Mountbatten took Patel’s offer to Lahore the day Indian troops landed in Srinagar. Liaquat Ali, ‘who understood neither history nor geography’ said no, Soz tells Shekhar Gupta.
Barely 48 hours after the BJP pulled out of the alliance with the PDP in Kashmir, talks on revoking Article 370 have gained steam. BJP MP, Sabha Subramanian Swamy in a tweet claimed to have written to the PMO on “why Article 370 can be deleted without Parliament concurrence."
The last time this matter flared up was when Delhi Chief Minister Rekha Gupta, in a very similar directive in April, called for the relocation of stray dogs in the capital.
Finance ministry says the proposed revamp will focus on structural reforms, rate rationalisation & ease of living, & will be deliberated upon in the coming weeks.
The project is meant to be a ‘protective shield that will keep expanding’, the PM said. It is on the lines of the ‘Golden Dome’ announced by Trump, it is learnt.
Now that both IAF and PAF have made formal claims of having shot down the other’s aircraft in the 87-hour war in May, we can ask a larger question: do such numbers really matter?
Clearly an article written with the elections of 2019 in view. The fallacies tried to be propagated will be obvious to anybody who has any political sense.
Apart from manipulating to become the first PM at Sardar’s cost, it is well known how Nehru prevented officials from attending Patel’s funeral and how his secretary paid for those who were eager to attend.
Regarding art 370 also, when Nehru first suggested it Ambedkar had told ‘over my dead body’. Then Nehru found Ayyangar to do it when he went abroad and Patel was in a situation where he did not want anybody to say that the DyPM had betrayed the PM when he was away.
Almost all of Nehru’s actions were treachery of the highest order. Jai Chand, Mir Jafar etc are babies compared to the giant Nehru.
BJP always says Nehru tried to belittle Patel to gain in stature without conceding that it was Nehru who spared Patel crucification when Gandhi was assassinated and entire congress asked for Patel resignation in one voice.At that juncture Nehru could easily have nailed Patel but Nehru was too big a person to stoop so low and exhorted Patel not to resign.But this rss and BJP with crooked mind will never accept.
But for Nehru 90% Muslim state Kashmir would never have agreed to accession to India.But an illetrate p.m out to villify Nehru with realising his contribution in building this nation and its institutions.U can’t help it he has power and spineless media.
Great article. However, the author suggests that Nehru government went to UN to avoid war, which is inaccurate. India went to UN in December 1947 but war with Pakistan continued for a whole year. Then Major General Timmayya’s Zebra Brigade did not arrive until May 1948 and remarkable Drass Valley battles were yet to come. War continued for 8 months even after UNSC Resolution 47 was passed in April 1948.
It was a collective decision of the team…..They were not children not to understand the pros & cons at that point of time. Once the resolution was finally accepted we should not draw lines between them. All were matured politicians accepted & led by the then PM. Whether good or bad. We should behave responsibly not to use them for any vested interests now. Moreover, without any pun intended, it seems BJP is looking for breathers and soft skills from the Congress camp having exhausted its own limited resources. The Nation wants performance from its representatives and not hide behind the legends. !! What had happened should not be debated, rather what can be done, if required, needs introspection & engagement. We can never authoritatively assert anything now in the passing.
What ever happened in past was past. If you support 370 in Kashmir you do not want one India. I will oppose your article with one sentence. STAND WITH US DO NOT STAND ON OUR WAY.
If majority people want 370 to be reintroduced let it be their election tion manifesto and if they ome elected that way, they can issue fresh notification why to Kashmir alone why not to all states.
Good article. Nehru also informed the Constituent Assembly (Legislative Assembly) as to how it would be impossible to clear Pakistani raiders from Jammu and Kashmir without cutting off the supply lines of the raiders. He added that to cut off the supply line would mean attacking Pakistan which was the source of supply lines. He maintained that attacking Pakistan would have blown out a full fledged war which would have attracted adverse attention to India and it would have been dubbed as an aggressor. To avoid that situation Nehru decided to go to the UN.
