Patel would have secured a better future for Kashmiri Pandits

If there is one community in the country that is suffering because Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel could not act decisively in their favour, it is the Kashmiri Pandits.

The repercussion of flawed decisions and missteps taken 75 years ago continue to be felt even today. The presence of minorities in the Muslim-dominated Valley has been almost wiped out. Pakistan's push for Islamic Kashmir is near complete.

What could not be achieved militarily in 1947, 1965 and 1971 has been enacted through a religion-inspired terror push sponsored by Pakistan and aided by China. The minority stake in Kashmir has depleted with the Kashmiri Pandits having been forcibly externed.

This was probably foreseen by Sardar, who wanted the Pandits to be relocated to the cool climes of Dehradun and the Valley given to Pakistan. He knew that Kashmir would get restive and could keep the country's security on the edge.

Sardar was right. In all these years after Independence, India has suffered four wars, including the one in Kargil in 1999, and nearly 35 years of terrorism. Thousands have died in terror-related violence. The minorities faced persecution and till date continue to be the target of terrorists.

Driven out of their homeland, the community of seven lakh has been forced to seek refuge all over the country and even outside. The country is celebrating the 75th anniversary of its Independence, but, for the Kashmiri Pandits, these seven decades and the last 30 years, in particular, have been genocidal.

Talk to any member of the beleaguered community, the feeling is paramount -- had there been Patel in Kashmir, they would not have been suffering. The elders in the community lament Nehru's friendship with Sheikh Abdullah, which they feel blinded him to his evil designs.

It is well-documented that Nehru, being a Kashmiri himself, never wanted to part ways with his land of forefathers. But, when the British was dividing India, the then Jammu and Kashmir Maharaja Hari Singh wanted to remain independent. He signed a Standstill Agreement with Pakistan, which, however, breached it by invading J&K in October 1947.

India did not intervene till the Maharaja signed the Instrument of Accession. This was supported by Nehru's friend, Sheikh Abdullah.

In his broadcast to the nation from the All India Radio station on November 2 ,1947, Nehru said: "We have declared that the fate of Kashmir is ultimately to be decided by the people. That pledge we have given, and the Maharaja has supported it, not only to the people of Kashmir, but to the world. We will not and cannot back out of it."

He continued: "We are prepared when peace and law and order have been established to have a referendum held under international auspices like the United Nations. We want it to be a fair and just reference to the people and we shall accept their verdict. I can imagine no fairer and juster offer. Meanwhile, we have given our word to the people of Kashmir to protect them against the invader and we shall keep our pledge."

Nehru's going to the UN and his promise of referendum has been criticised and a lot has been written about it. But these two blunders cost India and the Kashmiri Pandits the most. These were used by Sheikh and his successors as political tools against the Government of India. But the latter had an agenda, which in future sowed the seeds of separatism and terrorism in the Valley.

At the time of accession, Maharaja Hari Singh sought special privileges for his people on the lines of a 1927 law that denied outsiders the right to buy and own property in J&K. Nehru agreed to the condition.

And finally, after a lot of deliberation, Article 370 was inserted in the Constitution's 21st part that proclaimed it to be a 'Temporary, Transitional and Special Provision'. Through a Presidential Order of 1954, Article 370 was enacted, which gave Jammu and Kashmir a special status.

The special status in time became a weapon not only for Nehru's friend Sheikh Abdullah, but down the line his successors used it to create an exclusive zone where other religions and pro-India forces were sought to be curbed.

Abdullah was instrumental in forming the Plebiscite Front in 1955 that vigorously campaigned for referendum as well as the idea of independence and also carried out anti-India propaganda.

The campaign was at such a massive level that the seeds of separation got sown in the very mindset of the Muslims and along with it an anti-Kashmiri Pandit sentiment was also nurtured, as the community was seen as being pro-Congress and pro-India.

The referendum they believed would be carried out by the UN to help them choose India, Pakistan or Independence. Article 370 did allow the Centre to invoke its laws directly in the J&K, but the one law which Sheikh ruthlessly adopted, modified and enacted was in 1950 -- the J&K Landed Estate Abolition Act or the 'Land to Tiller' reform -- which took lands from the Kashmiri Pandits without any compensation, and stopped just short of the Muslim Zamindars.

After losing land and being left penniless in many instances, the minority Hindu community found itself losing out in government jobs and even in admissions to professional colleges. The minorities in Kashmir were denied the benefits the Government of India had ensured for smaller population groups. All the benefits were gobbled up by the 98 per cent majority.

And then came the big blow of terrorism, which showed its face for the first time in 1986 when Hindus were attacked in south Kashmir's Anantnag district. From 1988 onwards, when Sheikh's son Farooq Abdullah was the Chief Minister, terrorism overtook the Valley that led to the genocide and ethnic cleansing of the Hindus.

Would it have been the same if Sardar had handled J&K? That is the question most of the persecuted Kashmiri Pandits have been asking. Somehow, the belief that the Iron Man of India, who nailed the map of India, could have ended Kashmir's tragedy, is a feeling that runs deep in the KP community.

Flawed decisions and a lack of vision have created a piece of history that has caused a near annihilation of a community. And, in the 75th year of Independence, the community is mourning a loss that seems to be difficult to recover even after the abrogation of Article 370.