Posted by Sanatana Jnana at 04:43
Nehru’s Anti National Policies
Going through the writings and speeches of Nehru, one finds that Nehru, the 1st Prime Minister of India, the only Hindu homeland, had only utter contempt and abuses for the Hindus and Hinduism. He himself strutted a number of times his hatred for Hinduism when he shamelessly declared that he was a Hindu by accident of his birth. Well, the problem with Nehru was that he was born and brought up in such an environment that offered him little or no opportunity to understand and appreciate the greatness of Hinduism and take pride in the same. Nehru’s father Motila was a westernized man. He had taken every care not to allow his son to imbibe Hindu values and mores. An entry, on 12 October, 1950, in Maniben’s diary that is awaiting publication, quotes Sriprakash, one of Jawaharlal’s close friend as saying “ there was no trace of Hindutva in Motilal Nehru. He was three quarters Englishman and one quarter Muslim. How can you expect any Hindutva in his son?” (The Pioneer, July 12, 2011, Tues day). Similarly the same diary records, on September 13, 1950 Ghanshyam Birla’s words- “Nehru’s whole family would have embraced Islam if they had not come in contact with Gandhiji,”( The Pioneer, July 13, 2011) In addition to this, early in his political career he was contaminated by the criminal and denationalizing ideology of Communism, a fashion at that time. Great historian late Sri Sita Ram Goel throws some light on the reason behind Nehru’s alienation from his ancestral religion, Hinduism, in his book the “Genesis and Growth of Nehruism”. He observes- “It was quite early in his political career that Pandit Nehru had learnt studiously to look through Communist glasses at every problem that arose in India. In the process he had become more alienated from India’s indigenous society and culture and at the same time more and more friendly to every force which was out to disintegrate India, uproot its people and destroy its cultural heritage. He had ended by becoming a combined embodiment of all the imperialist ideologies that have flooded this country in the wake of foreign invasions or interventions-Islam, Christianity, White Man’s burden and Communism. “
It is from this perspective that Nehru’s policies should be seen and analysed. Nehru’s friendship or comradeship with Sheikh Abdullah was the outcome of their common faith in Communism. Both of them were incurable communist sympathizers. Also, it is likely that Nehru’s inherent hatred for Hindus would have brought him closer to Sheikh who was a Muslim. Whatever it is, Nehru’s overtures must have amused Sheikh Abdullah as, in his proximity to Nehru, he could now clearly see an opportunity to fulfill his long nurtured ambition of becoming the ruler of Kashmir. He gleefully filled Nehru’s ear with all sorts of malicious rumors against the Maharaja. Nehru, obliged as he was to his comrade Sheikh Abdullah, lapped up the unverified stories and used every platform to deride Maharaja Hari Singh , question his right to rule J&K and allege him of resorting to repressive activities to strangle people’s voice. Any one wants to have an idea of Nehru’s fulminations against the king of Kashmir can refer the statement by Nehru on 26 May, 1946, published in The Hindu the next day. Besides, other news papers also covered Nehru’s speeches that reflect his denunciations of the king.
Needless to say, the king, who grew suspicious about the motives of the duo and apprehensive of his future under Nehru as the Head of India, desisted from signing the instrument of accession. Thanks to the political acumen of Sardar Patel that he sensed the ever widening gulf between the Maharaja and Nehru. Realizing that such a situation would only delay the accession of J&K to India and that there were chances, bleak though, the Maharaja might join Pakistan, in which case the Hindus of J&K would have to face annihilation at the hands of Muslims. Patel, in order to allay the fears and apprehensions of the Maharaja and concerned, of course, about the life and properties of the Hindus, wrote a letter on 3 July 1947 to the Maharaja assuring him full co-operation of the Govt. of India and the congress party.
However, unfortunately, before Hari Singh could take any decision with regard to joining India, Pathan tribesmen and soldiers of the Pakistan Army ‘on leave’ –led by some regular officers who knew Kashmir well, had invaded J&K on 22 October 1947. What followed the invasion constituted one of the bloodiest chapters in the history of J&K. As always in such raids, Hindus were killed mercilessly, their properties were looted, their houses were set on fire and their women were raped. Even children were not spared. V.P Menon, secretary ministry of states, who had played a major role in the accession of Kashmir to India, relates a very moving incident that gave an idea of the alarming situation prevailing in those hectic days in Kashmir, in his book “Integration of India States”.
