back

Indian Historian Busts Myths About Kashmir

“Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel was the architect of Article 370.” Srinath Raghavan’s account of Kashmir’s history may surprise many Indians. The noted historian was speaking at a lecture organised by Manthan.

20/10/2019 4:57 AM
  • 4M
  • 3.7K

2673 comments

  • Joseph C.
    5 days

    Can this video help all our Indian sisters/brothers to know about J & K.

  • Afghan G.
    10/01/2021 17:13

    ENGLISH WITH HINDI ACCENT

  • Rather S.
    05/01/2021 05:41

    This must be taught to those who try to rewrite the history by putting forth their false propoganda

  • Ganesan S.
    30/12/2020 08:29

    ALL FALSE TALKS

  • Treasa S.
    29/12/2020 20:18

    Truth is bitter

  • Ashok O.
    29/12/2020 18:46

    Knows nothing full of jihadi mindset

  • Bhanu P.
    28/12/2020 03:30

    So what he's saying here is to keep your house safe you should have a dog...but keep him chained so he won't bite and indeed tie down his mouth so he won't bark to disturb others....and even somehow the dog ever caught a thief be ready to own the outcome as it's the dog you adopted and dogs do bite.....anyways the thief chose your house because you have a dog.... how fūçkkêd up this sounds.....

  • Thaker H.
    27/12/2020 20:49

    As he was the member of NSA for the union of India he knows the term of flexibility in terms of which was the pressing issue at that time but thet doesn't point out that the even first Indien government wants to give kasmir to Pakistan, as they working in the very tight span of time if he is saying this, shame on you sir u r not deceiving the post and you are short sighted....

  • Niti B.
    27/12/2020 17:04

    Utter nonsense... selective approach to historical facts to suit certain agenda.

  • Ashar M.
    26/12/2020 19:46

    You can force somebody to marry you ,and wait untill divorce to judge the right and wrong.In effect the marriage was a failure and you can carry that all your life.

  • Ashutosh S.
    26/12/2020 19:07

    Rahul CK

  • Prakash P.
    26/12/2020 18:52

    It's the wrong interpretation

  • Pervaiz F.
    26/12/2020 11:15

    INDIANS ARE OCCUPIEDERS

  • Shivam B.
    25/12/2020 13:40

    I think everyone go to the full speach Brut just cut several lines..

  • Abhay G.
    25/12/2020 13:20

    Get started Open in app Responses (4) To respond to this story, get the free Medium app. Open in app Raj Maddali Raj Maddali over 1 year ago If Sardar Patel was so much against 370 prove it with a direct quote or state why he didn’t resign? After all Sardar Patel was a strong willed personality. Patel and Nehru saw 370 as a price and compromise to acquire Kashmir. Yes, sometimes one makes…... Read More Amrit Vatsa Amrit Vatsa about 2 years ago been reading your book on Sardar Patel over the last few days — good stuff! OinkOink OinkOink about 1 year ago The issue today, around article 370 is that the blame is put entierly on Nehru. That's incorrect. Based on the amount of reading I have done since this article was revoked, I feel if we blame Nehru for it then even Patel has to be blamed. Nothing…... Read More Sandeep Anirudhan Sandeep Anirudhan over 1 year ago could you please quote the sources for Ambedkar’s opposition? thank you! You have 2 free member-only stories left this month. Sign up for Medium and get an extra one No, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel was not the architect of Article 370 HindolSengupta HindolSengupta Jul 22, 2018·3 min read The clause to give special status to Kashmir was created by Jawaharlal Nehru and his aide, and even B. R. Ambedkar hated it. This essay is taken from my upcoming book on Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, India’s first deputy prime minister, called The Man Who Saved India. Image for post Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru Some people say that Sardar Vallabhbhai, India’s first deputy prime minister and home minister, was the architect of Article 370 in the Indian constitution which gives special status to the state of Jammu and Kashmir. This kind of statement leaves out a lot of nuance which is critical to understand the situation. The first thing to understand is that such a clause was completely against Patel’s natural instinct. Patel’s sympathies in the Kashmir affair was with Maharaja Hari Singh, while Nehru supported Sheikh Abdullah. Even on Article 370 giving special status to Kashmir, the two differed. What happened was the following. As noted in detail by V. Shankar who witnessed the whole saga, ‘This matter (on Article 370) was handled by Gopalaswami Ayyangar in consultation with Sheikh Abdullah and his Ministry and with the approval of Pandit Nehru. Although Nehru was himself away in the United States, at the time [when the Indian Parliament debated it], his approval had been taken in advance to the draft formula. But Sardar had not been consulted.’ But, of course, it was Patel who had been left to convince the Congress Party which was up in arms against it. Congressmen and women believed that Kashmir should be part of the Indian constitution as every other state and ‘in particular the provision that basic articles, e.g. fundamental rights as enshrined in the constitution would not apply to the state was greatly resented’. B. R. Ambedkar declared that he would not draft it, telling Sheikh Abdullah, ‘You wish India should protect your borders, she should build roads in your area, she should supply you foodgrains, and Kashmir should get equal status as India. But Government of India should have only limited powers and Indian people should have no rights in Kashmir. To give consent to this proposal, would be a treacherous thing against the interests of India and I, as the Law Minister of India, will never do it.’ It fell upon Patel to convince the party which he achieved successfully but remained sceptical of Abdullah who questioned even the right of the Indian Parliament to consider it. He told Ayyangar, ‘Whenever Sheikh Sahib wishes to back out, he always confronts us with his duty to the people. Of course he owes no duty to India or to the Indian government, or even on a personal basis to you and the Prime Minister (Nehru) who have gone all out to accommodate him’. Shankar even writes that ‘how much against his (Patel’s) conviction he did it (tried to convince the Congress Party) is apparent from the statement above. Another reason Patel reluctantly agreed was that Article 370 was always seen as a temporary provision and placed under ‘temporary, transitional and special provisions’ — even today it sits under Part XXI of the Indian Constitution under this heading. The thing to understand here is that Patel was a true democrat and even against his own strong convictions, once a decision was a made by Gandhi, and sometimes even Nehru, he tried to do his best in the circumstances. Especially if a difficult task was left to Patel, as in this case, he would do his best to keep peace within the party. Especially on Kashmir, where Patel felt none of the romantic attachment that Nehru did, and on which the two had already quarrelled bitterly, Patel would choose a path of conciliation as a democrat. Yes, it is true that since it was Patel who convinced the Congress Party about Article 370, he was party to the agreement but this has to be taken into context and understood that he was filling a role in Nehru’s absence and very much against his deepest convictions

  • Daya N.
    25/12/2020 10:29

    Wrong

  • Ravishankar N.
    25/12/2020 10:28

    Is he saying that Ambedkar was wrong when he rejected article 370... This man is one from BIRYANI brigade

  • Victor M.
    25/12/2020 06:27

    Great!!! Now inform that fellow in PM chair.

  • Varun G.
    25/12/2020 06:07

    Hahahaha 🤣🤣🤣 Beech beech me se sunne ka bada maza aata hai Lekin Aadha sach bahot khaternak hota hai

  • M. S.
    25/12/2020 01:08

    After listening this, all the biased hatred propaganda ideology goobar bhakts started barking.

Stay informed and entertained, for free with myBrut.

Stay informed and entertained, for free with myBrut.

switch-check
switch-x
By continuing, you agree to receive emails from Brut.