[Reader-list] the latest stupidity of arundhati roy - comparing her utterances on kashmir with those of nehru
Shuddhabrata Sengupta
shuddha at sarai.net
Mon Nov 29 07:35:34 IST 2010
Dear Mr. Aima,
I am writing this in response to your criticism of Arundhati Roy's
recent statement published in the Hindu.
You say, "the directive of "Metropolitan Magistrate Navita Kumari
Bagha" asks delhi police to "lodge an FIR under relevant provisions
of the Indian Penal Code" against some named persons (which includes
arundhati roy) for their speeches made in the seminar on
21/10/2010 ........ it does not say anything about 'waging war
against the state'
The Times of India, seems to have reported otherwise
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Delhi-court-calls-for-FIR-
against-Roy-Geelani/articleshow/7002100.cms
The Times of India quotes the Metropolitan Magistrate, Navita Kumari
Bagha as saying -
"The Delhi police is hereby directed to lodge an FIR under relevant
provisions of the Indian Penal Code and file a report in this regard
on January 6, 2011, the next date of hearing,'' metropolitan
magistrate Navita Kumari Bagha said, pointing out that the court has
to step in since even after an offence was disclosed, the police
failed to register an FIR. The sections include those relating to
sedition, waging war against the state of the IPC and a section of
Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA)."
If you read any other paper's reports on the matter, you will see
exactly the same language. Which in itself is not surprising, as the
complainant has sought remedy under those precise sections, including
the one pertaining to 'waging war against the state' and so, the
Magistrate, in instructing the Police to look into the filing of the
FIR, has to instruct the police to file their report with reference
to these specific sections.
So, when Arundhati Roy refers to the court asking the police to file
an FIR for 'waging war against the state' against her and others
(including, incidentally, me) she is not trifling by any means. What
she has said in her statement faithfully mirrors the reports that
have appeared in the press. I suspect, that rather than her, it is
you who seems not to have read the reports with care.
Now, as for your contention, that Nehru changed his position on the
need for a plebiscite to ascertain the will of the people of Jaamu
and Kashmir following the ratification of the accession to the state
of Jammu and Kashmir to the Union of India by the Constituent
Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir. This, unfortunately, is simply not true.
I had published a posting on this list on the matter of 23 statements
made by Jawaharlal Nehru on the matter of ascertaining the will of
the people of Jammu and Kashmir on the 25th of August, 2008. The link
to the posting is as follows -
http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/2008-August/014098.html
I don't want to reproduce the contents of this posting in its
entirety, because much of the matter is already contained in
Arundhati Roy's statement to the Hindu. But since you have produced
the magic date of the 15th of February, 1954, as a threshold, let me
just reproduce two statements made by Jawaharlal Nehru AFTER this date.
In a statement in the Rajya Sabha (Chamber of States) of the Indian
Parliament, Nehru says on the 18th of May, 1954 -
“But so far as the Government of India are concerned, every assurance
and international commitment in regard to Kashmir stands.”
'Every assurance and International commitment' includes the
commitment to hold a plebiscite, as mandated by several United
Nations resolutions. If, Nehru believed that the ratification of the
Maharaja's of J & K's accession to India by the Constituent Assembly
of J & K was the same thing as an expression of the popular will vis-
a-vis the question of the integration of J&K into the Indian Union,
then, he would not have needed to state that "international
commitments in regard to Kashmir stand". The international
commitments, which can have been nothing other than the holding of
the plebiscite under international auspieces, could have been said to
be 'standing' if, and only if, they had not yet been seen to have
borne fruit. Clearly, here, Nehru on the 18th of May 1954 still sees
the plebiscite as a possibility.
Further, On 31st of March, 1955, (which as you will notice, is a full
year and five weeks after the 15th of Februrary, 1954), Nehru, in a
statement in the Indian parliament, says -
“Kashmir is not a thing to be bandied about between India and
Pakistan but it has a soul of its own and an individuality of its
own. Nothing can be done without the goodwill and consent of the
people of Kashmir.”
First of all, Nehru makes a distinction here between the wills of the
entities he calls India, Pakistan and Kashmir. Which means that he
does not conflate the will of the entity he calls India, with the
entity he calls Kashmir. Kashmir, in his eyes, (these are his words,
not mine) is seized of a will and individuality of its own, distinct
from India, and Pakistan.
