The way Indian National Congress envisaged the integration of Jammu and Kashmir with India had a grave implication of creating a  ‘State within the State’, besides providing constitutional legitimacy to communal politics, Sh. Shyama Prasad Mukerjee was the foremost leader and statesman who cautioned the nation on these issues at the dawn  of Indian Independence. He even sacrificed his life to draw the attention of the nation to these issues. To commemorate his-birth anniversary which fell on July 6, 1999 we reproduce his letters written to Sh. J.L. Nehru and Sheikh Abdullah which reflect his concerns. We also reproduce the tribute given to him by another Janasangh stalwart Sh. Balraj Madhok

By Bal Raj Madhok

Shyama Prasad Mookerjee was one of the most distinguished scholars and parliamentarians born in India. The most glorious period of his crowded life began on April 8, 1950, when he resigned from the Union Cabinet on a policy issue relating to Pakistan. He was the first Cabinet Minister of free India to resign on a matter of policy. He, thus, acted in the best traditions of parliamentary democracy and set an example for others to follow.

After his resignation, he set about forming a nationalist and Rightist alternative to the ruling Congress, which was being converted into a Leftist party by Pandit Nehru after the demise of Sardar Patel. The Bharatya Jana Sangh, which came into existence on October 21, 1951, under Dr Mokkerjee’s leadership, was a concrete result of his efforts. It was his greatest gift to the country. Dr Mookerjee was elected to the first Lok Sabha as a Jana Sangh candidate from south Calcutta. Within a month of his election, he brought together the Jana Sangh, , the Hindu Mahasabha, the Ram Rajya Parishad, the Ganatantra Parishad and some Independent members of the Lok Sabha on the basis of a common program to form a National Democratic Party. This was the first attempt at polarization of political forces in the country  on an ideological basis. As a leader of NDP, which was the largest party in the Opposition, Dr Mookerjee made his mark as an effective leader and a potential alternative to Pandit Nehru.

Being an intellectual giant with vast administrative experience and grasp of parliamentary nuances, he became a terror for the treasury benches. He had a specific point of view on all national and international issues. But the issues on which he concentrated most were those pertaining to the integration of Jammu and Kashmir with the rest of India, the fate of the Hindus left behind in Pakistan, and the plight of Hindu refugees. He devoted the last 15 months of his life to the task of integrating Jammu and Kashmir with the rest of the country. Sheikh Abdullah’s separatist policies and the resentment they created among the people of Jammu and Ladakh in particular, and all nationalists in general, impelled him to give priority to Kashmir. His approach to the Kashmir issue and the efforts made by him for a national and rational solution need to be recalled because the situation in Kashmir today has become even more explosive than it was in 1952.

It was the Kashmir issue, which first brought me in touch with Dr Mookerjee in 1948 after my externment from Jammu and Kashmir by the Abdullah government for my role as general secretary of the Jammu and Kashmir Praja Parishad. Earlier, I had received sympathetic response from Sardar Patel who told me: ‘Balraj, you are trying to convince a convinced man. But I can do nothing because Pandit Nehru has kept Kashmir in his direct charge’. Dr Mookerjee made a powerful plea for rethinking about Kashmir in his speech in the Lok Sabha on June 26, 1952. He began with an appeal to Nehru ‘to have some patience with those who differ from his policy in relation to Kashmir. It is no use our throwing stones at each other. It is no use our calling each other communalists and reactionary. He should realize that on certain points there are fundamental differences between his approach and what we consider to be the national approach regarding this problem’.

Nehru had adopted a subjective and personalized approach because of his obsession with Sheikh Abdullah and animus for Maharaja Hari Singh. This had clouded his judgement. Had Sardar Patel handled Kashmir, he would have surely adopted an objective and realistic approach and solved the problem long ago. In fact, Sardar Patel told me on March 8, 1948, that he would set things right in Kashmir in one month if he was asked to tackle it. But he would not interfere so long it remained in Nehru’s charge. How one wishes that the Kashmir issue had also been transferred to Sardar Patel like Hyderabad.

Sheikh Abdullah owed his position entirely to the Maharaja and the Indian army. But his mind was set on independence. This became clear from his speech at Srinagar on October 27, 1947. He said: ‘we have picked up the crown of Kashmir from dust. The question of joining India or Pakistan can wait. We have to complete our independence first.’ The present situation in Kashmir is the result of this approach. The insertion of the temporary Article 370 in the Indian Constitution which gave a special status to the State with a separate Constitution was an outcome of this policy of Sheikh Abdullah.