You fall into same trap as the author. Execution of War and Going to UN were two different and parallel strategies. To say that Nehru went to UN instead of war is false. In fact when Nehru visited the garrison at Poonch in early 1948 (after going to UN), officers expressed their intent to retreat since they came under attack. Nehru reminded them of their responsibility to the citizens of Poonch who stayed home laying trust in Indian Army and exhorted them to stay and fight. After 14 months Nehru indeed had to stop the war which was a stalemate.
Totally baseless article , no proof attached , on the other hand there is proof available that Sardar Patel and Ambedkar were against 370, Nehru choose the other way, he tried his best to get support of congress working committee . But failed. In the last paragraph a word NOT is deleted deliberately.
1. Nehru first asked Ambedkar IN 1949, who was chairing the constituent assembly to include article 370, which he vehemently refused & legt the meeting.
2. Nehru then turned to Patel b4 going to London to talk to Ambedkar & get Stricke 370 included
3. Unser extreme restraint Ambedkar included article 370 with a condition as “provisional & transient”.
So where is the irony when BJP today wants to revoke article 370?
Patel was hardly involved in the actual negotiations as the article point out. It was clearly Nehru’s apointees thatcdid that with Sheikh Abdullah giving the last touches.
Wonder how that makes Patel the archutect? Bonkers!
Nehru’s appointees? Patel was also a Nehru’s appointee!
Based on the facts put forth by the author himself, the argument seems very flimsy and doesn’t even have the facts to support him. All just for a clickbait article.
The article is well written, but does not justify its intention at all: asserting that Patel was the architect of Article 370. The author appears to believe that since a letter from Nehru to Abdullah regarding Article 370 was drafted when Nehru was abroad, the whole action was conceived, initiated and executed by Patel. In fact, this essay only emphasizes the fact that Patel respected and succumbed to the insistence of Nehru in respect of Kashmir despite having clear different opinion. That is the relevant point. Even Mahatma Gandhi was not happy about what Nehru did with Kashmir. Mahatma was opposed to Partition itself! He insisted that the Kashmir issue should be settled once and for all making whatever portion available to India as integral part of the nation so that no dispute arise in future. Patel proposed practical solutions to implement what Gandhiji desired. However, it was Nehru’s insistence probably because of his personal relations with Raja Hari Singh and Sheikh Abdullah, that resulted in granting Kashmir special status, keeping the border line unclear and thereby giving permanence to Kashmir problem. After all, subsequent history unequivocally proves that Congress and Nehru family benefited from keeping the coals alive in Kashmir – exploiting sentiments of Muslims in the country and converting the fear psychosis as vote bank. Therefore, doubting intentions of Patel, who gave great regard to his Prime Minister, is absolutely rubbish.
Clearly an article written with the elections of 2019 in view. The fallacies tried to be propagated will be obvious to anybody who has any political sense.
Apart from manipulating to become the first PM at Sardar’s cost, it is well known how Nehru prevented officials from attending Patel’s funeral and how his secretary paid for those who were eager to attend.
Regarding art 370 also, when Nehru first suggested it Ambedkar had told ‘over my dead body’. Then Nehru found Ayyangar to do it when he went abroad and Patel was in a situation where he did not want anybody to say that the DyPM had betrayed the PM when he was away.
Almost all of Nehru’s actions were treachery of the highest order. Jai Chand, Mir Jafar etc are babies compared to the giant Nehru.
BJP always says Nehru tried to belittle Patel to gain in stature without conceding that it was Nehru who spared Patel crucification when Gandhi was assassinated and entire congress asked for Patel resignation in one voice.At that juncture Nehru could easily have nailed Patel but Nehru was too big a person to stoop so low and exhorted Patel not to resign.But this rss and BJP with crooked mind will never accept.
But for Nehru 90% Muslim state Kashmir would never have agreed to accession to India.But an illetrate p.m out to villify Nehru with realising his contribution in building this nation and its institutions.U can’t help it he has power and spineless media.
Great article. However, the author suggests that Nehru government went to UN to avoid war, which is inaccurate. India went to UN in December 1947 but war with Pakistan continued for a whole year. Then Major General Timmayya’s Zebra Brigade did not arrive until May 1948 and remarkable Drass Valley battles were yet to come. War continued for 8 months even after UNSC Resolution 47 was passed in April 1948.
