→Instrument of accession
>Kautilya3 |
->Hrishikes |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
{{Use dmy dates|date=June 2017}} | {{Use dmy dates|date=June 2017}} | ||
[[File:Junaghad state.jpg|thumb|Location of [[Junagarh State|Junagadh State]] in [[Saurashtra (region)|Saurashtra]] | [[File:Junaghad state.jpg|thumb|Location of [[Junagarh State|Junagadh State]] in [[Saurashtra (region)|Saurashtra]]]] | ||
[[Junagarh State|Junagadh]] was a [[princely state]] of British | [[Junagarh State|Junagadh]] was a [[princely state]] of the British Raj, located in what is now [[Gujarat]], outside but under the [[suzerainty]] of [[British India]]. | ||
In the independence and [[partition of British India]] of 1947, the 565 [[princely state]]s were given a choice to either join the new [[Dominion of India]] or the newly formed state of [[dominion of Pakistan|Pakistan]]. | In the independence and [[partition of British India]] of 1947, the 565 [[princely state]]s were given a choice to either join the new [[Dominion of India]] or the newly formed state of [[dominion of Pakistan|Pakistan]]. | ||
The Nawab of Junagadh, [[Muhammad Mahabat Khanji III]], a Muslim whose ancestors had ruled Junagadh and small principalities for some two hundred years, decided that Junagadh should become part of Pakistan, much to the displeasure of many of the people of the state, an overwhelming majority of whom were [[Hindu]]s, about 80%. The Nawab acceded to the Dominion of Pakistan on 15 August 1947, against the advice of [[Lord Mountbatten]], arguing that Junagadh joined Pakistan by sea.{{ | The Nawab of Junagadh, [[Muhammad Mahabat Khanji III]], a Muslim whose ancestors had ruled Junagadh and small principalities for some two hundred years, decided that Junagadh should become part of Pakistan, much to the displeasure of many of the people of the state, an overwhelming majority of whom were [[Hindu]]s, about 80%. The Nawab acceded to the Dominion of Pakistan on 15 August 1947, against the advice of [[Lord Mountbatten]], arguing that Junagadh joined Pakistan by sea.{{Citation needed|date=January 2019}} The principality of [[Babariawad]] and [[Sheikh]] of [[Mangrol State|Mangrol]] reacted by claiming independence from Junagadh and accession to India,{{sfn|Raghavan, War and Peace in Modern India|2010|pp=35, 38}} although the Sheikh of Mangrol withdrew his accession to India the very next day.<ref>{{harvtxt|Bangash, A Princely Affair|2015|p=113}}; {{harvtxt|Raghavan, War and Peace in Modern India|2010|p=38}}; {{harvtxt|Ankit, The accession of Junagadh|2016|p=377}}</ref> Muhammad Ali Jinnah waited for a month to accept the Instrument of Accession, to see if Nehru would make the argument that a Hindu majority under a Muslim ruler, than he would respond with Kashmir's case being the same. When Pakistan accepted the Nawab's [[Instrument of Accession]] on 16 September, the Government of India was outraged that [[Muhammad Ali Jinnah]] could accept the accession of Junagadh despite his argument that Hindus and Muslims could not live as one nation. [[Sardar]] [[Vallabhbhai Patel]] believed that if Junagadh was permitted to go to Pakistan, it would exacerbate the communal tension already simmering in Gujarat. | ||
The princely state was surrounded on all of its land borders by India, with an outlet onto the [[Arabian Sea]]. The unsettled conditions in Junagadh had led to a cessation of all trade with India and the food position became precarious. With the region in crisis, the Nawab, fearing for his life, felt forced to flee to [[Karachi]] with his family and his followers, and there he established a provisional government. | The princely state was surrounded on all of its land borders by India, with an outlet onto the [[Arabian Sea]]. The unsettled conditions in Junagadh had led to a cessation of all trade with India and the food position became precarious. With the region in crisis, the Nawab, fearing for his life, felt forced to flee to [[Karachi]] with his family and his followers, and there he established a provisional government. | ||
| Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
