NAYA (New) KASHMIR TO PANUN (Own) Kashmir: Reading on Past to Understand Present.

February 20, 20

The following article was first published in Kashmir Narrator (Volume 4 No.5 August 20th 2018) is a book review of Kashmir: Exposing the Myth Behind the Narrative by Khalid Bashir Ahmad. Publisher: Sage Publications, India Private Ltd 2017

The Kashmiri peoples’ political struggle, a demand for responsive and accountable government from an autocratic dynastic rule, began in the 1930’s. In 1947, after the British Empire on the Indian sub-continent was Partitioned into two countries of India and Pakistan, the Kashmiri’s political struggle became confused as a territorial dispute between India and Pakistan, who invaded and now occupy Kashmir.(1) In the 1990’s  the Kashmiri struggle turned into a militant insurgency. A consequence of the militancy was population migration. An estimated 350,000 Kashmiris migrated out from Kashmir.  Majority migrants where Kashmiri Hindus, known as Pandits. Pandits comprise about 4-percent of Kashmir’s population. The migration event is now used as a lightening rod to link the Kashmiri struggle with the world wide Islamist terrorism. In this new narrative the Kashmiri Pandits are portrayed as aboriginal inhabitants of Kashmir, persecuted since the advent of Islam in Kashmir in 14th-15th century. Pandits demand a separate homeland for Kashmiri Pandits – Panun Kashmir- to be carved out of the Kashmir Valley.    

A new book titled KASHMIR: Exposing the Myth Behind the Narrative, as the title asserts, is a counter to the Panun Kashmir narrative.(2) The book is written by a Kashmiri retired civil service official, Khalid Bashir Ahmad. The 456 page book has nine chapters. Each chapter has extensive notes and references. Ahmad’s central argument is that the Pandit community has historically held power and clout and wielded enormous influence irrespective of who ruled Kashmir. Ahmad emphasizes that religious tolerance among the majority community has existed for centuries in Kashmir. And that for the past four hundred years Muslims majority has borne and continues to bear the brunt of persecution. Ahmad concludes that the mistrust that now exists between Pandits and Muslims in Kashmir is compounded by emphasizing selective events and that to bridge the gap between the two it requires “understanding and recognizing each others pain and suffering . . . “(Page 354). Following are certain key points:    

Kashmiri Pandits as aboriginal

 Ahmad challenges the notion of Kashmiri Pandits being aboriginal i.e. the only original residents of Kashmir. Kashmir – land mass in size equal to the USA State of Massachusetts –  is a river valley  enclosed by Himalaya mountains and its inhabitants do have a distant cultural identity. However, Ahmad points, Kashmir is a part of a geographically contagious with other lands. And that Kashmir was at the cross roads of the ancient silk-route of Central and South Asia and has thus absorbed influences from its surroundings. In Kashmir three major religions have held sway – Buddhism, Hinduism and Islam. Buddhism was introduced in Kashmir as early as the 3rd Century BC.  Ahmad points that Kashmiri Pandits practiced religion is Shaivism. Shaivism, according to Ahmad was introduced to Kashmir in the third century AD by a white Hun named Mihirakula who took the throne of Kashmir. Mihirkaula patronized shaivism and brought Brahmans from Gandhara to settle in Kashmir. Mihirakula rule, starting in 530 AD, began the end of Buddhism that had remained dominant for over 800 years in Kashmir. 

Ahmad questions the validity of Pandits claim of being the only original inhabitants of Kashmir by pointing that there are scores of common surnames among Pandits and Muslims in Kashmir. If the majority population converts to a religion, Ahmad asks, how can the minority, who did not convert, claim that the majority are outsiders?