Next, Nehru says, "Nothing CAN be done without the goodwill and
consent of the people of Kashmir". Had Nehru said - "Nothing HAS
BEEN DONE without the goodwill and consent of the people of Kashmir",
your contention, that Nehru treated the ratification of the
Maharaja's accession by the Constitutent Assembly of Jammu and
Kashmir as the final word on the matter, would have had some weight,
because then we would be arguing about whether or not the decision of
the constituent assembly of J & K actually represented the 'goodwill
and consent' of the people of Kashmir. But Nehru did not say what you
wish he had said. His statement clearly implies that he believed that
as of 31st of March, 1955 a year and a month after the J&K
Constitutent Assembly's so called 'ratification' that the "goodwill
and consent" of the people of J&K was yet to be ascertained. So,
following from this, as far as Nehru is concerned, it is very
difficult logically to assert that he believed that the Constituent
Assembly of J&K's ratification amount to anything closely resembling
the final statement of the "goodwill and consent" of the people of J&K.
Incidentally, this quotation, from 1955, was included in Arundhati
Roy's statement in the Hindu. I suppose, in your haste to indulge in
the popular pastime of attacking people who say things that are not
comfortable for Indian Jingoism, you had overlooked the fact that
March 1955 comes a year and a bit, AFTER, February 1954.
Mr. Aima, Your contention that Nehru changed his public stance on the
question of a plebiscite post February 1954 is not borne out by these
two quotations. You say - "this is where arundhati roy reveals her
stupidity and how little she knows about kashmir".
I wonder who looks more stupid now, you, or Arundhati Roy.
best
Shuddha
On 28-Nov-10, at 3:57 PM, Aalok Aima wrote:
> ARUNDHATI ROY : "My reaction to today's court order directing the
> Delhi Police to file an FIR against me for waging war against the
> state"
>
> has the court asked the police to file an FIR against arundhati roy
> for 'waging war against the state' or is arundhati trifling with
> facts?
>
> the directive of "Metropolitan Magistrate Navita Kumari Bagha" asks
> delhi police to "lodge an FIR under relevant provisions of the
> Indian Penal Code" against some named persons (which includes
> arundhati roy) for their speeches made in the seminar on
> 21/10/2010 ........ it does not say anything about 'waging war
> against the state'
>
> it is another thing that arundhati roy's utterance could be
> interpreted as 'waging war against the state'
>
> as she did in an earlier statement, arundhati seems to find
> unacceptable that someone should seek prosecution against her or
> that a court of law should be approached with the complaint that
> delhi police have not taken cognisance of the 'anti-india speeches'
> by arundhati (amongst others)
>
> so arundhati roy issues yet one more statement (quoted below from
> 'the hindu')
>
> she seeks to compare her statements on kashmir with those of nehru
> on kashmir and suggests that delhi police "should posthumously file
> a charge against Jawaharlal Nehru too"
>
> (her statement, giving quotes of nehru on kashmir, is a
> regurgitation of what has since long been put forward as arguments
> by the secessionist and secession supporting propaganda
> machines ...... geelani also used the quotes just a few days back)
>
> this is where arundhati roy reveals her stupidity and how little
> she knows about kashmir
>
> in comparing her utterances with those of nehru, arundhati roy
> gives us a list of 13 quotes attributed to nehru (and 1 of krishna
> menon)
>
> what arundhati roy overlooks, in her stupidity, is that the
> position of goi (and of nehru as pm) treating the accession of j&k
> to india as confirmedly final (in what goi considers as fulfilling
> it's part of the un resolution on kashmir) is on the basis of the
> ratification of j&k's accession to india by the constituent
> assembly of j&k on 15/02/1954
>
> the nehru statements nos 1 to 12, that she quotes, pre-date that
> ratification date of 15/02/1954 and are from a period when the
> status of j&k with respect to india was subjected to a lot of
> questioning (including the un resolution) and nehru acknowledged
> that as is reflected in his statements
>
> after the 15/02/1954 ratification by the j&k constituent assembly,
> goi treated the accession of j&K to india as being unquestionable
> and nehru did not make any statement that carried the vein of the
> statements 1 to 12 quoted by arundhati
>
> arundhati roy is being stupid in comparing her own statements on
> kashmir with those of nehru prior to 15/02/1954 and on that basis
> self-righteously suggesting that if she is to be prosecuted then
> nehru (posthumously) should also be prosected
>
> ........... aalok aima
>
>
> http://www.hindu.com/2010/11/28/stories/2010112862661200.htm
>
> They can file a charge posthumously against Jawaharlal Nehru too:
> Arundhati Roy
>
> Arundhati Roy
>
> My reaction to today's court order directing the Delhi Police to
> file an FIR against me for waging war against the state: Perhaps
> they should posthumously file a charge against Jawaharlal Nehru
> too. Here is what he said about Kashmir:
>
> 1. In his telegram to the Prime Minister of Pakistan, the Indian
> Prime Minister Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru said, “I should like to make
> it clear that the question of aiding Kashmir in this emergency is
> not designed in any way to influence the state to accede to India.