The constitutional adviser to the Nawab of Junagadh, Nabi Baksh, and Junagadh's ministers gave the impression to Mountbatten that Junagadh intended to accede to India.<ref> | The constitutional adviser to the Nawab of Junagadh, Nabi Baksh, and Junagadh's ministers gave the impression to Mountbatten that Junagadh intended to accede to India.<ref> | ||
{{ | {{cite book |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Nyk6oA2nOlgC&pg=PA206 |title=Aspects of India's International Relations, 1700 to 2000: South Asia and the World |last=Banerji |first=Arun |publisher=Pearson Education India |year=2007 |pages=206 |chapter=Border |isbn=9788131708347 |quote=The decision on Junagadh's accession to Pakistan was announced on 15 August.}} | ||
</ref> However, Muslim League politicians from Sindh | </ref> However, [[All-India Muslim League|Muslim League]] politicians from [[Sindh]] had joined Junagadh's executive council since May, and the state's diwan was away for health reasons, leaving the charge with [[Shahnawaz Bhutto]].{{efn|[[Shahnawaz Bhutto]] was a politician from Sindh, and the father of the later Pakistan prime minister [[Zulfikar Ali Bhutto]].}} Bhutto met Jinnah in July, who advised him to hold out till 15 August under any circumstances.<ref>{{harvp|Raghavan, War and Peace in Modern India|2010|pp=31–32}}; {{harvp|Ankit, The accession of Junagadh|2016|p=374}}</ref> Accordingly, the state continued to give the impression till the last moment that it was intending to join India along with other Kathiawar states.<ref>{{harvp|Raghavan, War and Peace in Modern India|2010|pp=31–32}}: "Junagadh in turn managed to mislead Delhi and other neighbouring states by issuing proclamations of Kathiawar unity."</ref> | ||
{{ | Four days before independence, under the influence of the [[All-India Muslim League|Muslim League]] politicians, the Nawab decided to join Pakistan, and sent a delegation to Karachi to negotiate terms with Pakistan,<ref> | ||
</ref>{{ | {{cite book |last=Banerji |first=Arun |chapter=Borders |title=Aspects of India's International Relations, 1700 to 2000: South Asia and the World |publisher=Pearson Education India |year=2007 |pages=207|isbn=9788131708347 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Nyk6oA2nOlgC&pg=PA206}} | ||
</ref><ref>{{harvp|Ankit, The accession of Junagadh|2016|p=374}}; {{harvp|Bangash, A Princely Affair|2015|p=108}}</ref> disregarding Mountbatten's contiguity principle.{{sfn|Copland, The Princes of India|1997|p=260}} Mountbatten's contention was that only states bordering Pakistan should accede to it. Evidently, it was not a constitutional requirement, only a political one.{{sfn|Copland, The Princes of India|1997|loc=p. 260, footnote 120}} The Nawab and Pakistan reasoned that Junagadh was close enough to Pakistan and linked by a sea route ([[Veraval]] to [[Karachi]]).<ref>{{harvp|Raghavan, War and Peace in Modern India|2010|pp=31–32}}: 'Jinnah assured Bhutto that he would not allow Junagadh to be “starved out or tyrannized and that Veraval was not far from Karachi.”'</ref> | |||
Junagadh, under the amendments done to the Government of India Act 1935, had political bands with the neighboring states of Mangrol and Babariawad. In 1943, The latter states were tied to Junagadh through an attachment scheme, but when the act was adopted in 1947, the amendments had not carried over, and this lapse was the base on which VP Menon argued that Junagadh did not have a say in the affairs of Mangrol and Babariawad states.<ref name=":0">{{cite journal |last=Ankit|first=Rakesh|date=July 2016|title=The accession of Junagadh, 1947–48: Colonial sovereignty, state violence and post-independence India|url=http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0019464616651167|journal=The Indian Economic & Social History Review|language=en|volume=53|issue=3|pages=371–404|doi=10.1177/0019464616651167|s2cid=147765080|issn=0019-4646}}</ref> Nehru strategised that if Junagadh didn't recognize the accession of Mangrol and Babariawad and withdraw its forces from the latter, then he would send in forces, information of which he sent to Pakistan and Britain. Meanwhile, a study case of India regarding Junagadh was made in the international opinion through press communiques that provided information on Junagadh's geographical contiguity to Indian landscape and its demographics.<ref name=":0" /> | |||
