31121947 The Text of Letter dated December 31, 1947 from the Prime Minister of Pakistan to the Prime Minister of India.

31121947 The Text of Letter dated December 31, 1947 from the Prime Minister of Pakistan to the Prime Minister of India.

"Please refer to your demi-Official dated the 22nd December in which you have brought formal charges against the Pakistan Government for aiding and abetting the so-called 'invaders' of Kashmir in their fight against the forces of the Maharaja and of the Indian Dominion.

2. Despite the ominous hint contained in paragraph three, I trust I am right in assuming that your letter is not an "ultimatum" but a fore-runner of a formal reference of the matter to the U.N.O. If so, nothing could be more welcome, for, you will recollect, this is exactly what the Pakistan Government has been suggesting throughout as the most effective method of ironing out our mutual differences. I am, therefore, sincerely glad to find that you propose at last to adopt this particular line of approach to our problems.

3. I must, however, confess my disappointment that your proposal apparently restricts the reference to the single issue of Kashmir. The episode of Kashmir considered by itself would look like a sentence torn out of its context. It is but an act in the unparalleled tragedy which is being enacted before our eyes-ever since the announcement of the scheme of partition. A reference to the U.N.O. therefore, in my opinion, must cover much larger ground and embrace all the fundamentals of the differences between the two Dominions. As I see it, it is neither Kashmir alone nor Janagadh and Manavadar, nor even the terrible tragedy of wholesale massacres of Muslim men, women and children in extensive areas of the Indian Dominion, but a totality of these horrors and iniquities, indicating but one consistent sinister pattern, which should rightly form the subject matter of international investigation. If the root causes of the evil, which is vitiating our relations, are not determined and removed, it is much to be feared that fresh incidents will* continue to threaten the peace not only between the two Dominions, but in a much wider field.

4. The case of Kashmir is simple and our attitude has been explained frankly and repeatedly both in our communications to you and our official statements to the Press. The Pakistan

Government has not accepted and cannot accept the so-called 'accession* of the Jammu and Kashmir State to India. We have said it before and repeat that the 'accession' was fraudulent inasmuch as it was achieved by deliberately creating conditions with the object of finding an excuse to stage the 'accession'. It was based on violence because it furthered the plan of the Kashmir Government to liquidate the Muslim population of the State. The accession was against the well-known will of an overwhelming majority of the population and could not be justified on any grounds whether moral or constitutional; geographical or economic; cultural or religious.

5. The sole responsibility for the disturbances which occurred in the State must squarely lie on the Maharaja and his Government who, Despite the advice tendered by the Pakistan Government, persisted in their policy of repression of Muslims. Repression was followed by resistance particularly in the area of Poonch which is inhabited by a large number of ex-soldiers. The resistance in its turn was met with more repression till the Dogra savagery, supported by the brutality of Sikh and Rashtriya Sevak Sangh bands, created a reign of terror in the State. This State of affairs naturally aroused strong feelings of sympathy throughout Pakistan, particularly among the Muslims living in the contiguous areas who had numerous ties of relationship with the persecuted people of the State. Some of these people went across to assist their kinsmen in their struggle for freedom and indeed for existence itself. The stage was thus set for the pre-planned intervention by the forces of the Indian Dominion to quell this spontaneous popular rising against the culmination of the age-long tyranny of the Dogra rule. The repeated warnings of the Pakistan Government went unheeded. The hasty and ill-advised action completely changed the picture and the Frontier tribesmen, a Ferociously freedom-loving people, naturally took up the challenge in support of their Kashmir co-religionists fighting for their survival and liberation. If the Government of India had extended to the Pakistan Government the courtesy of consulting it before embarking on its enterprise and suddenly landing troops in Kashmir, or even notifying Pakistan of its proposed action thus providing an opportunity for discussion and consultation, it might have been possible to avert the tragedy of Kashmir. The action of the Government of India served to swell the torrent of popular resentment until it became impossible for the Pakistan Government to stem it without embarking on large-scale military operations.

6. As regards the charges of aid and assistance to the 'invaders' by the Pakistan Government, we emphatically repudiate them. On the contrary, and solely with the object of maintaining friendly relations between the two Dominions, the Pakistan Government has continued to do all in their power to discourage the tribal movement by all means short of war. This caused bitter resentment throughout the country but, despite a very serious risk of large-scale internal disturbances, the Pakistan Government has not deviated from the policy.

