""The people of KASHMIR were never given that right. LORD MOUNTBATTEN became the first Governer General of India while
MUHAMMAD ALI JINNAH, (a local leader) the Governor General of Pakistan. Now, there was this REDCLIFF COMMISION (lead by Sir Serale Redcliff, a british lawyer) appointed by the British parliament to decide the borders for the countries. He along with MOUNTBATTEN, cheated and included KASHMIR in India. A part of that Kashmir was won by Pakistan in the war b/w PAK and IND in 1948""
the ruler of kashmir (a hindu) AND his muslim rival, both wished kashmir to be part of India and so in effect 'gave' kashmir to India. there was no referendum however. the british accepted this and it may have been a mistake. however, partition of kashmir would have been unfair, 'giving' kashmir to pakistan may also not have been in the kashmir peoples interest either. its obviously a problem and emotive for both sides. we get the blame either way.
why is there all this anti-british, blaming britain stuff ??? cheating ?? all the british tried to do was leave the place in peace and as democratic states (or state, the partition wasn't a british idea).
why say we cared either way ? it didn't matter to the british if kashmir was pakistani or india, or whether pakistan existed as an independant state at all. all that was done was a compromise to try to please all the various factions. i think it was all rushed and mistakes were made, but the british were told to leave basically, they didn't have much choice. independance, if allowed to be a longer slower process would have been better for all concerned.