==Instrument of accession== | ==Instrument of accession== | ||
[[File:Instrument of Accession of Junagadh to Dominion of Pakistan.pdf|page=1|thumb|IoA of Junagadh, first page]] | |||
Mountbatten and Ayyangar both agreed that the issue of geographical contiguity had no legal standing and that Junagadh's accession to Pakistan was strictly and legally correct. But Sardar Patel demanded that the matter of the state's accession should be decided by its people instead of the ruler.<ref>{{harvtxt|Ankit, The accession of Junagadh|2016|p=381}}: While Ayyangar and Mountbatten concurred that Junagarh's geographical contiguity could not have 'any standing in law', that is, it was 'strictly and legally correct' for it to have joined Pakistan, Patel retorted by arguing that people of a state should decide and not its ruler.</ref> Nehru laid out India's position which was that India did not accept Junagadh's accession to Pakistan.{{sfn|Ankit, The accession of Junagadh|2016|p=383}} | Mountbatten and Ayyangar both agreed that the issue of geographical contiguity had no legal standing and that Junagadh's accession to Pakistan was strictly and legally correct. But Sardar Patel demanded that the matter of the state's accession should be decided by its people instead of the ruler.<ref>{{harvtxt|Ankit, The accession of Junagadh|2016|p=381}}: While Ayyangar and Mountbatten concurred that Junagarh's geographical contiguity could not have 'any standing in law', that is, it was 'strictly and legally correct' for it to have joined Pakistan, Patel retorted by arguing that people of a state should decide and not its ruler.</ref> Nehru laid out India's position which was that India did not accept Junagadh's accession to Pakistan.{{sfn|Ankit, The accession of Junagadh|2016|p=383}} | ||
| Line 50: | Line 52: | ||
==Provisional government (''Aarzee Hukumat'')== | ==Provisional government (''Aarzee Hukumat'')== | ||
Upon Menon's advice{{sfn|Ankit, The accession of Junagadh|2016|p=381}} Mahatma Gandhi's nephew, Samaldas Gandhi, created a provisional government in Bombay with the | Upon Menon's advice{{sfn|Ankit, The accession of Junagadh|2016|p=381}} Mahatma Gandhi's nephew, Samaldas Gandhi, created a provisional government in Bombay with the provincial government's backing.<ref name=McLeod>{{citation |last=McLeod |first=John |chapter=Junagadh |editor1=James Stuart Olson |editor2=Robert Shadle |title=Historical Dictionary of the British Empire |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=L-X-XYB_ZkIC&pg=PA613 |year=1996 |publisher=Greenwood Publishing Group |isbn=978-0-313-29366-5 |page=613}} | ||
</ref><ref>{{harvnb|Bangash, A Princely Affair|2015|p=112}}: "The second tactic was the Arzi Hukumat (provisional government), which was set up under the leadership of Samaldas Gandhi, a nephew of Mahatma Gandhi, under the auspices of the Government of India in Bombay [''sic'']."</ref> This government received support from the 'Gujarat States Organisation' and also received sponsorship from the Kathiawar Political Conference | </ref><ref>{{harvnb|Bangash, A Princely Affair|2015|p=112}}: "The second tactic was the Arzi Hukumat (provisional government), which was set up under the leadership of Samaldas Gandhi, a nephew of Mahatma Gandhi, under the auspices of the Government of India in Bombay [''sic'']."</ref> This government received support from the 'Gujarat States Organisation' and also received sponsorship from the [[All India States Peoples' Conference|Kathiawar States' Political Conference]].{{sfn|Raghavan, War and Peace in Modern India|2010|pp=39-40}}{{sfn|Ankit, The accession of Junagadh|2016|p=381}}{{efn|The Kathiawar Political Conference (''Kathiawar Rajkiya Parishad'') was established in 1921 to coordinate the peoples' movements in the princely states of Kathiawar.{{sfn|McLeod, Sovereignty, Power, Control|1999|pp=37–38}} Its goal was to achieve some participation of the states' subjects in the governance of the states.{{sfn|Ramusack, Congress and the People's Movement in Princely India|1988|p=381}} It became a member of the [[All India States Peoples' Conference]] when the latter was founded in 1927, and remained so until its dissolution in April 1948, after which it merged with the [[Indian National Congress]].{{sfn|Ramusack, Congress and the People's Movement in Princely India|1988|p=395}}}} | ||
