite the Supreme Court of Pakistan’s
verdict in favour of the accused – that they were true Kashmiri patriots, many
people among Kashmiris and Pakistani still regard the Ganga hijacking a
‘conspiracy of India.’
Those
who are in power and dominate the society, they have ability to influence
people by their propaganda; and it is very difficult to eliminate the
impression they have created with their State machinery. In the case of Ganga
hijacking, those accused of working for India and their political party tried
to counter the official propaganda with their limited resources; but they could
not completely eradicate that wrong impression.
Tribal
Invasion started on 22 October 1947, when people of Jammu and Kashmir were
oppressed, and they were unorganised. Above all, they had no control of media;
and leaders of one political party – Muslim Conference not only invited the
tribal attack but also actively joined the raiders. Reward for this
collaboration was that they were appointed rulers of this region known as Azad
Kashmir; they and their political masters in Pakistan kept on feeding lies to
people to strengthen the impression that the ‘tribesmen’ were ‘liberators’, and
they came to Kashmir to fulfil their religious obligation.
The
Tribal Invasion was a contentious and significant action, because of its
serious consequences; and because it clearly violated the Standstill Agreement
concluded between Pakistan and the Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir. Furthermore, it
resulted in death and destruction of thousands of innocent people; and it
forced the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir to seek help from India, which was
only made available after the ‘provisional accession’ to India. Apart from that
it divided our motherland resulting in enormous problems for thousands of
families on both sides of the divide.
It
should also be remembered that the Tribal Invasion, apart from other problems
also resulted in the first India and Pakistan war, bringing its own problems,
animosity and divisions. Both governments since 1947 have spent billions of
dollars on arms and have had three wars over control of Jammu and Kashmir. Both
governments have enormous problems related to poverty, education and welfare;
but because of the competition to control Jammu and Kashmir, they continue to
divert money for military preparedness and continue to develop more and more
lethal weapons.
Hamid
Karzai did not invite America to attack Afghanistan, but he was installed by
them after the invasion of the country. Majority of Afghan people, Pakistani
people and people of Jammu and Kashmir regard him as a collaborator and ‘agent’
of the occupying forces. People hold similar views for those who collaborate
with foreign powers or who invite them to invade their own country; then
question is why those Kashmiris who collaborated with a foreign power and
invited them to invade Jammu and Kashmir should be viewed differently. We
cannot condemn one collaborator for his actions and commend the other.
Nearly
all those in Pakistan and Azad Kashmir who have written on the Tribal invasion,
presented them as ‘liberators’ and Mujahedeen; and urged people of Jammu and
Kashmir to respect them. One may ask, respect them for what? Are we fools that
we respect them for trampling our sovereignty, respect them for dishonouring
our women and kidnapping young girls; or respect them for looting and killing innocent people
and for giving bad name to our religion?
Non
- Muslim writers gave some details of brutal acts of the tribesmen; but many
people did not pay much attention to this because of the propaganda that these
non- Muslims were churning out false stories to give bad name to Muslims, Jihad
and Pakistan. All the crimes committed by the Tribesmen were camouflaged under
the name of Jihad and independence. Only few Muslim writers have given some
brief details of their crimes, among them was Justice Yusuf Saraf.
After
reading my article on the Tribal Invasion, one Kashmiri critic accused me that
I ‘was using pro India, non - Muslim and pro independent Kashmiri writers to
promote anti Pakistan propaganda’. People like this critic use this weapon
to harass Kashmiri nationalists and to create doubts in minds of innocent
people. In my reply to him I said:
‘In
the article concerned I used two writers as a source, one was Justice Yusuf
Saraf and the other was Major General Akbar Khan. Both were Muslims, one was a
senior army officer of Pakistan and the other was a Pro Pakistan Kashmiri. So
how could you make that allegation against me?’
