Tribal Invasion - Pakistan’s first proxy war, Dr Shabir Choudhry

Tribal Invasion - Pakistan’s first proxy war

Speech of Dr Shabir Choudhry in a seminar arranged by Kashmir National Party to observe and condemn ‘Tribal Invasion’ which Pakistani government managed on 22 October 1947 to capture the State of Jammu and Kashmir.

Mr Chairman, friends and colleagues aslamo alaykam

I want to thank Asim Mirza and other people who helped to arrange this seminar to observe Black Day. KNP leadership can rightly take credit for being the first one to take this courageous step and tell the Kashmiri nation that Black Day should be observed on 22 October and not on 27 October as we have been observing in the past.

On advice and on instructions of JKLF senior leadership, and under influence of propaganda and wrong history taught to us (prepared by Pakistani bureaucrats to advance their imperialist aims in Jammu and Kashmir), we always observed Black Day on 27 October to coincide with the landing of the Indian army in Jammu and Kashmir. This wrong history and propaganda of Islamabad under the cover of religion is taught to us right from the childhood, and aim of that is to make us obedient slaves of Pakistan rather than rational human beings and loyal citizens of Jammu and Kashmir.

KNP leaders said after the lapse of the British Paramountcy, Jammu and Kashmir emerged as an independent state on 15 August 1947, and this fact was acknowledged by Pakistani leaders and they concluded a Standstill Agreement with the government of Jammu and Kashmir. When KNP leadership announced that we should observe a Black Day on 22 October because it was on this day Pakistan and Pakistani backed tribesmen attacked sovereignty of the State of Jammu and Kashmir by violating terms of the Standstill Agreement there was an outcry against this move.

Some Kashmiri parties, including some JKLF leaders accused us for promoting a pro Indian agenda, as in their view we were diverting attention away from the Valley; and they accused us for creating problems on the Pakistani side of Jammu and Kashmir and weakening the struggle. When I looked at todays Urdu papers of Azad Kashmir it gave me immense satisfaction and a real sense of achievement, as papers were full of news items showing that different Kashmiri parties observed 22 October as a Black Day. My pleasure and sense of achievement was enhanced with news that the JKLF also observed 22 October as a Black day.

This proves that we were right at that time, and we are right now. We are trend setters and our thinking is ahead of other parties and political activists. Whenever some thing new is introduced, and even when it is not new and has been hidden by those who occupy us, people will oppose that either due to lack of knowledge or on instructions of those powers which want to maintain the status quo. KNP leadership is determined to bring out facts and educate the young Kashmiris about our rich historical past, about events of 1940s and the present day forced division that they can make informed decisions as to how to fight those who occupy us and take forward our struggle in line with international requirements.

Root cause of our present troubles, and trouble since 1947 is that unprovoked aggression against us which started on 22 October 1947, and resulted in killing of tens of thousands of innocent people of Jammu and Kashmir, looting arson, rapes and kidnapping of Kashmiri women. Furthermore it forced the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir to seek help from India to save his State, life, property and honour of his subjects. The Indian help came only after the Maharaja agreed to sign an Instrument of Accession with India which was provisionally accepted and had to be ratified by the people of Jammu and Kashmir. Of course, to date we have not had an opportunity to ratify or reject that Provisional Accession.

The Indian forces landed in Kashmir on the morning of 27 October 1947; and Pakistani governments and Pakistani backed parties are encouraged and helped to observe that day as a Black Day. I have no problem with that. However, this fact should be understood that if there was no tribal attack on 22 October 1947, there would not have been any need to seek help from India, and the Indian troops would not have landed on 27 October. In other words, 27 October is a by product of the events that started on 22 October; and without this unprovoked aggression, aim of which was to capture the Kashmiri Capital, we could have been an independent State.

Furthermore, whereas Pakistan and Pakistani backed tribesmen entered the State territory by violating the Standstill Agreement, and against the wishes of the government and the Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir; the Indian troops entered the Kashmiri territory on the request of the Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir and as a result of a treaty between the two States.

Mr Chairman

It must be pointed out here that the present role of the Indian army and para military forces goes far beyond the terms of the agreement under which they entered the State. I and my other colleagues condemn all human rights abuses taking place in Jammu and Kashmir whether committed by men in uniform, secret agencies or jihadi groups or other militants; but we must understand historical facts and who did what in name of Kashmir dispute.