India allowed the provisional government to take control over outlying areas of Junagadh.<ref>{{harvtxt|Ankit, The accession of Junagadh|2016|p=384}}: Finally, New Delhi agreed to the provisional government taking over administration in the outlying pockets of the state.</ref><ref name=McLeod/> | [[Samaldas Gandhi]], [[U. N. Dhebar]] and members of Junagadh People's Conference met at the office of Gujarati daily ''Vande Mataram'' in Bombay on 19 August 1947. He was was specially invited to attend Kathiawar Political Confrence on 25 August 1947. A five-member committee called Junagadh Committee was formed on 15 September 1947. Gandhi met [[V. P. Menon]] and proposed to formed the a government-in-exile the ''Aarzi Hakumat'' or ''Provisional Government'' of Junagadh State. On 25 September 1947, the ''Aarzi Hukumat'' headed by Samaldas Gandhi was declared in a public meeting at Madhavbagh in Bombay.<ref name=":02">{{cite web |last=Jani|first=Shashikant Vishwanath|date=2010-01-01|title=ગાંધી, શામળદાસ લક્ષ્મીદાસ|url=https://gujarativishwakosh.org/%E0%AA%97%E0%AA%BE%E0%AA%82%E0%AA%A7%E0%AB%80-%E0%AA%B6%E0%AA%BE%E0%AA%AE%E0%AA%B3%E0%AA%A6%E0%AA%BE%E0%AA%B8-%E0%AA%B2%E0%AA%95%E0%AB%8D%E0%AA%B7%E0%AB%8D%E0%AA%AE%E0%AB%80%E0%AA%A6%E0%AA%BE/|url-status=live|access-date=2022-01-02|website=[[Gujarati Vishwakosh]]|language=gu}}</ref> | ||
The five member ministry of ''Aarzi Hakumat'' went to [[Rajkot]]. Gandhi became the Prime Minister and also held ministry of foreign affairs. ''Aarzi Hakumat'' captured 160 villages in forty days, from 30 September to 8 November 1947.<ref name=":02" /> | |||
India allowed the provisional government to take control over outlying areas of Junagadh.<ref>{{harvtxt|Ankit, The accession of Junagadh|2016|p=384}}: Finally, New Delhi agreed to the provisional government taking over administration in the outlying pockets of the state.</ref><ref name=McLeod/> India later at the [[UN Security council|UN Security Council]] denied ever having supported the provisional government.{{sfn|Bangash, A Princely Affair|2015|p=112}}<ref name=":132">{{harvtxt|Ankit, The accession of Junagadh|2016|p=401}}: "It continued to claim that New Delhi had given 'no support at all to the so-called provisional government' and even denied stopping supplies to Junagadh."</ref> Pakistan objected to India's indifference to the actions of Junagadh's provisional government.<ref name=":4">{{harvtxt|Ankit, The accession of Junagadh|2016|p=386}}: In response, Karachi protested against New Delhi's 'indifference' to the provisional government of Junagadh and its activities.</ref> Nehru wrote to Pakistan that the provisional government was "a spontaneous expression of popular resentment" to the state's accession to Pakistan by Junagadh's local population.{{Citation needed|date=October 2021}} | |||
==Blockade and Indian annexation== | ==Blockade and Indian annexation== | ||
To force the Nawab of Junagadh to change his decision, the Provisional Government (Aarzee Hukumat) and the volunteer forces in the surrounding regions of | To force the Nawab of Junagadh to change his decision, the Provisional Government (Aarzee Hukumat) and the volunteer forces in the surrounding regions of Kathiawar implemented a blockade.{{sfn|Bangash, A Princely Affair|2015|p=112}}<ref name=McLeod/> India later denied ever having blocked Junagadh's supplies.