In view of this background it would not be surprising if some nationals of Pakistan were taking part in the struggle for the liberation of Kashmir along with the forces of the Azad Kashmir Government. You must have already heard of an international Brigade composed of representatives of many nations in the world who are likewise fighting on the side of the Azad Kashmir Government. In regard to the modern military equipment that you allege to be in the possession of the Azad Kashmir forces, our information is that these forces are poorly equipped and such few modern weapons as they might possess, have either been captured from the Dogra and Indian troops or have been in the possession of the ex-soldiers of poonch since the days of the British. As you know, there are large numbers of Punches in the Pakistan Army and if some of them, while on leave in their homes, rendered assistance to their kith and kin in defence of their hearths and homes, it is scarcely to be wondered at.

7. On the contrary, it is the Indian Government which must answer the charge of conspiracy with the Maharaja of Kashmir in repudiation of the very principles on which it had only one month before opposed Junagadh's accession to Pakistan. The plea that the accession is only temporary pending restoration of peaceful conditions is too flimsy to stand examination, particularly in the light of recent negotiations in the course of which a perfectly fair and workable plan of withdrawal of opposing forces followed by a referendum under

the impartial aegis suggested by us was turned down by your Government. But all this fits in with the general 'pattern' of the Indian Government's political attitude towards Pakistan ever since it became evident that partition was the only possible solution to our constitutional problems.

8. The story begins as early as the middle of 1946 following the demonstration of Muslims throughout the country after the last provincial elections. It became clear that Pakistan was the unalterable goal of the Muslims. The inevitability of the parti­tion of the country, which now became evident to all, gave rise to a wave of deep resentment among the Hindu and Sikh population of the sub-continent. As a direct result of this severe Communal noting occurred in several towns and Provinces of India such as Calcutta, Noakhali, Bihar, Bombay,Garhmukteshwar, Rawalpindi, Lahore and Amritsar. Such communal strife had not been unknown previously, but what was astonishing was the unprecedented scale of killings that took place in Bihar and Garhmukteshwar proving beyond doubt the existence of a well-settled plan of extermination of the Muslims. It was during these disturbances that the Rashtriya Sevak Sangh came to be known as the author of some of the most brutal massacres. The orgy of blood, however, died down in due course, but, as later events proved, only temporarily.

9. The political activity which took place in the early part of 1947 produced a lull, but soon after the partition plan was announced on the 3rd June 1947, clear indications began to be

received that the country was going to be plunged into a bloodbath by the fanatical Sikhs and the militant Hindu groups headed by the Rashtriya Sewak Sangh who had made no secret of their opposition to the partition scheme, in spite of its being accepted by the representatives of all the three major communities.

10. The process of partition itself was marked by all manner of obstructions aimed at depriving Pakistan of its rightful share of financial and other assets. Even in cases in which agreement was reached, the implementation was delayed or sabotaged.

11. At this stage the main chain of events which eventually brought untold suffering to millions of people of East Punjab, Rajputana and the United Provinces was set in motion with

carefully prepared attack on a special train carrying Pakistan Government employees   and their families from Delhi to Karachi on the 9th August 1947. As the plan unfolded itself, it

became clear that the Sikhs, encouraged and actively assisted by the Hindus, had determined to liquidate by violent and bloody means the entire Muslim population of East Punjab. The object of the plan was to kill or drive out Mussalmans in order to settle the Sikh population which was being pulled out of West Punjab under a planned scheme. The modus operandi to disarm the Muslim population and then to leave it at the mercy of armed bands who were actively assisted by the Array and the police. There is abundant evidence that this plan had the full support and active assistance not only of the officers of the Provincial Government, but also of the Sikh States, such as Patiala, Kapurthala, and Faridkot. Alwar and fihararpur had already set the example in eliminating their entire Muslim population, but they were soon outdone. Kapurthala, which, like Kashmir, was a Muslim-majoriiy State, has to-day not a single Muslim left. Similarly large tracts of Muslim majority areas which under the Boundary Award had been most unjustly included in East Punjab were depopulated. The whole country was ravaged by fire and sword; vast numbers were butchered and countless women were abducted. Indeed decency forbids mention of some crimes committed against women. Millions were forcibly and ruthlessly driven out of their homes. The process went on, sector by sector, and culminated in the tragedy that was enacted in Delhi, the Capital of India. According to the Government of India itself there was a complete breakdown of administration for a number of days. The destruction and desecration of mosques, tombs and holy places, and forcible conversions on a mass scale, were special features of these happenings.