> Our view which we have repeatedly made public is that the question
> of accession in any disputed territory or state must be decided in
> accordance with wishes of people and we adhere to this
> view.” (Telegram 402 Primin-2227 dated 27th October, 1947 to PM of
> Pakistan repeating telegram addressed to PM of UK).
>
> 2. In other telegram to the PM of Pakistan, Pandit Nehru said,
> “Kashmir's accession to India was accepted by us at the request of
> the Maharaja's government and the most numerously representative
> popular organization in the state which is predominantly Muslim.
> Even then it was accepted on condition that as soon as law and
> order had been restored, the people of Kashmir would decide the
> question of accession. It is open to them to accede to either
> Dominion then.” (Telegram No. 255 dated 31 October, 1947).
>
> Accession issue
>
> 3. In his broadcast to the nation over All India Radio on 2nd
> November, 1947, Pandit Nehru said, “We are anxious not to finalise
> anything in a moment of crisis and without the fullest opportunity
> to be given to the people of Kashmir to have their say. It is for
> them ultimately to decide ------ And let me make it clear that it
> has been our policy that where there is a dispute about the
> accession of a state to either Dominion, the accession must be made
> by the people of that state. It is in accordance with this policy
> that we have added a proviso to the Instrument of Accession of
> Kashmir.”
>
> 4. In another broadcast to the nation on 3rd November, 1947, Pandit
> Nehru said, “We have declared that the fate of Kashmir is
> ultimately to be decided by the people. That pledge we have given
> not only to the people of Kashmir and to the world. We will not and
> cannot back out of it.”
>
> 5. In his letter No. 368 Primin dated 21 November, 1947 addressed
> to the PM of Pakistan, Pandit Nehru said, “I have repeatedly stated
> that as soon as peace and order have been established, Kashmir
> should decide of accession by Plebiscite or referendum under
> international auspices such as those of United Nations.”
>
> U.N. supervision
>
> 6.In his statement in the Indian Constituent Assembly on 25th
> November, 1947, Pandit Nehru said, “In order to establish our bona
> fide, we have suggested that when the people are given the chance
> to decide their future, this should be done under the supervision
> of an impartial tribunal such as the United Nations Organisation.
> The issue in Kashmir is whether violence and naked force should
> decide the future or the will of the people.”
>
> 7.In his statement in the Indian Constituent Assembly on 5th March,
> 1948, Pandit Nehru said, “Even at the moment of accession, we went
> out of our way to make a unilateral declaration that we would abide
> by the will of the people of Kashmir as declared in a plebiscite or
> referendum. We insisted further that the Government of Kashmir must
> immediately become a popular government. We have adhered to that
> position throughout and we are prepared to have a Plebiscite with
> every protection of fair voting and to abide by the decision of the
> people of Kashmir.”
>
> Referendum or plebiscite
>
> 8.In his press-conference in London on 16th January, 1951, as
> reported by the daily ‘Statesman' on 18th January, 1951, Pandit
> Nehru stated, “India has repeatedly offered to work with the United
> Nations reasonable safeguards to enable the people of Kashmir to
> express their will and is always ready to do so. We have always
> right from the beginning accepted the idea of the Kashmir people
> deciding their fate by referendum or plebiscite. In fact, this was
> our proposal long before the United Nations came into the picture.
> Ultimately the final decision of the settlement, which must come,
> has first of all to be made basically by the people of Kashmir and
> secondly, as between Pakistan and India directly. Of course it must
> be remembered that we (India and Pakistan) have reached a great
> deal of agreement already. What I mean is that many basic features
> have been thrashed out. We all agreed that it is the people of
> Kashmir who must decide for themselves about
> their future externally or internally. It is an obvious fact that
> even without our agreement no country is going to hold on to
> Kashmir against the will of the Kashmiris.”