Ahmad points that the origin of Kashmir Hindu epithet change – from Brahmin to Pandit – happened during the Mughal rule. Kashmir was annexed to the neighboring Mughal empire in 1586. Kashmiri Brahmins where quick to learn the court language of Mughals. That enabled them to attain positions in the Moghal governance not only in Kashmir but at the Moghal Court in India. The Mughal trusted Kashmiri Brahmins in comparison to the Kashmiri Muslim majority that resisted the Mughal occupation of Kashmir. The 12th Mughal Emperor Mohammad Shah (Ruled 1719 to 1748) issued royal decree to title Hindu Brahmin of Kashmir as Pandit (Pandit means: Wise and Learned).

Kashmiri Pandits a persecuted minority

The 1990 exodus of Kashmir Pandits from Kashmir is used to build a foundation to the victimhood narrative, according to Ahmad. Terms like ethnic cleansing, genocide and holocaust are used to demonize the Muslim community and win support of the Hindutva forces in India.  Ahmad provides details of the enormous influence exercised by Brahmins in governance of Kashmir, in particular during Kashmir’s colonial period, beginning with the Mughal conquest of Kashmir. Mughal rule in Kashmir was replaced by Afghan rule, Pandits continued their dominance during the Afghan rule. Afghan where defeated by the neighboring Sikh empire of Punjab. Pandit leadership facilitated the Sikh conquest of Kashmir and thus continued to maintain their influence.  Sikh Empire was vanquished by the British East India Company.  Ghulb Singh, a Dogra courtier of the Sikh Court, collaborated with the British and as a reward the British sold Kashmir to Singh.(3) The Dogra dynastic rule was a century (1846 to 1947) oppressive rule.  During the Dogra rule through the institution of, kaar-i-sarkar (unpaid labour requisitioned for State purposes) and Chakdari (land yield taxation) majority population was reduced to beggary. The face of Dogra oppression, i. e., officials responsible for governance, came from the Pandit community.

Dogra rule was in its 84th year, 1932, when at the urging of the British Government Kashmir’s ruler, Maharaja Hari Singh, appointed an inquiry commission to look into the Muslim grievances. The Glancy Commission report, submitted on March 22, 1932 confirmed that grievances of Muslims were indisputable.(4)

Kashmiri Pandits as Collaborators.

Since 1931 when government soldiers killed unarmed civilians in Srinagar, July 13 is considered as a landmark in the freedom struggle of Kashmir. It is commemorated as the Martyers’ Day. Kashmiri Pandits declared 13th July 1931 as the Back Day and have ever since sided with the government and always been opposite to the majority sentiment.

Ahmad points that the majority community could not enlist support of Pandits whether it was against the Muslim occupying forces such as Mughals and the Afghans or non-Muslim tyrannies such as the Sikhs and the Dogras.

Even Sheikh Abdulla, the patron of secular politics, who according to Ahmad is accused of having handed over Kashmir to India on a platter, in his book Atishi Chinar described Kashmiri Pandits as the Fifth Columnists and Instruments of Tyranny.

Kashmiri Pandits Holocaust, Ethnic Cleansing

   January 19, is observed as “Kashmiri Hindu Holocaust Day”. That day according to the Pandit Narrative 750,000 Pandits where forced out of Kashmir; 3,000 to 4,000 where murdered in an orgy of “mass-murder, rape, arson and loot of Hindu men, women and children in Kashmir.(5) Ahmad citing census and other studies question the Panun Kashmir assertions and provides reference including government reports to suggest that during militancy about 124,453 migrated out of Kashmir.(6). Citing Kashmir government reports, Ahmad notes that during the militancy 13,226 civilians were killed by militants. This included 219 Kashmiri Hindus and 13,007 Muslims. Ahmad points that as per these official figures the number of Kashmiri Pandits killed by violence is 0.5 percent compared to the casualties 99.5 percent suffered by Muslims. (Page 255) Ahmad suggests that it is apparent that the killings of civilians Kashmiri Hindus and Kashmiri Muslims where on allegations of being informers of the government and the killings were political rather than communal in nature (page 229).

