Two ab initio illegal unilateral and arbitrary actions in 1954 in India and the Russian Federation respectively which resulted in the per se illegal diminution of the territorial extent of India and the Russian Federation, and how the two states responded to the illegality in the long run

 

In the year 1954 there were two momentous  arbitrary and unilateral  decisions  taken which are per se ab initio illegal and null and void and non est in law which resulted in the per se illegal diminution of the territorial extent of the Republic of India,  as well as  the  Russian Federation. 

On April 26, 1954 There was a decree of the Presidium of the USSR Supreme Soviet transferring the Crimea Oblast from the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic.

According to a 2009 article on Russian website “Pravda”, the Presidium of the Supreme Council gathered for a session on 19 February 1954 when only 13 of 27 members were present. There was no quorum, but the decision was adopted unanimously. 

The transfer merited only a paragraph in Pravda, the official Soviet newspaper, on Feb. 27, 1954. The story was one long sentence and dense with detail. Here is what it said:

"Decree of the Presidium of the USSR Supreme

Soviet transferring Crimea Province from the Russian Republic to the Ukraine Republic, taking into account the integral character of the economy, the territorial proximity and the close economic ties between Crimea Province and the Ukraine Republic, and approving the joint presentation of the Presidium of the Russian Republic Supreme Soviet and the Presidium of the Ukraine Republic Supreme Soviet on the transfer of Crimea Province from the Russian Republic to the Ukraine Republic."

And with that, a region that had been purportedly "part of Russia for centuries" was "gifted" to Ukraine. "Gifted" because Khrushchev's transfer was ostensibly to mark the 300th anniversary of Ukraine's merger with the Russian empire. And he probably didn't think the Soviet Union would disintegrate less than 40 years later.

But, asks Lewis Siegelbaum, a historian at Michigan State University, "what motivated such generosity?" Writing on the website Seventeen Moments In Soviet History, he says:

"After all, Crimea, the rugged peninsula jutting into the Black Sea, had not become territorially contiguous with Ukraine all of a sudden."

Siegelbaum argues that Crimea's cultural links with Russia were far stronger, and, at the time, there were slightly more than three Russians in Crimea for each Ukrainian. (Stalin had expelled the entire local Tatar population a decade earlier.)

Khrushchev informed his comrades of the decision to deliver Crimea to Ukraine incidentally, on the way to lunch. “Yes, comrades, there is an opinion to deliver Crimea to Ukraine,” he said casually. No one dared to express any protests, because a word of the first face of the Communist Party was law.

The agenda of the session of the Presidium of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, which took place January 25, 1954, contained a question about the delivery of the Crimean region to the structure of the Ukrainian SSR. The discussion of the question took only 15 minutes. The participants of the meeting approved the decree, and the region was given away to Ukraine for free in a platter and for a song!

Not a single protest was made; no one had any doubts about the decision. No one wondered how the population (presumably the predominant Russian-speaking population, given the en masde expulsion and deportation of the indigenous  obviously acculturated Crimean Tatars) of Crimea would treat the decision. It turned out that such important issues as the territorial movement of regions could be solved without any difficulties at all.

The question ought to have been submitted to the open discussion of the Supreme Council of the Russian SSR. Moreover, a referendum should have been conducted to find out the opinion of the residents of the two republics. Nothing of that happened. The Presidium of the Supreme Council gathered for a session on February 19, 1954 - only 13 of 27 members were present. There was no quorum, but the decision was adopted unanimously. The Supreme Council of Russia ruled in 1992 that the Crimean region had been delivered to Ukraine illegitimately.

The earlier published documents and materials that have emerged more recently confirm that the transfer of Crimea from the Russian SFSR to the Ukrainian SSR was carried out in accordance with the 1936 Soviet constitution, which in Article 18 stipulated that "the territory of a Union Republic may not be altered without its consent." The proceedings of the USSR Supreme Soviet Presidium meeting indicate that both the Russian SFSR and the Ukrainian SSR had given their consent via their republic parliaments. 

On 27 June 2015, after the so-called "annexation" of Crimea by the Russian Federation, the Office of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation accepted the request of the leader of A Just Russia party, Sergey Mironov, to evaluate the legitimacy of 1954 transfer of Crimea and stated that the transfer violated both the Constitution of the Russian SFSR and the Constitution of the Soviet Union. The text of the document signed by Russian Deputy Prosecutor General Sabir Kekhlerov stated: "Neither the Constitution of the RSFSR or the USSR Constitution provide powers of the Presidium Supreme Soviet of the USSR for the consideration of the changes in the constitutional legal status of the Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, members of the union republics. In view of the above, the decision adopted in 1954 by the Presidium of the Supreme Soviets of the RSFSR and the Soviet on the transfer of the Crimean region of the RSFSR to the USSR, did not correspond to the Constitution (Fundamental Law) of the RSFSR and the Constitution (Fundamental Law) of the USSR." 

In January 1992, the Supreme Soviet of Russia questioned the constitutionality of the transfer, accusing Nikita Khrushchev of treason against the Russian people and said that the transfer was illegitimate. Alexander Rutskoy, the former Vice President of Russia, said that this was a “harebrained scheme” for which Khrushchev was famous saying that those who signed the document must have been suffering from sunstroke or hangovers.