Another
critic wanted me to trust whatever Sardar Ibrahim Khan wrote in his book, as if
that was a gospel truth. Question is why I should believe a man who helped a
neighbouring country of Jammu and Kashmir to invade his country - Jammu and
Kashmir, and who signed away more than 28 thousand square miles of his country
to Pakistan, and left the people at the mercy of bureaucracy of Pakistan; and
who agreed to curtail powers of Azad Jammu government and gave a free hand to
Pakistan to negotiate on behalf of people of Jammu and Kashmir.
Above all, how can I respect or trust a man who was
appointed President of Azad Kashmir by a middle ranking officer of Pakistan
(Commissioner of Rawalpindi Khawaja Abdul Rahim); and who served interests of
Pakistan throughout his life. Sardar Mohammed Ibrahim Khan himself acknowledged
that he did not know anything about this until on the night of 23 October when
‘he was awakened almost at the dead of
night by Khawaja Abdul Rahim and Nasim Shah Nawaz…..who told him that it had
become necessary to announce the formation of a reconstituted Government with
himself as President, and that the announcement could not be delayed.’
Wounded Memories
I
did my own research on this tragic and treacherous event of the Tribal attack
when I was looking for materials for my MPhil, title of which was ‘Kashmir and
Partition of India’. However, Muhammad Saeed Asad is the first person to
interview those people who either suffered during the Tribal attack or
witnessed the carnage and produced a book in Urdu with the name of ‘Yadoon Kay
Zakhm’. This book was later on translated in to English and published by
Institute of Kashmir Affairs with the name of ‘Wounded Memories’.
In
the Foreword of this important book, Professor Dr Sabir Affaqi
of Muzaffarabad, wrote:
‘When I visited
Indian-occupied Kashmir in 2008, I met many Hindus and Sikhs in Jammu who had
fled from Muzaffarabad and its surrounding areas in the wake of the tribal
attacks of October 1947. When I asked them about the situation leading up to
the tribal invasion, they stressed that they were living as brothers and
friends with their Muslim neighbours. There was no bone of contention between
them. That all hell broke loose with the arrival of the tribal invaders.’ 1
On the question
that the tribesmen went to Jammu and Kashmir for the purpose of ‘Jihad’ he
wrote:
‘As the
tribesmen had limited awareness of genuine Islam and the true spiritual
philosophy of jihad, it would be utterly incorrect to term the tribal attack on
Muzaffarabad as a religious duty, holy war or jihad. Furthermore, the effect of
this invasion had such negative implications for the politics and history of
the region that in no terms could it be described as beneficial for the people
of Jammu and Kashmir. The unity of Kashmir was obliterated, it was taken over
by foreign powers, it's social, religious, cultural and civilisational
attributes were wounded to the extent that it has yet to recover and pick up
the pieces. Blood is still seeping out from both sides of the divide and the
deeply cut body is ever yet hopeful that somebody will patch up the wounds.’
2
In
the preface of this important book, author Muhammad Saeed Asad, while
discussing the tribal invasion, wrote:
‘This
ill-fated and pre-conceived plan of the 22nd of October 1947 was designed to
dismember our body. It totally disintegrated our society. It turned our history
on its head and it buried our dignity. These aforementioned reasons laid the
background for my search for an authentic version of our history. Further, to
bring that authenticity to the fore. To bring public awareness of our past
history that had hitherto been buried deep under the earth by fear and
political correctness.’ 3
While
criticising the Tribal Invasion, author of ‘Wounded Memories’, Muhammad Saeed
Asad asserted:
‘Many
eye-witnesses of the time along with a number of writers have opined that the
tribal invasion of Kashmir was an ill-thought out and idiotic plan, which has
proved fatal for Kashmir and Kashmiris…. In my opinion, there remains no doubt
and there is no room for a second opinion that the planners and perpetrators of
the tribal invasion on Kashmir: stand out as enemy number one of the Kashmiri
nation. I would go further to say that if this invasion didn't take place; a
dispute on Kashmir would not have arisen. As India and Pakistan emerged as
nation states, so would have Kashmir.’ 4
Muhammad
Saeed Asad further said:
‘The
planners of the tribal invasion and their Kashmiri agents are the original and
actual culprits of the Kashmiri nation. It is important for the nation to
identify these criminals, bring them forth and make them stand in the court of
time….I have strong hope that the new generation of Kashmir will not remain ill
- informed or misdirected, as to who are foremost in killing their future and
the enemy of their freedom struggle.’ 5
Khawaja
Abdul Samad, while explaining the communal and
religious harmony of Muzaffarabad before the Tribal Invasion to the author of
this book, he said:
‘There
was no concept of hatred or inferiority based on religious identity. When
somebody amongst the Muslim community passed away, Hindus and Sikhs of the
community would accompany us to the burial ground. As we would offer the funeral
prayer, they would also stand in a separate line and witness the procedure.
