Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar's View on Kashmir Issue and His Speeches On Kashmir in Indian Parliament.

Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar's View on Kashmir Issue in 1951

1. Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar had dissatisfied for the foreign policy of India. This was one of the reasons behind for the resignation of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar from the cabinet (Law Minister) in 1951.

For More: Reasons behind for the resignation of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar from the cabinet (Law Minister) in 1951.

Here the Statement of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar:

"The third matter which has given me cause, not merely for dissatisfaction but for actual anxiety and even worry, is the foreign policy of the country. Any one, who has followed the course of our foreign policy and along with it the attitude of other countries towards India, could not fail to realise the sudden change that has taken place in their attitude towards us. On 15th of August 1947 when we began our life as an independent country, there was no country which wished us ill. Every country in the world was our friend. Today, after four years, all our friends have deserted us. We have no friends left. We have alienated ourselves. We are pursuing a lonely furrow with no one even to second our resolutions in the U.N.O. When I think of our foreign policy, I am reminded of what Bismark and Bernard Shaw have said. Bismark has said that "Politics is not a game of realising the ideal. Politics is the game of the possible." Bernard Shaw not very long ago said that good ideals are good but one must not forget that it is often dangerous to be too good. Our foreign policy is in complete opposition to these words of wisdom uttered by two of the world's greatest men. How dangerous it has been to us this policy of doing the impossible and of being too good is illustrated by the great drain on our resources made by our military expenditure, by the difficulty of getting food for our starving millions and by difficulty of getting aid for the industrialisation of our country.

Out of 350 crores of rupees of revenue we raise annually, we spend about Rs. 180 crores of rupees on the Army. It is a colossal expenditure which has hardly any parallel. This colossal expenditure is the direct result of our foreign policy. We have to foot the whole of our Bill for our defence ourselves because we have no friends on which we can depend for help in any emergency that may arise. I have been wondering whether this is the right sort of foreign policy.

Our quarrel with Pakistan is a part of our foreign policy about which I feel deeply dissatisfied. There are two grounds which have disturbed our relations with Pakistan - one is Kashmir and the other is the condition of our people in East Bengal. I felt that we should be more deeply concerned with East Bengal where the condition of our people seems from all the newspapers intolerable than with Kashmir. Notwithstanding this we have been staking our all on the Kashmir issue. Even then I feel that we have been fighting on an unreal issue. The issue on which we are fighting most of the time is, who is in the right and who is in the wrong. The real issue to my mind is not who is in the right but what is right. Taking that to be the main question, my view has always been that the right solution is to partition Kashmir. Give the Hindu and Buddhist part to India and the Muslim part to Pakistan as we did in the case of India. We are really not concerned with the Muslim part of Kashmir. It is a matter between the Muslims of Kashmir and Pakistan. They may decide the issue as they like. Or if you like, divide it into three parts; the Cease-fire zone, the Valley and the Jammu-Ladhak Region and have a plebiscite only in the Valley. What I am afraid of is that in the proposed plebiscite, which is to be an overall plebiscite, the Hindus and Buddhists of Kashmir are likely to be dragged into Pakistan against their wishes and we may have to face the same problems as we are facing today in East Bengal."

Source: 

* Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar’s Writings and Speeches, English Volume- 14, Part-II / Tamil Volume- 32.

2. Representation of The People Bill:

"Then I come to Kashmir. As the House will see, there is a special provision with regard to Kashmir and that provision differs in one important respect and that is that the Kashmir representatives will not be elected by the people. Now, the reason for making an exception in regard to Kashmir is this, namely, that Kashmir is a part of India in a very attenuated manner, so to say. The Article relating to Kashmir says that only Article 1 applies, that is to say, Kashmir is part of the territories of India. The application of the other provisions of the Constitution, that Article says, will depend upon the President, who may in consultation with the Government of Kashmir apply the rest of the Articles with such modifications and alterations as he may determine. As the honourable House may probably know, there has been already issued an order in regard to Kashmir in which the President has modified the Article providing for the representation of States in Parliament by stating that he shall nominate the representatives of Kashmir in consultation with the Government of Kashmir. I think it was issued on the 26th January. That being so, there is really no room for this Parliament to make any provision with regard to the representation of Kashmir in Parliament in a manner different from what has been provided in the Bill. I think that nothing more is necessary for the purpose of elucidating how the First Schedule has been brought into being."

Source:

* Parliamentary Debates: Vol. 4, Part II, 18th April 1950, Pages- 3000-06.

* Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar’s Writings and Speeches, English Volume- 15, Page- 129.

Dr. Ambedkar's View on Kashmir Issue in 1952.

3. Budget (General) 1952-53 General Discussion:

"If we were informed that our relations with certain foreign countries were not happy, that there might be any time a danger to our safety and to our security, it would be possible for most of us to agree that rather than wait for the arrival of the danger, we should keep the Army ready so that in an emergency we may face the danger squarely. But we are told that we have no enemy at all in this world. Then, why this army is maintained, I do not quite know. Secondly, the only possible enemy, if one may use that world, is probably Pakistan. And that too, on account of Kashmir. Now, with regard to Kashmir, I hope that this House will have a full opportunity of discussing that question. I did not have time to say anything, nor did I think it right to spend just a few moments on a problem so great as that of Kashmir. But surely the matter is within the charge of the U.N.O., and I do not think that Pakistan would be so foolish as to invade Kashmir or to invade this country in the teeth of the U.N.O. decision on the subject. Therefore, again, why are you maintaining this Army? I am quite unable to understand the point.

Then, Sir, on our part we never seem to be able to realise that the sooner we settle this Kashmir problem the better for us, because if the excuse for this enormous is increase in our Defence Budget is to be attributed to the Kashmir tangle, is it not our duty to do something, to contribute something, positively in order to bring that dispute to an end? I cannot expatiate on the subject, but so far as I have been able to study the part played by the Government of India in connection with the negotiations that have been taking place on the settlement of the Kashmir issue, I am sorry to say that I have not read a single word which I can describe as a positive and not a negative suggestion on the part of the Government of India to settle this question. All that they are dealing with is the question of military allotment. The question of plebiscite is in no way new in the history of the world. One need not go back to the ancient past to find precedents for settling questions of this sort by plebiscite. After the First World War, I certainly remember there were two questions to be settled by plebiscite. One was the question of Upper Silesia and the other was the question of Alsace-Lorraine. Both these questions were settled by plebiscite, and I am sure that my hon. Friend Shri Gopalaswami Ayyangar, with his mature wisdom and sagacity, must be knowing of this. It is not possible for us to borrow something from the line of action taken by the League of Nations with regard to the plebiscite in Upper Silesia and Alsace-Lorraine which we can usefully carry into the Kashmir dispute and have the matter settled quickly so that we can release Rs. 50 crores from the Defence Budget and utilise it for the benefit of our people ?

I do not want to say much more, but I do want to say that most of us are feeling very keenly that the Defence Budget is the greatest stumbling block in the path of the welfare of this country."

Source:

* Parliamentary Debates: Vol. I of 1952, 27th May 1952, 
Pages: 469-80.

* Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar’s Writings and Speeches, English Volume- 15, Pages: 848-50.

Jai bheem...!!!