Some people in order to justify the ‘Tribal Invasion’ claim that the tribesmen came there to help Muslims who were being butchered by Hindus and Sikhs in Jammu. This story is totally wrong; and is advanced only to provide a cover to the atrocities of these savage tribesmen. Communal riots started in Jammu in third week of August 1947 when non Muslims uprooted from Pakistani Punjab poured in to Jammu from Sialkot and Gujrat areas. Horror stories and condition of these ‘migrants’ provided fuel required to start riots and non Muslims from outside the State also took part in these riots in which Muslims were the main target.

If aim of this tribal attack was to help Muslims who were killed in riots then they should have proceeded towards Jammu where Muslims were in minority. They could have entered the State territory from Sialkot which is only about 28 miles from Jammu or from Gujrat. Furthermore, why did they wait till 22 October (two months) before they launched this tribal attack, Muslims of Jammu needed urgent help in August 1947, but Pakistani government and these Tribesmen did not make any move, they did not even issues a statement against these riots.

The reason for this is that until mid October 1947, Pakistani authorities were under this impression that the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir will accede with Pakistan; and by helping Muslims of Jammu (when they were under attack) or by speaking in their support the Government of Pakistan did not want to annoy the Maharaja and risk losing Jammu and Kashmir. However, when Pakistani government realised that the Maharaja did not want to join Pakistan and wanted to remain independent; and he even refused to allow Mohammed Ali Jinnah to visit Srinagar for a holiday, they decided to teach him a lesson.

Pakistani government was really annoyed and felt humiliated and let down. They decided to punish the Maharaja and take over Kashmir by force. In complete violation of the Standstill Agreement they stopped all the essential supplies including food and oil entering the State; and despite repeated requests from the Maharaja government, Pakistan did not allow resumption of supplies of essential goods to Jammu and Kashmir.

To make matters worse for the Maharaja, Pakistan government encouraged a rebellion in Poonch where Muslims were very resentful. Muslim soldiers who took part in the Second World War had returned to their homes and were more conscious of their rights and use of gun. Furthermore Pakistan accused the Maharajah government for attacking Pakistani territory; and demanded that either the Maharaja or his Prime Minister should immediately visit Karachi (Pakistan) to resolve these issues.

The Maharaja denied these charges, and said how his small army (8000, in total and scattered in various parts of the State) could attack Pakistan; and for what purpose he would do that. Both governments exchanged telegrams to resolve these issues between second week of October and 19^th October 1947; and the Maharaja suggested to set up a Joint Commission to investigate these matters. Pakistani government showed no interest in any kind of investigation or any Commission; and while these communications were going on, Pakistan assembled tribesmen from North West Frontier in name of Jihad and attacked the Valley of Kashmir which had overwhelming Muslim majority, and where there were no riots and Muslims were not under attack.

Clearly the aim was not to help surrounded Muslims of Jammu, but to punish the Maharaja by capturing his capital – Srinagar. As noted earlier if the aim was to help Muslims of Jammu then the tribesmen should have been directed to Jammu Province via Sialkot and Gujrat; and that attack should have taken place in August 1947, and not on 22 October.

In this brutal attack non Muslims were the main target – their men were systematically killed, their women were raped and kidnapped and taken back to North West Frontier. Their houses were burnt; however, the tribesmen showed great equality when it came to looting- they looted everyone; even those items which were stored in a Masjid (Mosque) by Muslims and non Muslims hoping that Muslim tribesmen will not loot their belongings from a place of worship, were also looted. Any Muslim who tried to protect non Muslims and criticised these tribesmen were also killed on spot. It is believed that more than 30 thousands people lost their lives in this brutal attack.

To us 22 October is rightly called a Black Day, but to rub salt in our wounds, and to hide their crimes, imperialists of Pakistan and their foot soldiers camouflaged their crimes in name of religion and fabricated false stories to justify their atrocities and naked aggression. Sad thing is that these people have not learnt anything, and they still continue to promote those policies which divide people in name of religion; and time has come that we people of Jammu and Kashmir stand up and be counted.

Situation in Gilgit Baltistan

Mr Chairman

Yesterday I received a phone call from a nationalist leader from Gilgit who is under detention there just because he spoke out against policies of Pakistan. This man, Baba Jan is a political leader and believes in peaceful struggle. He demands fundamental rights for the people of Gilgit Baltistan and exposes Pakistani oppression and exploitation. He has not committed any crime; and yet he is suffering in prison because he believes Pakistani occupation of these areas is illegal and against the wishes and interests of the local people.

While talking to me Baba Jan said: ‘Dr Shabir Choudhry, give my Salam (greetings) to my brothers of Azad Kashmir who are observing a Black Day to condemn and expose the Pakistan’s Kashmir policy and the tribal invasion. Tell them I fully support you and wish you all the best for your seminar. While you talk about your miseries and problems, please do not forget about the problems we face in Gilgit Baltistan.’