Ahmad’s Argument

In the epilogue of his book Ahmad concludes that the present divisive discourse advanced among the Pandits is a reaction rooted to the socio-economic advancement of the Muslims. He points that after the end of Dogra rule political influence and economic power exercised by the Pandits was weakened as Muslims gained foothold in administration and business. As result of the Muslim advancement he argues “right wing leadership of the Kashmiri Pandits is seen increasingly allowing itself to be used by the Hindutva forces of India.” And that associating the Kashmiri political struggle with the Islamic Terrorism movement is to gain acceptance of Western nations support for Indian occupation of Kashmir.

Ahmad points that in Kashmir throughout its history, the suffering of majority community has been far greater for that of the minority. And that the moral fiber and spirit of accommodation of the majority community, has enabled the minuscule minority to survive and even thrive. If 90% of the population of Kashmir was against the minority why was no harm done to the migrating Pandits and why Ahmad asks, why even after decades of their absence not a single place or Hindu symbol in Kashmir has been changed into Islamic lexicon.(7)

  Ahmad asks that the death of hundreds of Kashmiri Pandits must be viewed in the context of thousands of Kashmiri Muslims killed during the militancy. And that the suffering of Pandit refugees in Jammu need to accounted along with the continued torment to Kashmiris in Kashmir from the continued crackdowns, killings and custodial disappearances. 

LEARNING FROM HISTORY.

As Ahmad points out, the present Pandit leadership links the militancy in Kashmir with the worldwide rise of militant Islam. The militancy is projected as a new phase of the historic animosity of the majority community persecuting the minority. Ahmad provides convincing argument to the counter the Pandit narrative. He suggests that in Kashmir the Pandits have been the lightning rod for persecution of the majority Muslim community. 

These arguments, implying that the divide in Kashmir between Pandits and Muslims communities is religion-based animosity, are a misnomer.

Yes, Pandits sided with the oppressive regimes and did not affiliate with political aspirations of the majority. But the reason behind the Pandits siding with the oppressive regimes is not religious antagonism. It is a rivalry to safeguard the economic interests of a clan within the feudal community. It is a manifestation of the feudal structure of the Kashmiri society.    

In Kashmir, as chronicled by ancient writings infighting and disunity, has been the enduring characteristic of the Kashmir ruling class. Pandit Ram Chand Kak, who served as Prime Minister of the last Dogra ruler of Kashmir, summarizes the ancient history of Kashmir as thus:” (Ancient Monuments of Kashmir): “For centuries the court of Kashmir was the Pandora-box of all the evils that afflict humanity, . . . Dissolute ministers of state, pettifogging functionaries as generals of armies, outcastes as reigning queens and kings, . . .”  

Sultan Sikandar accused of wanton destruction of temples and persecution of Hindu subjects – falsely according to Ahmad – was not alone to use religion to legitimize his hegemony. The worst iconoclasts where the Hindu rulers – Ahmad chronicles six – who plundered temples. Their purpose was to assert power and transfer of wealth. Religion was used as a means to justify abuse by all sides. Indeed the lexicon of Hindu and Muslim animosity is a creation of the British colonial era. Historian Audrey Truschke suggests that the word ‘Hindu’ is Persion, not Sanskrit, and came into use during British colonialism(8)

Back when the Mughals ruled Kashmir, the Kashmiri Brahmin clan, to maintain their position of privilege, did not want to be associated with the Hindus of India. They sought and where granted a special epithet: Pandit. During the Dogra rule when the government had recruited Indians for administrative positions in Kashmir. The Pandits started an agitation known as the roti (bread) agitation. Roti agitation slogan was “Kashmir for Kashmiris.” At present in the Panun Kashmir narrative the Pandit epithet is not mentioned. Kashmiri Pandit/Brahmin is now projected as Hindu, part of the Indian Hindutva movement. 