<ref name=":132" /> The blockade compelled the state's ruler to leave for Pakistan,{{sfn|Copland, The Princes of India|1997|p=261-262}} who left the state's administration to [[Shah Nawaz Bhutto|Sir Shahnawaz Bhutto]]. Menon claimed that the Nawab had delegated the state's destiny to Bhutto, which is not implausible since it was primarily Shah Nawaz Bhutto who had taken the decision to accede to Pakistan, under the close influence and mentorship of Jinnah. Bhutto requested the regional commissioner for administrative assistance "pending an honourable settlement of the several issues involved in Junagadh's accession." Diwan Bhutto waited till November for Pakistan to send help, but none came. The provisional government, nationalistic volunteers from the Indian side, and the Hindu residents had started to agitate and tensions were simmering. Meanwhile, the state of Junagadh had raised a force of 670 Muslim men, who had been stationed at various places to ensure retaliation, if any. Fearing an outbreak of communal violence, on 9 November 1947, the Indian Government assumed the state's administration to re-establish peace.{{sfn|Bangash, A Princely Affair|2015|p=117}} Nawab's soldiers were disarmed, with Diwan Bhutto leaving for Pakistan a day before.{{sfnp|Yagnik & Sheth, Shaping of Modern Gujarat|2005|pp=222–224}} | ||
Nehru telegrammed Liaquat Ali Khan: | Nehru telegrammed Liaquat Ali Khan: | ||
{{ | {{blockquote|In view of special circumstances pointed out by Junagadh Dewan that is the Prime Minister of Junagadh – our Regional Commissioner at Rajkot has taken temporary charge of Junagadh administration. This has been done to avoid disorder and resulting chaos. We have, however, no desire to continue this arrangement and wish to find a speedy solution in accordance with the wishes of the people of Junagadh. We have pointed out to you previously that final decision should be made by means of referendum or plebiscite. We would be glad to discuss this question and allied matters affecting Junagadh with representatives of your Government at the earliest possible moment convenient to you. We propose to invite Nawab of Junagadh to send his representatives to this conference.<ref name="Nehru1949"> | ||
{{citation |last=Nehru |first=Jawaharlal |title=Independence and after: a collection of the more important speeches, from September 1946 to May 1949 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Fr1PAQAAIAAJ |year=1949 |publisher=Publications Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India}} | {{citation |last=Nehru |first=Jawaharlal |title=Independence and after: a collection of the more important speeches, from September 1946 to May 1949 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Fr1PAQAAIAAJ |year=1949 |publisher=Publications Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India}} | ||
</ref>}} | </ref>}} | ||
Liaquat Ali Khan replied: | Liaquat Ali Khan replied: | ||
{{ | {{blockquote|Your telegram informing that your Government had taken charge of Junagadh was received by me on November 10, 1947. Your action in taking over State Administration and sending Indian troops to state without any authority from Pakistan Government and indeed without our knowledge, is a clear violation of Pakistan territory and breach of International law.{{sfn|Bangash, A Princely Affair|2015|p=118}}}} | ||
Reports arrived of widespread murder, rape and looting of Muslims in Junagarh following the arrival of Indian troops.<ref>{{harvtxt|Ankit, The accession of Junagadh|2016|p=397}}</ref> Many Muslims from Junagarh began migrating to Pakistan.<ref>{{harvtxt|Ankit, The accession of Junagadh|2016|p=396}}</ref> | Reports arrived of widespread murder, rape and looting of Muslims in Junagarh following the arrival of Indian troops.<ref>{{harvtxt|Ankit, The accession of Junagadh|2016|p=397}}</ref> Many Muslims from Junagarh began migrating to Pakistan.<ref>{{harvtxt|Ankit, The accession of Junagadh|2016|p=396}}</ref> | ||
| Line 79: | Line 85: | ||
Douglas Brown of the ''Daily Telegraph'' as well as Pakistani newspaper ''Dawn'' expressed concerns about the propriety of the plebiscite's arrangement. On 26 February, Pakistan termed India's proceeding with the plebiscite a 'discourtesy to Pakistan and the Security Council'.<ref name=":12">{{harvtxt|Ankit, The accession of Junagadh|2016|p=402}}</ref> In the plebiscite India polled 222,184 votes and Pakistan 130 out of a total population of 720,000 of Junagadh and its feudatories.<ref name=":12" /> | Douglas Brown of the ''Daily Telegraph'' as well as Pakistani newspaper ''Dawn'' expressed concerns about the propriety of the plebiscite's arrangement. On 26 February, Pakistan termed India's proceeding with the plebiscite a 'discourtesy to Pakistan and the Security Council'.<ref name=":12">{{harvtxt|Ankit, The accession of Junagadh|2016|p=402}}</ref> In the plebiscite India polled 222,184 votes and Pakistan 130 out of a total population of 720,000 of Junagadh and its feudatories.<ref name=":12" /> | ||
