Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Was Nehru about to make Telangana Another Kashmir?

There is an interesting piece of Information how Nehru was on the verge of making Telangana another Kashmir by going to UN while Indian Army wiped out any resistance of Nizam's forces and took over Telangana. As we all know how Nehru made Kashmir a spit fire with rather idiotic wisdom, stopping the war while our Indian forces are about to walk into the territory of occupied Kashmir and into Pakistan. Without him entire Kashmir would have been with India and would have been peaceful without 371 article. He unnecessarily went to UN in the midway while India was about to win that war with Pakistan and gain the Kashmir without any problem. Why was Nehru kept on doing such historic blunders despite the noble counsel like Sardar Patel and others. Even Rajgopalachari who succeeded Patel showed better wisdom than Nehru.

Here is an account of Sri TVR Shenoy in his words

Ladder of lies - by TVR Shenoy on Rediff on net

Two recent statements from Communist Party of India-Marxist general
secretary Harkishen Singh Surjeet deserve our attention. He wondered why
the Left had not stuck roots outside Kerala, West Bengal, and Tripura
"despite its glorious role in the freedom struggle." And he slandered
the Bharatiya Janata Party as "the men who killed Mahatma Gandhi."

A man's memory is the first faculty to start withering. But I suspect
Surjeet's speeches sprang from malice rather than age. They are, in any
case, easily disproved.

"I have kept myself almost in daily touch with the progress of Bapu's
assassination," Sardar Patel wrote to Jawaharlal Nehru on February 27,
1948, "It emerges clearly that the RSS was not involved in it at all."

Whom would you rather believe, Surjeet or the Sardar?

Why was the Iron Man's statement ignored? Simple, Sardar Patel was
feared and hated by Nehru-Gandhis and Communists alike, and they joined
to bury his memory. Surjeet, however, may recall the Sardar as the man
who vowed to uproot Marxism from the soil of his Gujarat.

The Sardar has a right to be wary. The Communists spewed poison against
everyone else in the late 1920s and early 1930s. (Even the Congress
Socialists, a group within the Indian National Congress, were described
as "social fascists.") This wasn't original; the Communists were simply
parroting the line laid down by Stalin at the sixth congress of the
Communist International.

This changed abruptly after the seventh congress was held in Moscow in
1935. Stalin decided to infiltrate socialists into the country. The
Sardar wasn't fooled. He acidly described the Socialists as nothing but
"the sappers and miners of Communism" and did his best to keep them out.

Simply put, Sardar Patel didn't trust Indians who owed allegiance to
foreigners. His suspicions were well founded. When Hitler invaded Russia
in June 1941, the Communists abruptly reversed themselves, even acting
as British informers during the Quit India Movement.

Yet at the CPI-M's Calcutta session, Surjeet accused BJP leaders of not
participating in the freedom struggle! Not only is this demonstrably
wrong, it is a blatant method of hiding the Left's own horrible record.

Communist hostility continued even after 1947. Vijayalakshmi Pandit,
India's first envoy to Moscow, recorded Stalin's refusal to believe that
India was truly free. And not a single Russian bureaucrat signed the
condolence book after the Mahatma's death.

Their Soviet masters' attitude was echoed in the 'Calcutta Thesis'
formulated by the Communists in February 1948. Repeating the charge that
India was still a British colony, it vowed to continue the ''liberation
struggle''. The practical expression of this philosophy came in the form
of the Telangana peasant struggle (a fancy name for guerrilla warfare).

Telangana was part of the then Hyderabad state, a princely state
refusing to join the India Union. The Nizam had given free rein to a
group called the Razakars. Their leader Kasim Razvi vowed that "if India
invaded nothing but the bones and ashes of 10.5 million Hindus would be
found". Hindus were openly killed in Marathwada (also part of the
princely Hyderabad).

This was the gentleman with whom the Communists allied. It was said in
Warangal and Nalgonda that "the Razakars rule by day and the Communists
at night." But Nehru's government didn't react, a stance encouraged by
Lord Mountbatten (India's governor-general at Nehru's invitation).

Hyderabad took advantage of this idiocy. It loaned 200 million rupees to
a Pakistan teetering on bankruptcy. It appealed to the Americans and
sent a delegation to the United Nations. Nehru's response was to send a
counter-memorandum, but Sardar Patel's patience was exhausted.

"You referred Kashmir to the UN when victory was at hand," he said,
"What happened?"

On June 21, 1948, Mountbatten finally left, and Chakravarti
Rajagopalachari took over as governor-general. Nehru continued to plead
for a softline as late as September 8, 1948. However on September 13,
'Operation Polo' began. It took just 108 hours before Hyderabad was
forced to lay down arms on September 17.

The Communists, however, fought on for three more years. The Sardar died
in December 1950, but his work was continued by Rajaji who succeeded him
as Union home minister. (He described the Communists as "Public Enemy
Number One.")

I wouldn't normally use this column to talk about events that took place
half a century ago and more, but comrade Surjeet is trying to rewrite
history six hundred and one months after the Nizam's fall.

You cannot ascend the pinnacles of power by standing on a ladder of


  1. //He unnecessarily went to UN in the midway while India was about to win that war with Pakistan and gain the Kashmir without any problem.//
    Why Lal bahadur Shastry an able Pm gave back the won over land in to Pakistan back?
    If it was genuine than Nehru was forsighted to understand that winning any such land with out world diplomacy will be useless.

  2. @aatmayogi

    Why an "able prime minister" Lal Bahadur shastri gave back the land which he won from pakistan? In your own words you are agreeing that Lal is more abler than Nehru. Good

    May be that is the reason only His body came back to India not his soul. May be it is another conspiracy of gandhi-nehru family in connivance with Communist USSR.

    Foresightedness of Nehru !!!
    Yes indeed, after discourse of Panchsheel to Chinese, they came to us with war. Good Diplomacy there also loosing Aksai chin to China, 30,000 sq kms.

    Nehru shamelessly commented in the Indian parliament that "Not a blade of grass grows in Aksai Chin", attempting to explain that Aksai Chin was a barren, inhospitable land and the nation had lost little by its occupation by China. An MP from UP Tyagi retorted, pointing to his bald head: "Nothing grows here ..should it be cut off or given away to somebody else?".

    This is what our Nehruji is!!!
    Pl come up with your argument yogiji