At the 61st session of the United Nations Human Rights Council, India’s External Affairs Minister, Dr. Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, reaffirmed India’s commitment to democracy, pluralism, and the protection of human rights. Shortly thereafter, India’s delegate, Ms. Annupama Singh, reiterated that Jammu and Kashmir “was, is and will remain an integral and inalienable part of India,” asserting that its accession in 1947 was legal and irrevocable.
These claims merit careful scrutiny.
The central question remains: by what justifiable legal and democratic process did Kashmir become a permanent part of India?
First, reference is made to the Instrument of Accession signed by Maharaja Hari Singh in October 1947. Yet historical records show that the accession was accepted by Governor-General Lord Mountbatten subject to the will of the people being ascertained. India itself brought the matter before the United Nations in January 1948. On January 15, 1948, India’s representative to the Security Council, Sir Gopalaswami Ayyangar, explicitly acknowledged that the final disposition of Kashmir would depend upon “the unfettered decision by the people of Kashmir” after restoration of normalcy.
These claims merit careful scrutiny.
The central question remains: by what justifiable legal and democratic process did Kashmir become a permanent part of India?
First, reference is made to the Instrument of Accession signed by Maharaja Hari Singh in October 1947. Yet historical records show that the accession was accepted by Governor-General Lord Mountbatten subject to the will of the people being ascertained. India itself brought the matter before the United Nations in January 1948. On January 15, 1948, India’s representative to the Security Council, Sir Gopalaswami Ayyangar, explicitly acknowledged that the final disposition of Kashmir would depend upon “the unfettered decision by the people of Kashmir” after restoration of normalcy.