Baba Jan further said, ‘like you people we are also occupied, but we are in worst condition because we don’t even enjoy those rights which you people have been enjoying for many decades. I support struggle of those people who are fighting for their rights and freedom on the Indian side of the LOC. I also support your struggle, but I cannot go to Muzaffarbad or Srinagar and fight for you because I am also in chains in Gilgit Baltistan. I believe my struggle is on this side of the divide where I am occupied and oppressed. I can only help you or fight to liberate you brothers once I am free; and those people who ask you to liberate the Indian side of the Jammu and Kashmir first are not sincere, as they are promoting the agenda of Islamabad to hide their crimes and keep attention away from these areas which in many ways are still living in dark ages.’

Mr Chairman, thank you for your patience and for allowing me to pass on message of Baba Jan who is another victim of Pakistani secret agencies, and who is suffering because of his political views.

Tribal Invasion and Kashmir, Dr Shabir Choudhry

Tribal Invasion and Kashmir

Tribal attack on Kashmir was a major event in contemporary history of Jammu and Kashmir with far reaching consequences. The Tribal Attack not only ended Kashmir’s sovereignty, but it also resulted in division of the State between India and Pakistan; and to date, it remains divided and families are forcibly separated since 1947.

Another sad part of this tragedy is that the brutal attack was launched in holy name of ‘jihad’ and liberation of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. The fact, however, is that those who planned this ferocious and unprovoked attack wanted to capture Kashmir; and majority of those who joined the attack did not do it because of any religious duty but for the purpose of looting.

It is unfortunate that because of very strong propaganda of the Pakistani ruling elite who planned this attack; and then justified it in name of Islam, still majority of people believe that the tribal attack was arranged to liberate people of Jammu and Kashmir. Furthermore, they claim Kashmir was part of Pakistan and illegally occupied by India; therefore, this attack was necessary and justified.

Before we discuss this, it is important that we explain the legal position of Jammu and Kashmir. The British Raj in India consisted of two units, namely British India and Princely India; whereas the former was directly ruled, the latter enjoyed semi autonomous status. The Rulers of the Princely States were allies of the British and under different treaties they accepted the British Paramountcy.

Many Muslims of Pakistan and Jammu and Kashmir are manipulated that because Pakistan was created in name of religion; and because Jammu and Kashmir was a majority Muslim State, therefore, it should have become part of Pakistan. That is not true; as Two Nations Theory did not apply to the Princely States, including the State of Jammu and Kashmir.

The Two Nations theory, whatever its value after the fall of East Pakistan, and after the separatist trends within the present Pakistan, was only applicable to the British India. The Rulers of Princely States had a choice to accede to either India, accede to Pakistan or negotiate some new terms with India or Pakistan.

Mohammed Ali Jinnah was a constitutional expert. He knew the Two Nations Theory did not apply to the Princely States; and that is why before the establishment of Pakistan he never asked Kashmir’s inclusion in Pakistan. When people asked him a question about future of Kashmir and other Princely States, he asserted:

“Constitutionally and legally, the Indian States will be independent sovereign states on the termination of Paramountcy and they will be free to decide for themselves to adopt any course they like. It is open to them to join the Hindustan Constituent Assembly, the Pakistan Constituent Assembly, or decide to remain independent. In the last case, they enter into such arrangements or relationship with Hindustan or Pakistan as they may choose.”

Mohammed Ali Jinnah demonstrated this policy by accepting accession of Junagarrh’s to Pakistan, even though this State had overwhelming non Muslim majority; and if the Two Nations Theory was applicable to the Princely States then this State would have automatically become part of India. Similarly, on question of Hyderabad, Mohammed Ali Jinnah supported Ruler of this State’s right to remain independent, even though this State also had overwhelming non Muslim majority; and if the Two Nations Theory was applicable to the Princely States then Hyderabad also should have automatically joined India.

Apart from that Governor General of India Lord Louis Mountbatten in his address to a Special full meeting of the Chamber of Princes on July 25 1947, said:

“Now, the Indian Independence Act releases the States from all their obligations to the Crown. The States will have complete freedom- technically and legally they become independent.”

The above examples prove without any doubt that the Two Nations Theory was only related to the British India and was not applicable to the Princely States. The Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir had no intention to join either India or Pakistan and lose his power and status.