Only 15 percent (21,606) of Junagadh's Muslim population voted while 30 percent (179,851) of the non-Muslim population voted. The total number of voters on electoral rolls was 200, 569 and less than 10,000 Muslims voted for India.<ref name=":12" /> In Manvadar, 276 out of 520 Muslims voted for India, in Bantwa 19 out of 39 and 79 out of 231 in Sardargarh. In Bantwa and Babariawad the number of voters who cast their votes in India's favour was less than the number of non-Muslim voters there, which meant that even some non-Muslims did not vote for India.<ref name=":12" /> According to scholar Rakesh Ankit India took liberties with facts and laws as it acted as the "judge, jury and executioner" of the entire situation.{{sfn|Ankit, The accession of Junagadh|2016|p=403}} | Only 15 percent (21,606) of Junagadh's Muslim population voted while 30 percent (179,851) of the non-Muslim population voted. The total number of voters on electoral rolls was 200, 569 and less than 10,000 Muslims voted for India.<ref name=":12" /> In Manvadar, 276 out of 520 Muslims voted for India, in Bantwa 19 out of 39 and 79 out of 231 in Sardargarh. In Bantwa and Babariawad the number of voters who cast their votes in India's favour was less than the number of non-Muslim voters there, which meant that even some non-Muslims did not vote for India.<ref name=":12" /> According to scholar Rakesh Ankit, India took liberties with facts and laws as it acted as the "judge, jury and executioner" of the entire situation.{{sfn|Ankit, The accession of Junagadh|2016|p=403}} | ||
==Later arrangements== | ==Later arrangements== | ||
Junagadh | After six months administration by Government of India, three civillian members (Samaldas Gandhi, Dayashankar Dave and Pushpaben Mehta) were inducted for the administration of Junagadh on 1 June 1948. The election of the seven constituencies of the Junagadh region for the Constitution Assembly of Saurashtra was declared in December 1948. All seven members of Indian National Congress were elected unopposed and they all voted to merge Junagadh State with [[Saurashtra State]]. The merger was completed in January 1949.<ref name=":02"/> | ||
On 1 November 1956, Saurashtra State was merged with [[Bombay State]]. Bombay State was split into the linguistic states of [[Gujarat]] and [[Maharashtra]] in 1960, and [[Junagadh district]] is now one of the districts of Gujarat. | |||
Pakistan brought the case of Junagadh to the United Nations in January 1948. The UN Security Council commanded its commission on Kashmir to examine the conflict over Junagadh.<ref name=McLeod/> The Kashmir conflict eclipsed the matter of Junagadh at the United Nations Security Council,<ref name="Terris2016">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=3TIlDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA138 |title=Mediation of International Conflicts: A Rational Model |date=8 December 2016 |publisher=Taylor & Francis |isbn=978-1-315-46776-4 |pages=138– |author=Lesley G. Terris}}</ref> where Junagadh's case is still unresolved.<ref name=McLeod/>{{sfn|Pande, Explaining Pakistan’s Foreign Policy|2011|p=18}} | Pakistan brought the case of Junagadh to the United Nations in January 1948. The UN Security Council commanded its commission on Kashmir to examine the conflict over Junagadh.<ref name=McLeod/> The Kashmir conflict eclipsed the matter of Junagadh at the United Nations Security Council,<ref name="Terris2016">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=3TIlDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA138 |title=Mediation of International Conflicts: A Rational Model |date=8 December 2016 |publisher=Taylor & Francis |isbn=978-1-315-46776-4 |pages=138– |author=Lesley G. Terris}}</ref> where Junagadh's case is still unresolved.<ref name=McLeod/>{{sfn|Pande, Explaining Pakistan’s Foreign Policy|2011|p=18}} Pakistan's official maps show Junagadh, [[Manavadar]] and [[Sir Creek]] as Pakistani territory.<ref> | ||
