11061958 Extract of a letter, dated 11 June 1958, from the representative of India to the President of the Security Council (S/4024) [page 4 of the English text of the mimeographed document].
11061958 Extract of a letter, dated 11 June 1958, from the representative of India to the President of the Security Council (S/4024) [page 4 of the English text of the mimeographed document].
These activities of Sheikh Abdullah were well known in Pakistan and they had the continued support of the Pakistan Government, as the following from Dawn of Karachi, dated 8 May, will show :
Dawn, Karachi, 8 May 1958
"It is stated that some kind of a 'maquis' underground organisation may soon spring up in occupied Kashmir to defy Bakshi's authority. Sheikh Abdullah had planned such an organisation as part of his anti-Indian fight in occupied Kashmir, but the planning was not completed when he was re-arrested."
This was also noticed by foreign correspondents. For example, the Daily Telegraph, London, of 3 May 1958, has the following report:
"Even his private army', they (Sheikh Abdullah's adherents) say, was a purely mercenary force paid £3 a month with Pakistan money."
It is well and widely known that conditions in Jammu and Kashmir are normal despite these attempts to create disorder. Already 25,000 tourists have visited the valley. Restrictions on the taking out of processions and the holding of political meetings without the previous permission of the district magistrate, imposed in March last, have been withdrawn in most places. Celebrations in connection with the spring festival started throughout the valley on 19 May.
In spite of this and the reports of independent observers to this effect, Pakistan press and radio have been putting out false and tendentious reports to misrepresent conditions in Jammu and Kashmir, misleading the world, increasing tension between the people of India and Pakistan and promoting a war psychosis amongst their people, as will be seen from the following:
"Today's dispatch from our special correspondent in Srinagar provides little evidence of the symptoms of public disturbance. The shops in Srinagar were all open today and busy ensnaring tourists in the usual manner. There is no curfew in the town and no sign of outward tension beyond intensified armed police patrols."
Daily Telegraph, London, 2 May 1958
"It is three weeks now since Sheikh Abdullah, the former Prime Minister of Kashmir State, was released. Those who had expected fireworks or convulsions have been somewhat disappointed."
"Note from our own correspondent", New Statesman, London, 31 January 1958
"Before the Kashmiri and Indian Governments accuse him (Sheikh Abdullah) of contributing to what neither they nor he wants, they should reflect that the only part which Sheikh Abdullah has been playing in the affairs of Kashmir for the past four years was that of a martyr, and that was their own fault. If in spite of their efforts Kashmir is still so inflammable that the words of one man-even if he is the 'Lion of Kashmir-can set it alight, then Sheikh Abdul lah's analysis of the feelings of Kashmiris would seem to be more accurate than the Kashmiri Prime Minister's. But nobody in his right mind will want any flames lit."
Manchester Guardian, 12 January 1958
Appendix III
"As I leave Kashmir after too short a visit the news reaches me that Bakshi, the Premier of Kashmir, has banned processions and demonstrations in the Valley. I am not surprised. Bakshi is a law-and-order man who knows all the tricks of control and is not at all afraid of the allegation that he is running a police state- a moderate one according to the standards of to-day, but tough and efficient. Since his release the Sheikh has been allowed to say anything he likes. He still draws big crowds and at one of his meetings, where batches of police took part, one man was killed, a lot injured and a great many arrested. A number of the Sheikh's leading supporters are in jail awaiting trial and Bakshi is obviously looking forward to a time when there is no one to challenge his police.
Kingsely Martin in New Statesman, 22 March 1958
"...Now, three months later, he (Sheikh Abdullah) walks behind the walls of his compound outside Srinagar, in full and tense awareness of the reports that 'Bakshi Sahib' is planning to arrest him again. Bakshi Ghulam Mohammed seems determined to put the Sheikh back in prison and is waiting for the right moment. This week news dispatches from Srinagar Began appearing in the Indian press saying that strong action was planned against the Sheikh... This burst of comment evidently was no accident. It seems to have been intended to prepare the public for the arrest of Sheikh Abdullah by April 21. That is the Moslem holy day of Id, when the people of this city gather on a great meadow. The theme of the Indian Press was that Sheikh Abdullah would make his customary appearance, inflame the public and cause violence, and that therefore he should be arrested before Id."
Dispatch datelined Srinagar, 12 April The New York Times, 13 April 1958
"...Sheikh Abdullah's feeling towards the dominant National Conference Party and towards India may have remained bitter, but that can hardly have been a surprise. Nor can the violence that has accompanied some recent political meetings in Kashmir be blamed only on him. A State that is as tightly controlled as Kashmir leaves little room for orderly political campaigning and there is quite enough discontent, thought of various kinds, to look to Sheikh Abdullah for leadership."
The Times, London. 16 April 1958
"Sheikh Abdullah talked fluently and tirelessly, with a surprising lack of bitterness or rancor, and an equal absence of false modesty-One has to pay the penalty of being popular, he remarked at one point Remembering the 'old happy days' when he had been virtually a member of Mr. Nehru's family, he still could not understand how the latter had agreed to the coup d'etat against him."
Dispatch datelined Srinagar, 21 April The Times, London, 25 April 1958
"Abdullah has failed," he (Bakshi Ghulam Mohommed) declared confidently. When we decided to release him we did not know what to expect. We thought the whole valley would be in turmoil, but everything has remained quiet. We were prepared for a hard fight to retain our political following, but not a single Government supporter in the Legislative Assembly has defected. We felt certain he would defy the ban on political meetings after all, he says he does not recognize my Government as having any authority-but he has preferred to lie low,"
Dispatch datelined Srinagar, 26 April The Times, London, 26 April 1958
"Certainly when he gave your correspondent his long interview in Srinagar last week, Sheikh Abdullah was living in almost ostentatious retirement, seldom leaving his house except for occasional appearances at public prayers. He declared that he had no intention of engaging directly in any political activity for the time being, as he did not wish to embarrass the Security Council in its efforts to find an agreed solution to the Kashmir Problem."
Dispatch detelined New Delhi, 30 April The Times, London, 1 May 1958
"There was little the Sheikh could do but consult with the few of his lieutenants the Prime Minister had allowed to remain out of jail, pace his garden and send warning that Mr. Bakshi was plotting to rearrest him."
Dispatch datelined New Delhi, 30 April The New York Times, 1 May 1958
"When he (Sheikh Abdullab) was released, after a fashion, last January, he showed no change of heart although he was scrupulous in refraining from any sort of incitement to violence. He made it plain, however, that he was not in agreement with India's unilateral action in annexing Kashmir without reference to the wish of the Kashmiris." The New York Times, 3 May 1958
"The simple truth seems to be that for his (Sheikh Abdullah's) followers in Kashmir to-day there is little point in rising against hopeless odds, unless outside encouragement is forthcoming."
Dispatch datelined Srinagar, 2 May Daily Telegraph, London, 3 May 1958
"The Chief Minister (Bakshi Ghulam Mohammed) said Sheikh Abdullah had been released to give him the opportunity to adopt a more 'realistic approach', which he had failed to do. He repeated the charge that Sheikh Abdullah had been receiving funds from Pakistan and distributing uniforms to private forces of volunteers, though with some inconsistency he added that the situation in Kashmir was absolutely normal and that there had been no demonstrations worth mentioning in protest against the rearrest".
Dispatch datelined New Delhi, 6 May The Times, London, 6 May 1968
(Source: UN Document no 4032)