The Maharajah of Jammu and Kashmir knew that the British Raj was going to end soon; and after the lapse of paramountcy, he wanted to become an independent Ruler of his State, so he decided to sign Standstill Agreements with India and Pakistan. Whereas, Pakistan signed the Standstill Agreement with the Maharajah of Jammu and Kashmir, India wanted to discuss this matter further.

Those who justify this unprovoked and brutal aggression claim that the tribal attack was arranged to save Muslims of Jammu and Kashmir who were killed because of communal riots. It is interesting to note that the riots took place in Jammu, whereas the tribal attack was launched in the Valley of Kashmir where the Muslims had overwhelming majority; and hundreds of miles away from the trouble spot.

The aim of this attack was to punish the Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir for not acceding to Pakistan and to capture his summer capital and the political and economic hub. Jammu and Kashmir was important to Pakistan because of its great strategic location, natural resources and security it provided to Pakistan.

If the entire Jammu and Kashmir had gone to India, and the Indian forces were deployed on Kashmir’s border with Pakistan, then that would have seriously endangered Pakistan’s main civil and military lines of communication between Rawalpindi and Lahore. If Pakistan was to safeguard this route properly then that would make cities of Lahore, Sialkot and Gujrat vulnerable to the Indian invasion. Apart from that Jammu and Kashmir was important to Pakistan’s economy, especially agriculture. So as far as Pakistani ruling elite were concerned they felt it was absolutely necessary to get Kashmir at all costs.

With that in mind the Pakistani leaders and Pakistani officers of the Pakistan army (all senior officers were British at that time) started formulating a policy to capture Kashmir soon after the partition of India. Major General Akbar Khan, who was in charge of this military campaign, went to Murree, the hill station near the Kashmir border two weeks after the partition of India. This is where he met Sardar Ibrahim Khan (who was appointed President of Azad Kashmir by Khawaja Abdul Rahim Commissioner of Rawalpindi), and Mian Iftikhar Khan a leader of Pakistan Muslim League, Lahore; and who was on way to Srinagar to assess the situation there.

Major General Akbar Khan, at that time was a serving officer of the Pakistan Army, and was Director of Weapons and equipment at the GHQ. In his book, ‘Raiders in Kashmir’, while referring to the meeting with Mian Iftikhar Khan, he wrote:

‘All he could tell me was that some money could be spent…he said that any action by us to be of an unofficial nature, and no Pakistani troops or officers were to take an active part in it. With this inadequate data in my possession, I spent the next day or so with Sardar Ibrahim and others and returned to Pinidi where I wrote out a plan’. 1

The whole plan needed a lot of assistance from the Pakistan army in the form of military plans, weapons, and supply of ammunition, communications, intelligence and able and committed manpower to implement that plan. The plan had to be kept secret not only from the Indians; but also from senior Pakistani army officers of the British origin. Major General Akbar Khan produced a plan to capture Kashmir with the title of: ‘Armed revolt inside Kashmir’.

As the name suggests, the Pakistani plan was that it 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.

I will 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 uprisings in Libya and Syria. One can say, people of these countries revolted against the rulers of these countries; and made great sacrifices. Yes, they have made great sacrifices and suffered immensely, but were these ‘revolts’ indigence or local with no help and support from outside?

Those who plan revolts of this nature always ensure that the fighting people believe that they are fighting for their own cause; and to advance interest of their nation, tribe or faith. I agree people of the present Azad Kashmir, especially people of Poonch had resentments against the Maharajah; but is it not true that foreign countries always exploit local, regional or tribal grievances and religious sentiments to start a revolt.

The man in charge of the campaign wrote: ‘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 – and at the same time taking steps to prevent of arrival of armed civilians or military assistance from India into Kashmir.’  2

To stop the Indian help reaching Kashmir he proposed 1,000 men to be stationed near Kathua and 200 men to be stationed near the Srinagar airport.

Total army of the Maharajah, at that time, was 9,000 out of which only 2,000 were Muslims; and because of the communal situation in the entire region, he was reluctant to put too much faith to his Muslim units. His remaining 7,000 army was widely scattered, and could not defend the borders; and in view of what the Muslim units subsequently did in various parts of the State, his judgement was not wrong.

