SAIFUDDIN  SOZ

Kashmir: Glimpses of History and the Story of Struggle by   Saifuddin Soz; Published by  Rupa; Pages 236 ; Price Rs.595/-

                             ********************

Throughout its long, diverse, distinctive but scarred history, the beautiful and bountiful land of Kashmir has captured the imagination of travellers, kings, historians and nations. Kashmir has seen it all. Kashmiris fought the Mughals, the Afghans and the Sikhs in the past. However, it was their fight against Dogra autocracy that ultimately led to their disillusionment with the Indian establishment. With Pakistan feeding the emotions of deeply alienated and disenchanted people and the Indian government using force and taking a harder stand by the day, this unique culture now stands completely besieged. In the book under review Saifuddin  Soz takes a passionate and compelling look at the past, present and future of a vastly misunderstood people.

 The first half of his book is a studied, well annotated recount of the historic and cultural roots of the Kashmiri people and its society right up to the time when which      J and K acceded to Union of India. The second half is how the understanding of that “past” helps  resolving the present political crisis in a pragmatic fashion,  that is acceptable to all stakeholders in J and K. In this backdrop,  the larger secular, pluralistic cultural legacy of Kashmir stands out, a vision that defined the Jawaharlal Nehru-Sheikh Abdullah equations, notwithstanding the painful and tragic developments J and K has seen post-1947.

The author very fairly records that in recent years two former Prime Minister, Atal Beharji Vajpayee and Dr Manmohan Singh tried their best to take forward the wisdom of the Kashmiri past to resolve the issues by simultaneously engaging with Pakistan, even while trying to normalise the ground situation.  But both efforts remain as unfinished projects, while Kashmir 2018 is again on a precipice.

Well-known historians Kalhana, PNK Bamzai and travellers like Hiuen Tsiang, Marco Polo, Al-Beruni, Francois Bernier and George Forster are some of the many names whose assessments, travel accounts and descriptions Soz has dipped into in a bid to unravel Kashmir and trace its recorded history which dates back to 3000 BC. 

His  history  of the region captures Kashmir  from Rajatarangini to the contemporary period. Kashmir has had a rich civilisation of its own with its unique culture that has been well   portrayed  in this book.

 Soz has discussed the contemporary period and the post-independence Indian period of Kashmir’s history. He has also  suggested a method  to tackle the Kashmir issue.  Says Soz-“In my opinion, it is futile to look to the UN for any workable help for the resolution of the dispute as the powers holding the authority of veto have all along responded to the situations keeping their own strategic interests in view.”

Soz’s approach is not  of a trained historian  nor that of a chronicler of historical events . He has problems with the Sikh rule in Jammu & Kashmir; he talks of the "brutalities committed by the Sikhs". He has problems with the Dogra rule; he says that Kashmiris struggled for freedom from the Dogra kings as they felt humiliated. He reproduces a passage from Captain Knight who wrote that the Kashmiris were "handed over to the tender mercies of the most thorough ruffians that ever was created" But he goes overboard in hailing the Islamic rule. He writes gushingly, "The advent of Islam created a new feeling of equality and harmony among the people and introduced a set of human values that were unknown till then."

He talks of a "unique situation of cultural synthesis" during the Muslim reign. Later in the book, Soz is compelled to admit that the Kashmiris were disgusted with the Afghan and the Mughal rulers, though the injustices the latter committed were "mild-mannered".

The author has high praise for Jawaharlal Nehru and Sheikh Abdullah, but he casts aspersions on Vallabhbhai Patel and the Dogra ruler, Maharaja Hari Singh. In what is a pathetic attempt to defend Nehru's disastrous policy on J&K, Soz seeks to put the blame at Lord Mountbatten's door. He takes pain to demonstrate that Nehru had strongly opposed the idea of taking the Kashmir issue to the United Nations, but agreed only on conditions favourable to India.

On the other hand, the author chooses to show little appreciation of Patel's shrewd move to link plebiscite in Kashmir with that in Hyderabad. Patel knew Pakistan would not agree, given that it would lose in Hindu-majority Hyderabad. Soz fails to realise that in doing so, Patel saved Kashmir from acceding to Pakistan. He also glosses over the fact that in a meeting at the Indian Prime Minister's residence in the aftermath of Pakistani invaders entering Kashmir, it was Patel who told the Kashmir delegation that its members had no reason to accept Pakistan's terms and that India would stand by them. It was only after his resolve that Nehru stirred into action and ordered Indian troops to drive away the invaders.

According to Rajmohan Gandhi's book “ Patel: A Life”,   it was for the J&K's ruler to decide; the Iron Man of India knew well that the Maharaja was not inclined towards Pakistan. While on the subject,  Soz has not elaborated on how Patel, as minister of states, was sidelined on Kashmir affairs, with Nehru taking direct control and making a mess of the situation?

Soz  holds the "RSS ideology and narrative" responsible for the failure to establish peace in the Valley, and the appointment of Jagmohan as Governor of J&K for a second time in January 1990 for the escalation of violence and the atrocities against Kashmiri Pandits.

The author meticulously goes over the birth of the National Conference under Sheikh Abdullah and traces in good detail the historical circumstances including the British Partition of the subcontinent, events leading to the “Delhi Agreement of 1952”, how a ‘special constitutional arrangement was evolved’ and provided for in Article 370 of the Constitution. He then points out how when Sheikh Abdullah was trying to give a “final shape to the constitutional relationship with the Union of India”, some “small minds” in Sheikh’s own party and in New Delhi sowed the seeds of how he toyed with the sole idea of an “independent Kashmir”.

Sheikh Abdullah’s subsequent arrest, the long years of incarceration, how Nehru’s last gambit for a peaceful political solution was cut short by his death and what it did to J and K’s politics later, the rise of armed militancy in the late 1980s’ and its aftermath, the ‘exodus’ of the Pandits, have all been dispassionately elucidated.  

Saifuddin Soz is very clear that the ‘way forward’ needs to include New Delhi talking to the    Hurriyat groups in Kashmir, even while the Governments of India and Pakistan should strive to settle the Kashmir dispute” in the backdrop of the ‘Musharraf- Vajpayee-Manmohan formula’.

 The book extensively mentions the miseries, atrocities and betrayals heaped on the Kashmiris time and again since Independence and earlier, but no one will miss to note  that the chapter on exodus of Pandits mentions the number of Kashmiri Pandits who stayed behind but forgets to bring up the number that left the Valley, and how.

The concluding chapter, The way forward, offers a number of solutions to reach a settlement on the decades-old dispute. The suggestions lay focus on the “Centre showing compassion to people of Kashmir”, “internal dialogue with people of three regions” and “reducing the presence of Army” in the strife-torn state. On the whole, no new solution comes on the platter.

Mutual trust and dialogue, but not force or religious polarisation, is the way to heal a ‘wounded’ Kashmir in the author’s ultimate analysis. The book is a must-read for all those who wish to understand J and K in the contemporary context.

P.P.Ramachandran 

21/10/2018.