It was a collective decision of the team…..They were not children not to understand the pros & cons at that point of time. Once the resolution was finally accepted we should not draw lines between them. All were matured politicians accepted & led by the then PM. Whether good or bad. We should behave responsibly not to use them for any vested interests now. Moreover, without any pun intended, it seems BJP is looking for breathers and soft skills from the Congress camp having exhausted its own limited resources. The Nation wants performance from its representatives and not hide behind the legends. !! What had happened should not be debated, rather what can be done, if required, needs introspection & engagement. We can never authoritatively assert anything now in the passing.
What ever happened in past was past. If you support 370 in Kashmir you do not want one India. I will oppose your article with one sentence. STAND WITH US DO NOT STAND ON OUR WAY.
If majority people want 370 to be reintroduced let it be their election tion manifesto and if they ome elected that way, they can issue fresh notification why to Kashmir alone why not to all states.
Good article. Nehru also informed the Constituent Assembly (Legislative Assembly) as to how it would be impossible to clear Pakistani raiders from Jammu and Kashmir without cutting off the supply lines of the raiders. He added that to cut off the supply line would mean attacking Pakistan which was the source of supply lines. He maintained that attacking Pakistan would have blown out a full fledged war which would have attracted adverse attention to India and it would have been dubbed as an aggressor. To avoid that situation Nehru decided to go to the UN.
You fall into same trap as the author. Execution of War and Going to UN were two different and parallel strategies. To say that Nehru went to UN instead of war is false. In fact when Nehru visited the garrison at Poonch in early 1948 (after going to UN), officers expressed their intent to retreat since they came under attack. Nehru reminded them of their responsibility to the citizens of Poonch who stayed home laying trust in Indian Army and exhorted them to stay and fight. After 14 months Nehru indeed had to stop the war which was a stalemate.
Totally baseless article , no proof attached , on the other hand there is proof available that Sardar Patel and Ambedkar were against 370, Nehru choose the other way, he tried his best to get support of congress working committee . But failed. In the last paragraph a word NOT is deleted deliberately.
Show me your proof about it please
What u have failed to mention is:
1. Nehru first asked Ambedkar IN 1949, who was chairing the constituent assembly to include article 370, which he vehemently refused & legt the meeting.
2. Nehru then turned to Patel b4 going to London to talk to Ambedkar & get Stricke 370 included
3. Unser extreme restraint Ambedkar included article 370 with a condition as “provisional & transient”.
So where is the irony when BJP today wants to revoke article 370?
Patel was hardly involved in the actual negotiations as the article point out. It was clearly Nehru’s apointees thatcdid that with Sheikh Abdullah giving the last touches.
Wonder how that makes Patel the archutect? Bonkers!
Nehru’s appointees? Patel was also a Nehru’s appointee!
Based on the facts put forth by the author himself, the argument seems very flimsy and doesn’t even have the facts to support him. All just for a clickbait article.
The article is well written, but does not justify its intention at all: asserting that Patel was the architect of Article 370. The author appears to believe that since a letter from Nehru to Abdullah regarding Article 370 was drafted when Nehru was abroad, the whole action was conceived, initiated and executed by Patel. In fact, this essay only emphasizes the fact that Patel respected and succumbed to the insistence of Nehru in respect of Kashmir despite having clear different opinion. That is the relevant point. Even Mahatma Gandhi was not happy about what Nehru did with Kashmir. Mahatma was opposed to Partition itself! He insisted that the Kashmir issue should be settled once and for all making whatever portion available to India as integral part of the nation so that no dispute arise in future. Patel proposed practical solutions to implement what Gandhiji desired. However, it was Nehru’s insistence probably because of his personal relations with Raja Hari Singh and Sheikh Abdullah, that resulted in granting Kashmir special status, keeping the border line unclear and thereby giving permanence to Kashmir problem. After all, subsequent history unequivocally proves that Congress and Nehru family benefited from keeping the coals alive in Kashmir – exploiting sentiments of Muslims in the country and converting the fear psychosis as vote bank. Therefore, doubting intentions of Patel, who gave great regard to his Prime Minister, is absolutely rubbish.