 The point to note is that the clan mentality is Kashmir is not limited to Pandits alone. Sheikh Abdulla, the lion of Kashmir, sang Koran and demanded end to autocratic rule in his speeches from the mosque pulpits for two decades. But in his bid to gain power he opposed Muslim Pakistan and joined India. Abdulla laid the foundation of modern era colonial rule in Kashmir in 1947. Following him are half a dozen surrogates of India, all with Muslim surnames. To the point where now in Kashmir the historic power broker dynastic names of Dhar and Koul are now replaced by Abdulla and Mufti surnames. And let us also remember that four hundred years prior, it was the Sunni Clan – with blessing of Mukdum Sahib – who invited Mughal Akber to Kashmir and thus paved the way of five hundred years of colonial rule in Kashmir.

Naya Kashmir to Panun Kashmir  

As noted at the beginning of this writing the contemporary struggle for political rights against autocracy started in 1930. In 1846 when Ghulab Singh bought Kashmir from the British he declared all the land as his personal property. He instituted the Jagirdar Nizam (feudal land grant bestowed by the ruler); Kashmiri peasants became landless, serfs at the mercy of the Jagirdars.(9)   

By 1944 the 1930’s demand for political rights had evolved into an ambitious program for Kashmir’s future under a democratic regime. National Conferance Party, that was leading the struggle adopted a manifesto entitled ‘Naya Kashmir’ (New Kashmir). The Naya Kashmir Manifesto proposed popular sovereignty and an inclusive and responsive system of government. A key point of the Naya Kashmir program was land reform: land to the tiller. In 1950’s, certain key points of the Naya Kashmir became a reality, including land reforms. The jagirdari Nizam was abolished.(10) 

And now, 70 years later, there is the demand for Panun Kashmir. It is not “Kashmir for Kashmiris’. It is a separate homeland for Kashmiri Pandits, in Kashmir.

 Naya Kashmir was a utopia – long since aborted – for a secular democracy which would give every citizen irrespective of religious background equal rights and opportunity. Panun Kashmir seems like a throwback to feudalism – the Jagirdari Nizam – of 19th century. Panun Kashmir advocates want 70 % of the Kashmir Valley for 4% of its population.(11) Ahmad suggests that Panun Kashmir manifests a contempt of the Pandits toward the Kashmiri Muslims for their political rights. I submit the demand for Panun Kashmir is a demonstration of the continued feudal clan mindset – Kumbaparvari – in Kashmir.

Ahmad’s analysis of the KP narrative adds to our understanding of competing narratives of vested interests that shaped and continue to shape Kashmir’s political landscape. The book, 456 pages with 1,200-plus notes and references, is a lengthy read. It is worth reading to understand Kashmiris’ centuries-long political struggle. Get a copy and read it.

 For comment please contact rafiquekhan@me.com or Call 323 428 6567.

Rafique A Khan is a Los Angeles based urban planner. He serves as the Managing Director of Kashmir Foundation of America. See www.KashmirFoA.org.

[Footnote 1, Cabeiri DeBergh Robinson: Body of Victim, Body of Warrior; Refugee Families and the Making of Kashmiri Jihadists , Published University of California Press.  2013). Robinson notes the conflict in Kashmir is “. . . about the conflict and contestations for political recognition that were happening at the time of decolonization, when Kashmiri peoples’ struggle for political rights were with the monarch of Jammu and Kashmir, not with the British colonial power or with the post-colonial nation-stares of India and Pakistan.”  And she points that the conflict in Kashmir is “fundamentally not a territorial dispute between states. It is a struggle by the ruled to establish limits on the sovereign power of their rulers.” Page 33.

[Footnote 2, Kashmir: Exposing the Myth Behind the Narrative SAGE Publication India private Limited, New Delhi, 2017 classifies the book as academic. SAGE publishing house (www.sagepub.in) was founded in 1965 to “support the dissemination of usable knowledge by publishing innovative and high quality research and teaching content.”