“As I was about to get into the plane, a Hindu lady rushed up to me with tears in her eyes begged me to take them in the plane to Delhi. She feared that her daughter might meet the fate of thousand of other Kashmir women. I had no option but to agree and they got into the plane. The pilot told me that at the hotel where he and his crew had their dinner, not a single soul talked and that, but for the noise of forks and spoons, the whole hotel was hushed into silence. It was all horribly depressing and, due to the sobs of the two young girls of whom I had taken charge, I was hardly able to collect my thoughts. (pg.399, 1995 Reprint)”
Further, V P Mennon’s book also brings to light a very important development that took place during this fateful period in Kashmir. All the Muslims in Hari Singh’s army deserted him when he was fighting a war of life and death. Almost 1/3rd of them joined the raiders extending them every help in continuing the atrocities on Hindus. What is remarkable is that even some Muslim ex-officers of Subhas Bose’s Indian National Army also assisted the raiders. However, fate was on India’s side. Maharaja Hari Singh, on 26 October, signed the instrument of accession, ensuring the formal integration of J&K into India. On 27 Oct. India accepted the accession on condition that a plebiscite would be held in the state to validate the accession. On that very day, Indian troops arrived at Srinagar and took control of the situation bringing to halt advance of enemies. The tribesmen were on the retreat everywhere when ceasefire was declared.
Now, a few words about Plebiscite. The question of plebiscite was brought into the picture by none other than our “great humanist” Nehru under the direction of Mountbatten, of course. Such was his conviction about the infallibility of a whiteman that, in this matter, he did not feel the need to consult Patel who was his Home Minister and Mahatma Gandhi who was his mentor. Nehru knew the nationalist in Patel would not entertain such a subversive proposition and history records when Patel came to know of this he spoke against the plebiscite. We all know it is Nehru’s commitment to plebiscite that has severely weakened our position in Kashmir ever since and given Pakistan an upper hand in the Kashmir issue.
One question arises- how is it that while Patel could clearly see where the interests of the nation lies and what is harmful for the nation, Nehru floundered repeatedly to do so? Sri Sita Ram Goel provides a very satisfactory answer to this. He attributes Nehru’s this unpatriotic posture to his obsession with Communism. In his book “Genesis and Growth of Nehruism”, page 171, he writes –“I refer him ( Sri Tolo Punjabi, one of the readers of his articles on Nehru published in the Organiser) the memorandum which the CPI had submitted to the British Cabinet Mission and in which Kashmir was described as a separate nationality which should be given the right of self-determination to the point of becoming a sovereign State. The CPI had denounced Kashmir’s accession to India as an imperialist annexation in early 1948. The Indian army in Kashmir had been described as an army of occupation in all official soviet publications at that time. So pandit Nehru’s communist conscience suffered persistent pricks. He not only promised a plebiscite but also ordered the Indian army to stop its triumphant march into Pakistan –occupied Kashmir. He changed his stand on a plebiscite in Kashmir only when the soviet union and the CPI had changed their stand and come out in support of Indian case in Kashmir after Pakistan entered into an alliance with America. And let loose a lying campaign against the west which was only reminding him half-heartedly of the plebiscite promise he had himself made.”
Coming to the reference of the Kashmir issue to the UNO, it was a decision solely taken by Nehru at Mountbatten’s insistence. It is quite plausible that Lady Mountbatten, “a whore who had slept with every communist intellectual within her reach, including pandit Nehru,” had had a hand in this. In a recent interview to CNN-IBN programme Devil’s Advocate, Mountbatten’s daughter Pamela Mountbatten admitted to the fact that her father had used her wife, lady Mountbatten to influence Nehru to accept his decisions.
“That is true, and he did use her like that. But he certainly wasn’t going to throw her, he didn’t say to her ‘go and become the Prime Minister’s lover, because I need you to intercede!’ It was a by-product of this deep affection.”
On the other hand, quite contrary to Nehru’s attitude, the fierce nationalist, Patel was strongly opposed to the idea of referring the Kashmir matter to UNO. His letter of 3 July 1948, to Arthur Henderson, British MP reveals his annoyance at the decision. Given below is a part of the letter.
“ I myself felt that we should never have gone to the UNO, and if we had taken timely action when we went to the UNO we could have settled the whole case much more quickly and satisfactorily from our point of view, whereas at the UNO not only has the dispute been prolonged, but merits of our case have been completely lost in the interaction of power politics.”
But Patel’s advice and feelings had no value for this stooge of Mountbatten that is Nehru who, by the time India approached the UNO, had sidelined Patel from Kashmir affairs. It is now history how Indian delegation paled into insignificance before the Pakistani representative Zafrullah Khan who had all along the support of the British delegate.
The debacle at the UNO has cost India a lot-both in terms of human life and money. Today Kashmir is a hunting ground for Islamic terrorism that is threatening the very existence of India. Besides, ever since the fiasco, India’s international image has suffered adversely as we are now considered a soft State which can be brought to her knees at will. If only Nehru had cared to heed the counsel of the Sardar. If only he had cared not to turn Kashmir into a testing ground where he can carry out his experiments with communism. If only he had cared to think of the welfare of the Indians who had great faith in him.