Whilst burying our dead, they would join us in the rite of putting soil over
the deceased and offering prayers for their salvation. In a similar manner, we
would also accompany their deceased to the funeral pyre and partake in the
rites as appropriate. Religious celebrations such as Eid, Holi and Diwali were
collectively celebrated by members of each community.’ 6
He
further narrated:
‘Tara
Chand was a prominent Hindu of Muzaffarabad at the time. He would recite
‘naats’ in an extremely melodious and sweet manner. Muslims were always keen to
invite him to their gatherings for recitation. For worship, we would proceed to
the masjid. Hindus would proceed to the mandir (Hindu place of worship). We
would worship before sunrise, they would worship during sunrise. Time was the
only difference. We would visit 'Saheli Sarkar' (prominent tomb and place of
worship in Muzaffarabad) and they would visit the mandir opposite ‘Saheli
Sarkar’.’ 7
While
discussing about brutalities of the Tribal attack, Khawaja Abdul Samad said:
‘Hindus
and Muslims were taking refuge in separate areas. Most of the properties that
belonged to Hindus had been burnt down. Many Hindus and Sikhs had been
mercilessly slaughtered and most of their bodies were still lying in their
homes or on the streets. In the past two days, the tribesmen had dragged
numerous bodies and thrown them into the river………..’ 8
Khawaja
Abdul Samad further said:
‘Their
attack had totally devastated Muzaffarabad. The homes of Hindus and Muslims
were looted, shops were plundered and all the stock loaded onto trucks. Places
of worship were not spared; they entered and took whatever they considered to
be of value. They tore down mandirs and desecrated masjids. In their lustful
search for gold, silver and rupees they even used digging equipment to search
beneath the stone floors of shops. Whatever they could find would be amassed in
a collective place where tribal leaders would supervise the whole process. From
here, everything would be loaded onto trucks and sent on their way to the North
West Frontier Province. In Muzaffarabad and its surroundings, no Muslim home
was spared from this tribal bounty-hunt.’ 9
Tribesmen
steal from a Masjid - Mosque
Khawaja
Abdul Samad, while discussing the loot and plunder carried out by the tribesmen
who apparently came to Jammu and Kashmir for the purpose of ‘Jihad’ and to
‘liberate’ people of Jammu and Kashmir, explained how they even looted
materials hidden in a Masjid.
‘As
there was no restriction on how much booty the tribal Pathans could take home,
some of us locals consulted with each other and made a plan. We decided that in
order to protect Hindu assets from being seized by the tribesmen, we would take
upon ourselves (Muslims) to transport goods and valuables from Hindu homes and
store them in the masjid. Some Hindu youngsters, many of whom were our close
friends; who had yet somehow avoided the deathly onslaught were also utilised
in this exercise….. ‘The ‘Bazaar Wali’ masjid was a two-storey building. By the
evening, so much stock had been stored there that there was barely room for
even a solitary ‘sandooq’ (large metal box for storing valuables) to fit in. We
locked up the masjid at night and left for our respective camps of refuge. When
I returned in the morning, I found that the masjid had been stripped bare
clean. I was later to learn that the tribesmen had come late the night before
and taken everything.’ 10
I
must add, as I have done it on many occasions before that, not all Tribesmen
came there for the purpose of looting. There must be some who came for ‘Jihad’.
