Dr Buragadda Srinadh
Nehru’s True Agenda Wasn’t Peace
It Was Dismantling the Monarchy and Targeting a Hindu King
The Kashmir issue has festered for over seven decades, draining India’s military, economic, and emotional resources. While mainstream discourse blames Partition and Pakistani aggression, one uncomfortable truth is often ignored: the seeds of the Kashmir crisis were sown by the personal ambitions—and vendetta—of India’s first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, against Maharaja Hari Singh, the last Dogra ruler of Jammu and Kashmir.
This wasn’t merely a political miscalculation. It was a personal feud, masked by diplomacy, but devastating in its consequences for India’s unity and national security.
Nehru’s objective was not peace—it was power. He was determined to dismantle the monarchy and erase the authority of Maharaja Hari Singh, a proud and independent Dogra ruler who refused to bow to Congress pressure. Nehru, who lacked genuine grassroots support even in his home region and had lost the internal party race for Prime Minister to Sardar Patel, owed his elevation solely to Mahatma Gandhi’s backing. Once in power, Nehru set about empowering his political ally, Sheikh Abdullah, and undermining the Dogra monarchy. The move to the United Nations provided him the perfect excuse to do both.
A Lawful Accession Betrayed
On 26 October 1947, Maharaja Hari Singh signed the Instrument of Accession, legally integrating Jammu and Kashmir with the Dominion of India. This was the same legal framework under which over 500 princely states joined the Union. Facing an invasion by Pakistani-backed tribal raiders, the Maharaja acted under duress, but his decision was both sovereign and final. The Indian Army responded swiftly under Operation Gulmarg, pushing back the invaders and nearing full reclamation of the territory. There was neither military nor legal compulsion to internationalize the issue.
Nehru’s Unilateral Blunder: Why the United Nations?
Yet in January 1948, Nehru unilaterally took the matter to the United Nations—not as a case of Pakistani invasion, but as a “dispute” between two countries. This redefined the status of Kashmir forever, handing Pakistan a diplomatic foothold it had not earned.
Why?
Why did Nehru act without Cabinet consensus, without military counsel, and even reportedly against the advice of Sardar Patel and other senior leaders? It wasn’t a strategic necessity. It wasn’t done under external pressure. It was a political decision, driven by ego and personal rivalry. By internationalizing the issue, Nehru diluted the legal accession, weakened India’s position, and opened the door to global interference—all without cause.
At the time, the Indian Army was gaining ground. Military experts and Cabinet members believed the entire territory, including what is today Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK)—could have been recovered. Nehru’s ceasefire halted this progress permanently.
Nehru’s Grudge Against Maharaja Hari Singh
At the heart of Nehru’s decisions lay a deep personal animosity toward Maharaja Hari Singh. As a Dogra ruler, Hari Singh was popular in Jammu and respected even in the Valley. He remained politically independent and refused to be dictated by Congress. Nehru, despite his Kashmiri ancestry, had no political base in the region and deeply resented the Maharaja’s autonomy.
Instead, Nehru backed Sheikh Abdullah and the National Conference—a party with limited credibility beyond the Valley. This calculated alliance was not about national integration; it was about political consolidation and punishing a monarch who refused to yield. The sidelining of the Maharaja and the elevation of Sheikh Abdullah was a deliberate power shift, executed not in national interest but to fulfill Nehru’s vision.
Catastrophic Consequences of Nehru’s Political Play
Nehru’s decision had far-reaching consequences:
- PoK was created due to a premature ceasefire and the UN resolution.
- An internal, legal matter became an international dispute.
- Kashmir’s full integration was delayed by decades.
- Separatism and communalism were emboldened by the power vacuum left by the Maharaja’s removal.
- The Dogra community was politically and culturally marginalized.
- Central interference and dynastic politics took root in J&K, haunting the state until Article 370 was abrogated in 2019.
Most tragically, India was forced into a defensive posture—militarily and diplomatically—for generations to come, all due to one man’s reckless agenda.
Nehru’s “Statesmanship”: Image Over Integrity
Nehru is hailed as an “international statesman.” But in Kashmir, he chose image over reality. By appealing to the UN, he won international praise but sacrificed India’s strategic advantage and weakened its sovereignty. Many believe that had Sardar Patel handled Kashmir—as he did Hyderabad, Junagadh, and the rest of the princely states—the issue would have been resolved swiftly and permanently.
Can Nehru’s Political Conspiracy Ever Be Forgiven?
The people of India—especially those from Jammu and Kashmir—continue to bear the burden of Nehru’s actions. His decision to go to the United Nations was no act of noble diplomacy. It was a historic betrayal rooted in ego and vendetta. The insurgency, the bloodshed, the exodus of Kashmiri Pandits, and the internationalization of India’s internal affairs—all trace back to that single, reckless move.
History must not be whitewashed. The nation must confront Nehru’s role in creating the Kashmir imbroglio. Forgiveness requires truth—and truth demands accountability.
Congress Must Apologize for Nehru’s Historic Blunder
The Congress Party owes India a formal, unequivocal apology for the political disaster engineered by its tallest leader. Nehru’s missteps cost India tens of thousands of lives, triggered multiple wars, displaced its citizens, and kept Kashmir in perpetual turmoil.
If the Congress Party wants to be taken seriously on national unity and historical justice, it must start by acknowledging this truth and issuing a public apology for Nehru’s Himalayan blunder.
Anything less is a continued betrayal of the Dogras, of the Kashmiri Pandits, and of India itself.