[Footnote 3, By this sale deed known as the Treaty of Amritsar Ahmad writes “An entire country along with its . . . six hundred thousands inhabitants, . . . at twenty-five shilling a head,. . .(is) the most extensive transaction of the slave trade of modern times… .  ]

[Footnote 4, As per the inquiry commission report, named after the British official Glancy, the government in certain major departments had 3,396 employees: Non-Muslims 2,789, Muslims 607.  The Commission noted that in spite of imperfections education facilities large number of qualified Muslims where available.  In menial jobs, that required no educational qualifications non-muslim where 1,284 workers and 414 where Muslims.  1932 the Pandit population was 4% of the State population.”]

[Footnote 5, See Press Release dated January 18, 2018 M.K.Dhar, Secretary Press and Publicity PANUN KASHMR Email Pran Raina  pranraina@gmail.com (Kashmir-global-network)].

[Footnote 6, Pandits population in 1981 was 3.96 % of the total population of 3,134,9040 of Kashmir. Ahmad estimates that based on decades growth of the community from 1971 to 1981 as 6.75 percent the Pandit population in 1991 would be 132,453.  About 8,000 Pandits did not migrate. Thus Pandits who migrated is during the militancy could not exceed about 124,453, according to Ahmad. .) India Magazine reported 90,000 migrants. Also total number of 38,119 families comprising 142,042 Kashmiri migrants were registered with the Revenue and Relief Ministry. A survey in 2008 and 2009 by Kashmir Pandit Sangharsh Samiti, reported 399 Kashmiri Pandits were killed by insurgents from 1990 to 2011. Kashmiri Pandit – Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmiri_Pandit

[Footnote 7,  Ahmad notes that neutral observers who visited 448 temples on 1700 kanal land found no instance of desecration, and that visit “to temple after temple proved that it was not the temples but the BJP propaganda that needed to be demolished.” (Page 261).]

[Footnote 8: Audrey Truschke  – Aurangzeb The Man and the Myth, Penguin Randum House India, 2017  – , writes that the word ‘Hindu’ is Persion, not Sanskrit, and only became commonly used self-referentially during British colonialism.(page 17.) She notes about the Hindu Muslim Divide: “Such views have roots in colonial era scholarship, where positing timeless Hindu-Muslim animosity embodied the British strategy of divide and conquer. “ (page 100) Elaborating she continues “Modern suggestions that Rajputs and Marathas who resisted Mughal rule thought of themselves as ‘Hindus’ defying ‘Muslims’ tyranny are just that: modern. Neither Mughal nor Maratha writers shied away from religiously tinged rhetoric in narrating this clash, especially in later accounts. But, on the ground, a thirst for political power drove both the opposition to Aurangzeb’s rule and the Mughal response.”(page 82). 

Footnote 9, During the Dogra rule “. . .  almost all of Jammu and Kashmir arable area of 2.2 million acres had been owned by 396 big landlords and 2,347 intermediate land lord. “ page 27.Sumantra Bose Kashmir Roots of Conflict, Paths to Peace. Harvard University Press, 2003.

[Footnote 10.  As a result of the Land To Tiller program, between 1950 and 1952, 700,000 landless peasants, become land owners of over a million acres.

Naya Kashmir was a short lived utopia. As noted by Bose the Naya Kashmir manifesto was “based on a Jacobin concept of popular sovereignty, augmented by a generous dollop of Bolshevism.” Bose writes that “The deeply authoritarian streak in the NC’s (National Conferance Party) emancipation movement rapidly became evident after 1947 and made its own contribution to the subversion and retardation of democratic development in Kashmir.“ (page 27). The founder of National Conference party, Sheikh Abdulla, who spent a life time advocating democracy, ended up establishing his dynastic rule. Neutral observers agree that the hall mark of government in Kashmir is nepotism and corruption. 

[Footnote 11: Kashmir Valley’s total area of about 15,500 sq km. The Panun Kashmir proposed land area is about 10,600 sq km of the Kashmir valley’s total area of about 15,500 km.  This adds up to 68.38 percent of the Valley land area. It includes the fertile part of Kashmir Valley, including its major towns, waterways and its lakes and tourist destinations, in all two thirds of the Valley.]