Devirupa Mitra, [https://thewire.in/external-affairs/pakistani-complaint-to-un-over-geospatial-bill-is-a-silly-issue-experts Pakistan Objects to India's Map Bill But its Own 2014 Law Regulates Geospatial Data Too], The Wire, 18 May 2016. | |||
</ref><ref> | |||
Philip Jagessar, [https://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/mapcollection/2019/10/03/pakistan-india-and-mapping-the-contested-accession-of-south-asias-princely-states/ Pakistan, India and mapping the contested accession of South Asia’s princely states], University of Nottingham, 3 October 2019. | |||
</ref><ref> | |||
{{cite news |url=https://thehimalayantimes.com/world/pakistan-unveils-new-political-map-claiming-jammu-india-retorts/ |title=After Nepal, Pakistan unveils new political map; Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh claimed, India retorts |work=The Himalayan Times |date=4 August 2020 |access-date=4 August 2020}} | |||
</ref> | |||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
| Line 105: | Line 119: | ||
* {{citation |last=Raghavan |first=Srinath |title=War and Peace in Modern India |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=EbtBJb1bsHUC&pg=PA101 |date=2010 |publisher=Palgrave Macmillan |isbn=978-1-137-00737-7 |pages=101– |ref={{sfnref|Raghavan, War and Peace in Modern India|2010}}}} | * {{citation |last=Raghavan |first=Srinath |title=War and Peace in Modern India |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=EbtBJb1bsHUC&pg=PA101 |date=2010 |publisher=Palgrave Macmillan |isbn=978-1-137-00737-7 |pages=101– |ref={{sfnref|Raghavan, War and Peace in Modern India|2010}}}} | ||
* {{citation |last=Ramusack |first=Barbara N. |chapter=Congress and the People's Movement in Princely India: Ambivalence in Strategy and Organization |editor1=Richard Sisson |editor2=Stanley Wolpert |title=Congress and Indian Nationalism: The Pre-independence Phase |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=QfOSxFVQa8IC&pg=PA387 |date=1988 |publisher=University of California Press |isbn=978-0-520-06041-8 |pages=377–404 |ref={{sfnref|Ramusack, Congress and the People's Movement in Princely India|1988}}}} | * {{citation |last=Ramusack |first=Barbara N. |chapter=Congress and the People's Movement in Princely India: Ambivalence in Strategy and Organization |editor1=Richard Sisson |editor2=Stanley Wolpert |title=Congress and Indian Nationalism: The Pre-independence Phase |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=QfOSxFVQa8IC&pg=PA387 |date=1988 |publisher=University of California Press |isbn=978-0-520-06041-8 |pages=377–404 |ref={{sfnref|Ramusack, Congress and the People's Movement in Princely India|1988}}}} | ||
* {{citation | | * {{citation |last1=Yagnik |first1=Achyut |last2=Sheth |first2=Suchitra |title=Shaping of Modern Gujarat |publisher=Penguin UK |year=2005 |isbn=978-8184751857 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=FYDviPFeoSAC&pg=PA222 |ref={{sfnref|Yagnik & Sheth, Shaping of Modern Gujarat|2005}}}} | ||
==Further reading== | ==Further reading== | ||
* {{citation |last=Hodson |first=H. V. |title=The Great Divide: Britain, India, Pakistan |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=MC2UoAEACAAJ |year=1969 |publisher=Hutchinson |location=London |ref={{sfnref|Hodson, The Great Divide|1969}}}} | * {{citation |last=Hodson |first=H. V. |title=The Great Divide: Britain, India, Pakistan |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=MC2UoAEACAAJ |year=1969 |publisher=Hutchinson |location=London |isbn=9780090971503 |ref={{sfnref|Hodson, The Great Divide|1969}}}} | ||
* {{citation |first=V. P. |last=Menon |title=The Story of Integration of the Indian States |publisher=Orient Longman |year=1956 |url=https://hidf1.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/the-story-of-the-integration-of-the-indian-states-by-v-p-menon.pdf}} | * {{citation |first=V. P. |last=Menon |title=The Story of Integration of the Indian States |publisher=Orient Longman |year=1956 |url=https://hidf1.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/the-story-of-the-integration-of-the-indian-states-by-v-p-menon.pdf}} | ||