12. This plan of liquidation of the Muslim population is still proceeding despite the pious professions of the Govern­ment of India. The latest example of this is provided by the happenings in the holy city of Ajmer. The Government of Pakistan find difficult to believe that under the circumstances the Government of India are innocent of all complicity in this vast scheme of 'genocide* started by the Sikhs and Hindus and encouraged and supported by persons in authority as means of destroying the newly created State of Pakistan. The Mussalmai,s of India are being subjected to calculated insults and humilations. All sorts of tests of loyalty are being demanded from them. The one on which particular emphasis is laid is that they should denounce Pakistan and try to undo the partition and express their readiness to fight Pakistan on the side of India in the event of war between the two Dominions. It is a matter for deep regret that even to-day responsible members of the Government of India, including yourself, openly declare their intention or hope of bringing Pakistan back into the Indian Union, well knowing that this can be done only through conquest by arms. Such an attitude can only mean that the Hindu and Sikh leaders while giving their agreement to the partition plan did so without any inten­tion of permitting its implementation and, further, that India is determined to undo the settlement by all means available at its disposal. In other words Pakistan's .very existence is the chief 'causes belli* so far as India is concerned. It is this impossible position which manifests itself, time and again, in. all of India's dealings with Pakistan whether political, economic or financial and unless an effective remedy is found, it is-difficult to see how a direct clash can be avoided with the best will in the world.

13. The events which took place following the announce­ment of the accession of Junagadh and Manavadar States to Pakistan lend further support to the contention of the Pakistan Government that the Government of India intend by all possible means at their disposal to destroy Pakistan.

In accordance with the agreed scheme of partition and the Indian Independence Act, 1947, Indian States were under no compulsion to join either of the two Dominions. Notwith­standing this clear provision, the Government of India by a combination of threats and cajolery forced a number of States into acceding to the Indian Union. The Rulers of Junagadh and Manavadar were similarly threatened with dire consequences but they stood firm and exercised their right of joining Pakistan in preference to India. This was the signal for India to launch with full force her attack, using every possible weapon in order to force the States against their will to change their affiliation. Protests were made to the Pakistan Government, pointing out that a State which had a Hindu-majority population could not accede to Pakistan as the country had been divided on a communal basis. Another reason given was that Junagadh was not physically contiguous to Pakistan and that its accession to Pakistan was calculated to cause disruption in the integrity of India- Simultaneously with these protests, the Government of India put large bodies of Indian troops on the borders of Junagadh and encouraged the neighbouring Hindu States, which had acceded to India, to do likewise. In clear violation of the stand-still agreement, the Junagadh State was subjected to an economic blockade involving stoppage of all vital supplies, including food, cloth and coal into the State territory. Lines of communication, including railway and telegraph, were operated in such a manner that it became impossible for the State or the Muslim population of Junagadh to communicate with the outside world. A strong Press campaign calculated to destroy the State administration and to create panic among the population was launched both inside and outside the State.

Another line of attack was adopted by setting up*the so-called 'Provisional Government' with headquarters first at Bombay and later at Rajkot, which claimed the right to liberate the non-Muslim population of the Junagadh State. The so-called 'Azad Fauj* of the 'Provisional Government' was created and armed by the officers of the Indian Dominion. The ^Provisional Government* not only proceeded to seize by force State property in Rajkot, but by methods of sheer 'gangsterism* created conditions in which it became impossible for the State Administration to function. At this point the Government of India sent its troops and occupied the State under the plea of an alleged 'invitation* by Dewan. Since then an orgy of murder, arson, rape and loot has been let loose in Kathiawar by the military forces of India in exactly the same manner as in Northern India, and hundreds of thousands of Muslims have had to flee from the State. According to newspaper reports, Mr. Samaldas Gandhi, the head of the so-called Provisional Government, has openly thanked a member of your Govern­ment, for all the assistance received. AH this was done in sheer disregard of the international conduct and ordinary neighbourly decency. In the interest of peace between the two Dominions, Pakistan refrained from sending a single soldier to Junagadh. Occupation by force of Junagadh, which is Pakistan territory, is a clear act of aggression against Pakistan.

14. In case of Manavadar even the thin camouflage of a semblance of justification was not considered necessary and the State was taken under military occupation without the slightest explanation being given. A similar fate befell the Talukdari States of Sardargarh, Bantva, Sultanabad and Mangrol. The unfortunate rulers of some these States have been kept in detention and have been subjected to considerable pressure to wean them from their affiliation to Pakistan.

