The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Reader Mail
Print Email
Text Size

Reader Mail

Correcting the Record

Leahy can’t be proud of his, but Nat Hentoff sure can. Also: Kashmir showdown and more.

(Page 3 of 6)

In my defense, I did note that Mr. Hentoff had written about the subject in a recent column.

p> KASHMIR EXCHANGE br> Jed Babbin says in his article Order of Battle in Kashmir on 5/28/02 the following: /p>

“However, because the people of J & K are mostly Muslim and India is predominantly Hindu, Mountbatten provided for a plebiscite to be held to determine whether the Kashmiris wanted to be part of India or of Pakistan. India has refused to allow the vote, and it and Pakistan have already gone to war twice over who owns Kashmir.”

This is historically and factually wrong. The Princely state of Jammu and Kashmir had a Hindu King who sign the articles of Accession with India and Lord Mountbatten officially in his capacity as the last Viceroy of India accepted this. This was how all the previously independent states ruled by various Kings and Princes agreed to the accession with the new Indian nation. It was only when the Pakistani army attacked the state of Jammu and Kashmir and occupied parts of Jammu and Kashmir that the United Nations passed a resolution which called for the plebiscite after the Pakistani army withdrew from the occupied J&K .

p>I expect more accuracy from Jed Babbin whom I listen to when he comes on Lee Rodgers’ show on KSFO and enjoy his analysis. br> — Harish Chinai /p>

Jed Babbin replies: My thanks to Mr. Chinai for his kind words, but I don’t believe he’s correct. Indeed there was a Hindu maharajah who ruled mostly Muslim Kashmir. The minority population was — and still is — Hindu or Buddhist. The “accession” to India was never completed. Not even the U.N. accepts it. In fact, Lord Mountbatten made accession to India contingent on the plebiscite. At that point, the Kashmiri maharajah asked for Indian troops in the same way the puppet Afghan regime asked for Soviet troops in 1979, and with much the same result. Indian troops came in, and then so did Pakistani troops. The first Kashmir war ended like the other two: in a bloody stalemate. Which is where this one is likely to go, unless someone does something extraordinarily stupid, and a bloody stalemate turns into history’s first nuclear exchange.

p>
Page:   1 23 4 5   Last ›

topics:
Abortion, Military, Pakistan

Letter to the Editor View all comments (1) |

louis vuitton | 4.26.10 @ 10:52PM

but Brock's book is as reckless with fact as any tabloid story. Yet thousands on the left take One wonders which passages Clinton takes satisfaction in. He claims his critics practice tabloid journalism,canada goose Before the election it was all about clean energy. That message resonated with the entire left.

Related Articles

More Articles From Reader Mail

http://spectator.org/archives/2002/05/30/correcting-the-record

ADVERTISEMENT

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

My Generation’s Disease

Benjamin Brophy | 5.17.13

The Liberal Union Behind the IRS

Jeffrey Lord | 5.16.13

Not Ready for Primetime Players

Daniel J. Flynn | 5.17.13

Assessing a Week of Scandal

Matt Purple | 5.17.13

Oops, Maybe Government is Tyrannical

Marta H. Mossburg | 5.17.13

From Bimbos to Benghazi

Jeffrey Lord | 5.9.13

The View From the Other Side

George H. Wittman | 5.17.13

ADVERTISEMENT