Tribal Invasion and Kashmir: Pakistani Attempts to Capture Kashmir in 1947, Division of Kashmir and Terrorism

Contents

1. Preface

Tribal invasion—some more facts

2. Introduction

Sardar Shaukat Ali Kashmiri, Chairman of United Kashmir Peoples National Party

3. Ray of Light

Professor Muhammad Rafiq Bhatti

4. Tribal invasion, sovereignty of Kashmir and problems of South Asia

5. Tribal Invasion and Kashmir

6. 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.

7. Mohammed Ali Jinnah’s visit to Kashmir and Tribal Invasion

8. Tribal invasion and its implications

Presentation of Dr Shabir Choudhry on Black Day conference organised by Kashmir National Party in Watford, England.

9. Tribal invasion was unprovoked aggression against Jammu and Kashmir, declares Black Day conference.

10. Resolutions passed by the Black Day Conference arranged by Kashmir National Party in Watford (England) on 18 October 2009

11. Why 22 October matters in Kashmiri history?

12. Kashmiri struggle and the UN Resolutions

About the Author

1. Preface

Tribal invasion—some more facts

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