Dr Mookerjee dwelt at length on this Article in one of his speeches and asked: ‘How is Kashmir going to be integrated with India’ Is Kashmir going to be a republic within a republic’ Are we thinking of another sovereign parliament within the four corners of India barring this sovereign parliament’’ And he also warned: ‘If you just want to play with the winds and say we are helpless and let Sheikh Abdullah do what he likes then Kashmir would be lost. I say this with great deliberation that Kashmir would be lost.’ Dr Mookerjee then referred to what Sardar Patel had said about the basis, the background and the necessity of integrating all the acceding states fully with no special rights and asked: ‘Are not the people of Jammu and Kashmir entitled to the fundamental rights that we have given to the people of India minus the J&K State’ Who made Sheikh Abdullah the king of kings in Kashmir’ It is because Indian troops went there. Did we do it for creating a sovereign republic within a sovereign republic’’ He also said that ‘there is no scope for varied constitutional patterns and disparities between one federating unit and another’.

He concluded by saying: ‘The Prime Minister must fully assert that we do not want this kind of Kashmiri nationalism. We do not want this sovereign Kashmir idea. If you start doing it in Kashmir, others also will demand it’ As a via media, he suggested: ‘If Sheikh Abdullah insists upon a limited accession by Kashmir, then at any rate let us devise a scheme by which the people of Jammu and Ladakh may have the full liberty whether they will or will not integrate fully’.

The crux of the stand taken by Dr Mookerjee is to be found in his letter to Pandit Nehru on February 3, 1953. He wrote that the issue of accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India should not be allowed to hang fire. In his reply, Pandit Nehru condemned the Praja Parishad and its approach as communal and destructive. He referred to the international complications it might create. This impelled Dr Mookerjee to write to him another letter on February 8 in which he touched upon the demand of Praja Parishad that the entire state should be governed by the same Constitution that applies to the rest of India and asked: ‘Is there anything communal or reactionary or anti-national about it’ If India’s Constitution is good enough for the rest of India, why should it not be acceptable to the state of Jammu and Kashmir..’ It is amazing how the move of separatism pursued by Sheikh Abdullah and his colleagues is being applauded by you as national and patriotic and the genuine desire on the part of Praja Parishad to secure the fundamental unity and integrity of India and to be governed as common Indian citizens is being dubbed as treacherous’.

Refuting the charge of communalism, Dr Mookerjee appealed to Nehru ‘to think in your cool moment how in your life-history your failure to stand against Muslim communalism in India has resulted in disastrous consequences. Perhaps you and others followed a policy of concessions and appeasement with the highest motive but in ultimate end the country came to be partitioned against your own often repeated declarations to the contrary. At that time, a factor of very great importance, which worked against us, was the existence of an alien power which wanted to function on the policy of divide and rule. If today we want to be cautious and avoid the tragic follies of the past, we do so in the highest interests of the country and not for any narrow communal ends or for any sectarian interests’.

With regard to Pandit Nehru’s repeated references to possible international complications as a result of the movement for full integration of the state, Dr Mookerjee wrote: ‘No one today could claim that your handling of the Kashmir problem has enhanced our international prestige or has won for us wide international support and sympathy. On the other hand, your policy in this behalf has added to complications both at home and abroad. Statesmanship requires that you should re-examine the whole matter dispassionately and, instead of being haunted by false internationalism, firmly create conditions for national solidarity based on a fair adjustment of different viewpoints and interests. If you succeed in this; it will give you greater strength and prestige even in international dealings’. He concluded this letter with the following moving words. ‘While we disagree on some vital matters, we are children of the same mother and, with a little goodwill and tolerance on both sides, we should have been able to avoid a serious cleavage’.

When all his efforts to persuade Pandit Nehru to adopt a realistic policy failed, Dr Mookerjee decided to visit Jammu to demonstrate his solidarity with the patriotic people who were undergoing great suffering for the cause of national unity. He left Delhi for Jammu in May 1953, soon after the budget session of Parliament was over. He was arrested by the Kashmir police on the soil of Jammu to keep him out of the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India. He was then taken to Srinagar and kept in detention in a small cottage, 10 miles away. A habeas corpus petition was moved in the High Court at Srinagar. Judgement was to be delivered on June 24. By that time, Dr Mookerjee had been shifted to the state hospital in Srinagar, and he died at about 11 PM on June 23.