Similarly, I do not undermine the role of people of Poonch. My contention is
that rulers of Pakistan encouraged that ‘rebellion’ to advance their agenda on
Kashmir. Major General Akbar Khan, who was in charge of the operation, produced
a Plan known as ‘Armed Revolt Inside Kashmir’.
As
the name suggests, the Pakistani plan was that the Kashmiri rebellion should
look like a ‘revolt’ of the people of Jammu and Kashmir against its (non-
Muslim) Ruler. I know many people claim that it was a Kashmiri ‘revolt’ against
a tyrant and non - Muslim Ruler; and they give details of their sacrifices or
sacrifices of their families. However, Major General Akbar Khan said:
‘As
open interference or aggression by Pakistan was obviously undesirable, it was
proposed that our efforts should be concentrated upon strengthening the
Kashmiris themselves internally’. 11
Question
is should I believe a story narrated by Major General Akbar Khan who was in
charge of this operation, or someone with myopic view and who is full of bias;
and who has no knowledge of historical events?
My
father was in the Indian British Army and fought for the British in the Second
World War; he later on fought the First Kashmir War and took part in the
‘liberation’ of areas now known as Azad Kashmir. He can tell me details of the
war at the micro level; but he would not know in detail the purpose of the war,
because his senior officers ordered him to proceed to a sector and fight. Later
on he was told to stop fighting; and he followed the instructions.
I
adore my father, love him and highly respect him, like any loving son would do;
but as far as motives of the war were concerned I would give more credence to
the information given by the Commander who planned the war, because my father
with all his sincerity and sacrifices would not have access to the information
available to the Commander and to those who planned the tribal attack.
I
do not deny the sacrifices made by the people. Also I don’t want to hurt
anyone’s feelings, however, as a researcher and a political analyst, I have to
see what were the motives of those who planned this brutal and unprovoked
attack that resulted in forced division of our motherland; and which was to be
the main cause of animosity and wars between India and Pakistan.
It
would be a good analogy, if we look at the uprising in Libya. One can say,
people of Libya revolted against the rule of Colonel Kaddafi; and made great
sacrifices. Yes, they have made great sacrifices and suffered immensely, but
were this ‘revolt’ indigence or local with no help and support from outside? We
know it was planned from outside with help of USA, UK and France.
Some
people claim that most of the areas of the present Azad Kashmir were
‘liberated’ before the tribal attack; and try to take credit for this. Yet the
fact is that Major General Akbar Khan claims that he met Sardar Ibrahim Khan
and some other leaders in the last week of August 1947; and encouraged people
to take up arms against the Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir.
If
these areas were liberated in the last week of August (which they were not)
then the claim of these people is correct; but if they were liberated in late
September and by middle of October then one has to believe the story narrated
by Major General Akbar Khan, who claims with evidence that he formulated the
plan for uprising in Kashmir for liberation of Jammu and Kashmir.
Many
Muslims of Pakistan and Jammu and Kashmir talk a lot about the Jammu massacres.
It was a tragic communal event, in which tens of thousands of people,
especially Muslims were killed; and some people hold functions on 6 November in
their memory. I also condemn that butchery. However, communal riots in Jammu started
in the third week of August 1947; and got worse with time. Question is why 6
November is commemorated as a day of Jammu martyrs? Professor Dr Sabir Affaqi,
a known writer and historian puts it like this:
‘Meanwhile,
when clusters of Hindu and Sikh survivors of the genocide reached Jammu on the
6th November: their blood drenched attire and pitiful condition,
evoked hatred amongst the locals for Pakistan and Muslims. As a reaction,
extreme right wing elements amongst the Hindus of Jammu: with the assistance of
like - minded Hindu militia from India decided to take revenge. Consequently, a
genocide of Muslims that lived in Jammu and in its surrounding areas took
place, on a similar scale to what to what happened to Hindus and Sikhs in
Muzaffarabad, just days earlier.’ 12
I
do not agree with everything the learned Professor has said, but I would not
call him ‘anti Pakistan’, ‘anti Islam’ or ‘anti Tribesmen’. That is his view of
the events. In my opinion right wing non - Muslim extremists reached Jammu in the
third week of August when migrants from Pakistani Punjab, especially from areas
of Sialkot reached Jammu; and in the communal riots that ensued tens of
thousands of Muslims were killed. May be on 6 November it got worse because of
what happened to non- Muslims in areas of Jammu and Kashmir, now called Azad
Kashmir; but the scale of massacres were not same as more Muslims were
butchered in Jammu.