>
> 9.In his report to All Indian Congress Committee on 6th July, 1951
> as published in the Statesman, New Delhi on 9th July, 1951, Pandit
> Nehru said, “Kashmir has been wrongly looked upon as a prize for
> India or Pakistan. People seem to forget that Kashmir is not a
> commodity for sale or to be bartered. It has an individual
> existence and its people must be the final arbiters of their
> future. It is here today that a struggle is bearing fruit, not in
> the battlefield but in the minds of men.”
>
> 10.In a letter dated 11th September, 1951, to the U.N.
> representative, Pandit Nehru wrote, “The Government of India not
> only reaffirms its acceptance of the principle that the question of
> the continuing accession of the state of Jammu and Kashmir to India
> shall be decided through the democratic method of a free and
> impartial plebiscite under the auspices of the United Nations but
> is anxious that the conditions necessary for such a plebiscite
> should be created as quickly as possible.”
>
> Word of honour
>
> 11.As reported by Amrita Bazar Patrika, Calcutta, on 2nd January,
> 1952, while replying to Dr. Mookerji's question in the Indian
> Legislature as to what the Congress Government going to do about
> one third of territory still held by Pakistan, Pandit Nehru said,
> “is not the property of either India or Pakistan. It belongs to the
> Kashmiri people. When Kashmir acceded to India, we made it clear to
> the leaders of the Kashmiri people that we would ultimately abide
> by the verdict of their Plebiscite. If they tell us to walk out, I
> would have no hesitation in quitting. We have taken the issue to
> United Nations and given our word of honour for a peaceful
> solution. As a great nation we cannot go back on it. We have left
> the question for final solution to the people of Kashmir and we are
> determined to abide by their decision.”
>
> 12.In his statement in the Indian Parliament on 7th August, 1952,
> Pandit Nehru said, “Let me say clearly that we accept the basic
> proposition that the future of Kashmir is going to be decided
> finally by the goodwill and pleasure of her people. The goodwill
> and pleasure of this Parliament is of no importance in this matter,
> not because this Parliament does not have the strength to decide
> the question of Kashmir but because any kind of imposition would be
> against the principles that this Parliament holds. Kashmir is very
> close to our minds and hearts and if by some decree or adverse
> fortune, ceases to be a part of India, it will be a wrench and a
> pain and torment for us. If, however, the people of Kashmir do not
> wish to remain with us, let them go by all means. We will not keep
> them against their will, however painful it may be to us. I want to
> stress that it is only the people of Kashmir who can decide the
> future of Kashmir. It is not that we have
> merely said that to the United Nations and to the people of
> Kashmir, it is our conviction and one that is borne out by the
> policy that we have pursued, not only in Kashmir but everywhere.
> Though these five years have meant a lot of trouble and expense and
> in spite of all we have done, we would willingly leave if it was
> made clear to us that the people of Kashmir wanted us to go.
> However sad we may feel about leaving we are not going to stay
> against the wishes of the people. We are not going to impose
> ourselves on them on the point of the bayonet.”
>
> Kashmir's soul
>
> 13.In his statement in the Lok Sabha on 31st March, 1955 as
> published in Hindustan Times New Delhi on Ist April, 1955, Pandit
> Nehru said, “Kashmir is perhaps the most difficult of all these
> problems between India and Pakistan. We should also remember that
> Kashmir is not a thing to be bandied between India and Pakistan but
> it has a soul of its own and an individuality of its own. Nothing
> can be done without the goodwill and consent of the people of
> Kashmir.”
>
> 14.In his statement in the Security Council while taking part in
> debate on Kashmir in the 765th meeting of the Security Council on
> 24th January, 1957, the Indian representative Mr. Krishna Menon
> said, “So far as we are concerned, there is not one word in the
> statements that I have made in this council which can be
> interpreted to mean that we will not honour international
> obligations. I want to say for the purpose of the record that there
> is nothing that has been said on behalf of the Government of India
> which in the slightest degree indicates that the Government of
> India or the Union of India will dishonour any international
> obligations it has undertaken.”
>
>
>
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
Shuddhabrata Sengupta
The Sarai Programme at CSDS
Raqs Media Collective
shuddha at sarai.net
www.sarai.net
www.raqsmediacollective.net
More information about the reader-list
mailing list