No society is a monolithic group, but historical communities have something from DNA that never dies. It is a sustained cultural and spiritual capital. Religious formalism can disturb it temporarily, but the core culture cannot be erased.
Kashmiri society, as such, is one monolithic cultural entity, that if left to it, would abhor violence and live in peace, in its own social and geographical landscape. Nevertheless, ‘Kashmir Files’ is as factual as my drawing room photograph with my best childhood friend Ghulam Hassan ‘Shaheen’.
The current political and social consciousness would despise it; prone to believe. Let us understand the conundrums of this bond of the two communities, Batta and Musalman.
Islam entered into the valley through court entry in fourteenth century and expanded by conversions from the common ancestry. Nevertheless the native genius produced an indigenous tradition, a Trika philosophy that was a blend of greater traditions of Islam in the Shavite philosophy of little traditions, departure from formalism of Islam or pure Brahimism, a formation of a lived religion.
Lalded was its harbinger and Nund Reshi, its stream of continuity. Budshah stabilised it. Lalded gave us Wakhs and an existential world view in simple Kashmiri language that made us swim with ease in the Nundreshi tradition. Both Shaivism and Islam got blended in it, it was our common identity.
We cultivated it together
However, it was overrun by non native traditions, when Kashmir was annexed by the Mughal Empire in late sixteenth century. With King Yusuf Shah Chak’s banishment and Zoon’s deprivation and agony, a superstructure of new tradition dominated us.
It was continued by non-native kingdoms until mid-twentieth century. It produced an elite formation that had non-native language, culture and mannerism that It impoverished our native tradition and scandalously portrayed it as an inferior mimicry of oral tradition.
We mourned at the loss of identity together and wept for centuries collectively
With the advent of National Movement, there a was generation of sub-movements, including Quit Kashmir Movement in early twentieth century. Nehru and Abdullah were its heroes and we loved them immensely. Their tryst with destiny was blessed by Allama Iqbal himself to overcome the suffering and get rid of powerful non-native superstructure which had dusted down and demeaned our traditions.
Grand Abdullah tried to reinvent that nativity, which was sought by Nehru. The subjugation of centuries had produced non-native cleavages, which not only would make believe our language and culture inferior, but also did drain our resources and played on the political economy of shali, shawl, and forests, and governed us with control over shrines. The birth of National Conference was to dispossess them.
It was not easy to face the powerful elite but we stood together to oppose them, the Ahrars, their supporters in the valley and the Maharaja. Nehru promoted Abdullah and Abdullah needed Battas to transform the large illiterate masses through their functional literacy. The agenda was decided and ‘Naya Kashmir Document’ was formulated. It was against the ‘Two Nation Theory’ and to the displeasure of Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah.
Jinnah visited Kashmir second time in 1944. He was greeted at two places. The first one, arranged by National conference; where the welcome address was read by Pt J.L Kilam. It had appealed to him so much that he said ‘even kings can feel proud at the warmth of welcome you have given to me’.
He was disappointed with the second welcome at Delegate, given by the leadership of Muslim Conference, which led him to advise them that without ‘Pandit company, they would go nowhere’. His mission was to pick up the alternate Muslim leadership, when Abdullah refused to budge. With Nehru’s closeness the image of Abdullah was colossal with unmatched popularity among his people.
Abdullah publicly scorned Quaid-i-Azam and forced him to leave valley, unceremoniously, which he never forgot. The Maharaja on his side worked to harm Abdullah. He was imprisoned, just before independence on the charges of mutiny.
Abdullah’s survival was doubtful without Nehru’s resolute support. Nehru sent three lawyers from Delhi to fight his case and made it a point that grand Abdullah assumes power, just after the instrument of accession was signed with the Maharaja, who had just survived from the surprise ‘tribal raid from Pakistan.
Abdullah was sworn on October 31, 1947. Nehru and Rafi Ahmad Kidwai shared the dais with Abdullah to affirm the bond. Nehru said ‘as in the past so in the future we shall stand together and face every enemy’. Abdullah responded with definite categorical statement. Later on, in 1950, Delhi Declaration was heralded by Abdullah as ‘the union of hearts and not the paper agreement, which no power on Earth can loosen’.
We rejoiced together
Alas! The Cold war had divided the world in two blocks. Fearing USSR expansion, US and the allies patronised Pakistan to keep Kashmir on boil in UNSC.Pakistan became strategic depth and Kashmir its strategic asset. Quaid-i-Azam had passed away and Liaquat Ali Khan, the Prime Minister of Pakistan, was assassinated. It was easy for western powers to entice grand Abdullah on the lax of religious observance.
The Kashmir dispute suited world powers and the military establishment of Pakistan. There was no political leadership in Pakistan; Adlai Stevenson, the shadow foreign minister of US of Democratic Party, cultivated Abdullah to show back to Nehru. He succumbed to this western ploy. He lost power and Kashmir entered into a stage of mystification.
It was a colossal tragedy for the regenerative politics of Kashmir. Abdullah’s imprisonment attained mythical stature. His narrative was vaguely generatedreligious discourse. Jamat i Islami was first time allowed to strike its roots. With tacit support of Congress, centre presumed it as a ploy to marginalise Abdullah.Naya Kashmir document lost its credence.
The new religious discourse would come from mosques and go into academic institutions. Nativity was further demeaned. The Cold War polemics was at its peak.
US and western allies needed political Islam to fight Soviet Union. The discourse was run to create binaries of two world views of Batta and Musalman. Battas were despised. Their institutional merit had no value with new numerical policy in admissions and appointments. Battas were marginalized beyond proportionality.
In this thick religious mystification, the funding from Arab world and Iran, for promoting their brand of Islam, easily found legitimacy in the affluent class, which had benefited from apple, forest, tourism and state sponsored agencies of development.
Pakistani propaganda, through Azad Kashmir Radio, would further rupture the native core culture. When the process of demystification started after the birth of Bangladesh, a mind set of one generation was already radicalised on political Islam. Regained Abdullah, back to power in 1975, could not overcome the loss of decades. His regaining power only proved counterproductive with distant illusions.
The changed international scenario, with the disintegration of Soviet Union, Pakistan ceased the moment to avenge their defeat and Quaid’s embarrassment. They, with plan, intruded with participatory jihad in the valley in 1990s. The agenda was to fracture the native core and erase its history completely and annex Kashmir, if possible.
Grand Abdullah had passed away to save the ruin and change the tide. There was no wall or will to stop children to go across the border for armed training. It happened so fast; the trained militancy with non-native commanders changed Kashmir ineradicably.
Battas became the first target and then Musalmans, who silently were not happy with it. It produced an unabated death dance, exodus, and annihilation of cultural capital and huge disillusionment. The tragedy is that gun has come to stay in Kashmir, like a routine business.
Since 1990, much water has flown in Jhelum; there are still conundrums that needed native statesmanship, but nothing in sight yet. Do we realise that more Muslims live in India than in Pakistan? It is imprudent to oppose it. In case we treat Kashmir as a distinct ethnic identity; even then, its main stakeholder, Battas are driven out.
The fractured voice has no purchase in international political principles. What is needed is a reconciliation between the two broken communities then negotiations for peace between India and Pakistan.
Peace and distinct glory to be back in Kashmir necessitate empowerment of its nativity that has the capacity to enrich the finest traditions of Indian pluralism, where freedom, dignity and security remain assured and blended.
Ashok Kaul is an Emeritus professor at Banaras Hindu University
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are the personal opinions of the author.
The facts, analysis, assumptions and perspective appearing in the article do not reflect the views of GK.