On
issue of the Tribesmen and their role in ‘liberation’ of areas of Azad Kashmir,
even Sardar Ibrahim Khan, first President of Azad Kashmir acknowledge
acknowledges it in the following words:
‘Tribesmen
played an important role in the movement of Azad Kashmir. They came all the way
from different parts, from settled and unsettled areas of tribal territory, to
fight in Kashmir. Sulemankhel tribesmen came all the way from Afghanistan to
take part in this Jehad.’ 13
The
Tribesmen marched triumphantly towards Muzaffarabad, Uri and Baramullah,
killing civilians and looting; but as soon as they encountered the Indian army
they retreated with a great speed. Despite his praise of the Tribesmen and
their fighting skills, Sardar Ibrahim Khan had to say:
‘…They
disintegrated in to smaller groups and vanished; leaving the territory entirely
defenceless….All the tribesmen reached Abbottabad (a city in Pakistan) safe and
sound, leaving a completely helpless people to their own defence. At this
juncture, General Tariq (real name Major General Akbar Khan of Pakistan Army)
held back the Indian Army with fifteen men.’ 14
Lastly,
why is it that when one explains a situation about Pakistan, which does not
look favourable to Pakistan even though it is based on some hard facts, some
people say it is anti-Pakistan? For example, if I say Pakistan lost East
Pakistan in a war and more than 90 thousand soldiers surrendered; that Pakistan
has experienced four military dictatorships; that a civil war is going on in
Balochistan and Pakistan is having very serious economic and political
problems; by saying all that I have not been anti Pakistan. I have simply
stated some hard facts which some Pakistanis and some pro Pakistan Kashmiris
don’t want to hear.
Some
of Kashmir’s and Pakistan’s problems are directly related to this fact that
people are not allowed to speak truth; and anyone who dares it, is immediately
labelled as ‘anti –Pakistan’, ‘anti – Islam’ or an ‘agent’ of some country.
This weapon has proved very effective in the past; but with time it is losing
its impact. We need to mentally grow up and face problems of the real world;
and must not live in the past or glorify significant achievements of Muslims
many centuries ago. We need to see what contribution we are making to the
mankind now; and how we can make progress and face challenges of the 21st
Century.
I
want to thank Sardar Shaukat Kashmiri for writing an introduction to this book.
Also I want to thank those friends and colleagues like Abbas Butt, Asim Mirza,
Sarwar Hussain, Ifzaal Suleria, Yasin Anjum, Professor Rafiq Bhatti, Saeed
Asad, Farooq Ahmed, Muhammad Farooq, Sabir Hussain, Ishaq Sharif, Nasir Aziz,
Jamil Maqsood, Ijaz Pracha and many others who have always supported me through
thick and thin.
I
hope my new book ‘Tribal Invasion and Kashmir’ will help people to
understand what the motives of the Tribal Invasion were, and what the Tribesmen
did when they entered the Jammu and Kashmir territory. Also it will help people
to understand how stories were spread that Tribesmen came for ‘jihad’ and to
help liberate people of Jammu and Kashmir.
References:
1.
Wounded Memories, Muhammad Saeed
Asad, page 6
2.
Ibid, page 7
3.
Ibid, page 13
4.
Ibid, page 11
5.
Ibid, page 12
6.
Ibid, page 19
7.
Ibid, page 20
8.
Ibid, page 49
9.
Ibid, page 52
10.
Ibid, page 53
11.
Raiders in Kashmir, Major General
Akbar Khan, page 14
12.
Muhammad Saeed Asad, page 7
13.
The Kashmir Saga, Sardar Ibrahim
Khan, page 97
14.
Ibid, page 135
No comments:
Post a Comment