15. This brief account of India's dealings with a friendly State can leave no doubt in the mind of an impartial person that the new India does not feel herself bound by any moral or international code of rules. The military coup d'etat by which the occupation of Junagadh and Manavadar and other States was achieved, is of one piece with the general scheme of

destroying the integrity and the very existence of Pakistan to which reference has been made. We have formally drawn your attention to the various acts of hostility culminating in the actual seizure of Pakistan territory by the India Government in Junagadh, but have not received even the courtesy of a reply. Perhaps now that you propose to take the case of Kashmir to the U.N.O. you would be good enough to let us know why, in spite of our clear request, you have not withdrawn from the territories of Junagadh, Manavadar and Mangrol, etc.?

In this connection it is of interest to note that the argu­ments advanced by India for refusing to accept the accession of Junagadh to Pakistan have been conveniently and com­pletely ignored in connection with the accession of Kashmir to the Indian Dominion, This again is fully in keeping with the general political attitude of India towards Pakistan.

16. These are not the only examples of aggression against Pakistan territory. Numerous raids by armed bands, assisted by the police and military, have taken place across the border

into Pakistan. The Royal Indian Air Force has made repeated attacks on Pakistan territory causing damage to life and property.

17. Another illustration of the same attitude is provided by the refusal of the India Government to implement the recent financial agreement of all outstanding cases which had been

referred to the Arbitral Tribunal. The India Government is deliberately withholding the payment of Rupees fifty-five crores of the cash balances which is the legal due of the Pakistan Government according to this agreement. This is the latest manifestation of their desire to strangle Pakistan financially and economically which characterised the partition proceedings. In the case of military stores there has been a similar refusal to implement the agreement. The Supreme Commander, who was appointed as a neutral authority under the joint Defence to carry into effect the partition of the armed forces and military stores, was forced despite the protests of the Pakistan Government, to leave by the Government long before he could complete his task. At the time this was done the Indian representatives on the joint Defence Council pledged the word of the India Cabinet that Pakistan would receive her due share of military stores- This pledge, like other similar pledges of the India Government, has not been honoured and the slight trickle of military stores to Pakistan shows signs of stopping altogether.

18. To sum up, our counter-charges against the Dominion of India are as follows:

1. that India has never wholeheartedly accepted the parti­tion scheme, but her leaders paid lip-service to it merely in order to get the British troops out of the country;

2. that India is out to destroy the State of Pakistan which her leaders persistently continue to regard as part of India itself;

3. that the systematic sabotage against the implementation of partition, the stoppage of such essential require­ ments as coal and rail transport, the deliberate with­ holding of Pakistan's share of funds and arms and equipment, and the wholesale massacres of Muslim

population are all designed toward one aim, namely, the destruction of Pakistan;

4. that India's forcible occupation    of Junagadh, Manavadar and other States in Kathiawar which had acceded to Pakistan, as well as the fraudulent procure­ment of the accession of Jammu and Kashmir State, are acts of hostility against Pakistan whose destruction is India's immediate objective.

19. I, however, note with pleasure your assurance that the Government of India has always desired and still earnestly desire to live on terms of friendship with Pakistan. On behalf of the Pakistan Government I fully and sincerely reciprocate this desire. I am constrained, however, to observe that the Government of India has at no stage afforded any practical proof of their desire to live on terms of friendship with Pakistan, more particularly in the case of Junagadh and Kashmir. On my side, I can assure you that the earnest desire of the Government of Pakistan to live on terms of friendship with India has, in many instances, restrained the Government of Pakistan from taking action which would not only have been legally justifiable but was in several instances urgently called for and yet was not adopted in the hope that the attitude of the Government of India might, even during these later stages, be more favourably affected towards Pakistan. I find it more and more difficult to persuade myself to continue to entertain that hope. The course of events, very briefly set out above, would normally have been treated as a chain of aggres­sion justifying extreme action on the part of the aggrieved Government. Now that your letter of the 22nd December 1947 has indicated an intention on the part of the Government of India to invite the intervention of the United Nations, a course which the Pakistan Government has so far ineffectively sug­gested to the Government of India, for the resolving of their differences, I have taken this opportunity to invite your atten­tion to the main heads of the differences between the two Governments that stand in the way of an amicable adjustment of our relations. It is my most earnest hope that these diffe­rences may be speedily composed and that our relations will thereafter ever continue to be on the most cordial, co-operative, and friendly basis. I trust you will agree that intervention of the United Nations, whatever from it is to take, should be invited in respect of all these matters, so that all pending differences may be speedily resolved."