Apart from Major General Akbar Khan other key protagonists were Mr Khurshid Anwar, Commander of the Muslim League National Guards, Mr Zaman Kiani, Commander of the former Indian National Army, Sardar Shaukat Ayat Khan a senior leader of Muslim League and a Minister in the Punjab government. All these met the Prime Minister of Pakistan in Lahore, in presence of Mr Ghulam Mohammed, Finance Minister and later Governor General of Pakistan and Mian Iftikhar Khan. In this meeting many important decisions with regard to the whole plan were discussed and finalised. 3

He claims that he also took some senior officers, like Brigadier Sher Khan, who was Director Intelligence at that time and based in the GHQ, in to confidence. Also he claims to have had support of Pakistan Air Force through Air commodore Janjua and others who helped them with winter clothing, ammunition and weapons etc. 4

I have always maintained that if there was no tribal attack then it was possible that we people of Jammu and Kashmir could have been still independent. We were attacked by the Tribesmen supported by Pakistani officials; and we lost our sovereignty as a direct result of this brutal and unprovoked aggression. Our suffering, deaths and destruction; and all that what has happened since October 1947, could be linked to that aggression.

Even Major General Akbar Khan tends to support this view point that the Maharajah was forced to seek help from India because of this brutal attack. He even agrees that Sheikh Abdullah was not in favour of acceding to India; and this is the view point I have asserted with evidence many times. Major General Akbar Khan wrote:

‘But then, suddenly at this stage, the whole situation was radically altered by the entry of Frontier Tribesmen into Kashmir on 23 of October. This event was of such significance that it led to the accession of the State to India within four days.’ 5

When the Maharajah of Jammu and Kashmir realised that the Pakistani authorities have violated the Standstill Agreement and have managed a tribal attack which has resulted in killing of innocent men, women and children and rapes and kidnapping of women and young girls, he had no option but to seek help from the other neighbour – India.

India was eagerly waiting for this invitation to intervene from the beleaguered Maharajah; in fact, in anticipation on 25 the October, they had alerted their Services Chiefs to prepare plans for sending troops in to Jammu and Kashmir. On the same day three senior officers flew to Srinagar to assess the situation and to advise the Maharajah to move to Jammu for safety.

There is plenty of evidence to prove that both the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir and the most popular Kashmir leader, Sheikh Abdullah were not happy to join India; if anything, they wanted to maintain independence of Kashmir by having cordial relationship with both India and Pakistan.

By having the Standstill Agreement with Pakistan, the Maharajah provided a foot hold to them in Kashmir. Sheikh Abdullah on his part tried his very best to meet Mohammed Ali Jinnah, Governor General of Pakistan and reach some consensus; but alas, he was insulted and Mohammed Ali Jinnah refused to meet the tallest Kashmiri leader when the latter had secretly travelled to Lahore to meet him. In fact, Mohammed Ali Jinnah said: "I don't need to meet this man, Kashmir is in my pocket'.

Humiliated and disappointed Sheikh Abdullah returned to Srinagar. Although, he had was bitter and did not want to join Pakistan, but he did not close doors for some future dialogue; and his emissaries were still in Lahore waiting to see senior Pakistani officials to reach some agreement when the tribal aggression was launched.

Thinking in some important circles in Pakistan was, why talk to these Kashmiri leaders when we can get Kashmir by force. However, by use of force, within five days they pushed bulk of Kashmir in to the Indian corner, where it remains since that time.

It is sad that we people of the former Princely State of Jammu and Kashmir are forcibly divided and oppressed on both sides of the divide. It is also sad that despite our sufferings and sacrifices we cannot see any light at the end of the tunnel; hence no end to our suffering, humiliation and miseries. But it is more disturbing that people who matter in Islamabad have not learnt anything from the past mistakes; and still that mindset prevails that they can get rest of Kashmir by use of gun.

Those who planned and launched that disastrous tribal attack, or took part in it, their followers and those who represent forces of extremism, violence and hatred will sharpen their knives and attack me for writing the above. Already for the past four months a concerted and well coordinated smear campaign is going on against me for speaking truth and for exposing those who have made the Kashmiri struggle for independence their business.

All those who speak truth and choose to travel on right path, ultimately suffer at the hands of those who either represent forces of the status quo, have personal or professional envy or they lack the ability to differentiate between good and bad. Whatever the real reason for their hate campaign, they need to understand that by smear campaign and by promotion of hate they cannot promote any cause, let alone winning independence for people of Jammu and Kashmir.

Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) said: "Say what is true, although it may be bitter and displeasing to people", so as far as I am concerned, I will continue my jihad of speaking truth, no matter how bitter it is, and exposing those who are using sentiments of simple and innocent people to advance their personal and political agenda.

1.   Major General Akbar Khan, ‘Raiders in Kashmir’, Pak Publishers Limited, Karachi, Pakistan, page 12

2.   ibid, page 14

3.   ibid, page 17

4.   ibid, page 19

5.   ibid, page 23