Thus when it comes to Russia, there has been a voracious endeavour by Russian Nationalist academicians and intellectuals  to quite rightly denounce and repudiate the illegal transfer of Crimea in 1954 from the Russian Federation to Ukraine and undo and set-aside  the whole exercise  and procedure by vitiating it legally as non est in law  and also politically. That is what is to be expected of a proud and self-respecting nation whose conduct is not one of subservience and being  servile and meek.

Now coming to India,  again in the very same

year, 1954 one notorious Mr. Jawaharlal Nehru, in collusion with the Chinese  published out of the blue,  an ab initio illegal, bogus and spurious, insulting fraudulent map which is per se ultra vires the sacrosanct Constitution of India and non est in law which ceased  to depict vast areas of the Cis-Kuen Tract in northern Kashmir extending from the Shingshal Valley and Chhogori Peak K2 8611 metres in central Kashmir to Dafdar, Taghdumbash Pamir and Mariom Pamir and The Raskam Tract, and the Kukalang, Yangi, Kilian, and Sanju-la and Hindu-tash Passes in northern Kashmir as part of India and consequently resulted in the illegal cartographical cession of the aforesaid integral parts of India resulting in the illegal diminution of the territorial extent of India as a gift to the Chinese. There has been no chest beating. No hoarse cry! Mr. Jawaharlal Nehru accomplished the work he set out to do with precision for a song, just like that! 

Two maps, viz. The official maps attached to the

White Papers published in July 1948 and February 1950 by the Government of India's Ministry of States, headed, incidentally, by Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, under the authority of India's Surveyor General G.F.Heaney pertaining to the period of the commencement of the sacrosanct Constitution of India give them the legal status to determine the extent of the State of Kashmir as stipulated in Entry 15 in the First Schedule of the Constitution on India. The said official maps presented with the White Papers prove that the northern border of Kashmir with East Turkistan at the time of the accession of the state to the Union of India was on the Kuen Lun Range, the natural and historic border of Kashmir with neighbouring Trans-Kuen Lun State of East Turkistan.

Pertinently, it is imperative to note that areas shown in colour including the Kashmiri Town of Shahidullah which was virtually on the southern flanks of the Kuen Lun Range in northern Kashmir in the aforesaid maps are illegally not depicted as part of Kashmir by the present office of the Surveyor General of India presently in consonance with the bogus and spurious map published  by Mr. Jawaharlal Nehru in collusion with the Chinese. 

The Government of Kashmir had in exercise of its territorial sovereignty built a fort in the historical northern Kashmiri town of Shahidullah which was virtually on the southern flanks of the Kuen Lun Range in northern Kashmir to command the Kuen Lun  range  and to regulate and control these Kirghiz vagabond and criminal thugs. 

In June 1954, Zhou Enlai, Prime Minister of China was in India, and in the October of the same year Mr. Jawaharlal Nehru went to China. In between, Nehru issued a memorandum which stated inter alia that the frontier should be considered a firm and definite one, which is not open to discussion with any one. A system of check posts should be spread along this entire frontier. As was seen later, this lie  perpetrated on the Indian Nation  which was the pretext for this collusive bogus and false map of 1954 was tested and proved to be a lie in 1959. The  Alleged purpose of the 1954 Nehru Line was that the  "Frontier should be considered a firm and definite one, which is not open to discussion with any one. A system of check posts should  be spread along this entire frontier". The spurious and bogus reason for the publication of this illegal map can  be inferred from what happened in 1959! 

In 1959, The Director of the Intelligence

Bureau , B.N. Mullik recommended the setting of new posts in Kashmir, at inter alia Sarigh Jilganang Kol and Palong Karpo  verily in consonance with the alleged rationale behind the per se illegal and null and void map of  1954 depicting the Nehru Line  is discussed in January 1959 at a meeting in the External Affairs Ministry in the presence of Gen. Thimayya, Chief of the Army staff and the Foreign Secretary, Mr. Subimal Dutt, who was a part of Mr. Jawaharlal Nehru's coterie.  Both the Army Chief and the Foreign Secretary  opposed the proposal to open border posts at inter alia Sarigh Jilganang Kol  because according to them, the opening of the said posts would ‘provoke’ the Chinese, and create tension and “this part of the territory was useless to India", thus  debunking for ever the fraudulent reason for publishing the ab initio illegal  bogus and spurious map in 1954. Unlike much of the Russian Empire which was created by conquest, acquisition and deportation of the aboriginal indigenous population, particularly in annexed Crimea and the annihilation of Circassia, the whole of Aksai Chin including the Ngari Khor-sum extending to the ridges separating the plateau of Tibet from the Highlands of Kashmir on which are the Aling Kangri and the Mawang Kangri peaks, in Ladakh was historically per se part of Ladakh pure and simple even before the marauding Tibetans from the east reached the frontiers of Maryul in Kashmir and there was nothing whatsoever to discuss with the Chinese about this. Aksai Chin was per se not a disputed territory. It is non-negotiable! There is nothing whatsoever to discuss with the Chinese about Aksai Chin. It is per se a part of India pure and simple. 

If there had been well-informed and proud nationalist Indians, there would have been an outrage and a revolution and India would have denounced and repudiated Mr. Jawaharlal Nehru for treason and condemned him for his criminal actions against India and India would have undone the illegality and restored India's historical International Boundary with the sovereign state of East Turkistan on the Kuen Lun Range which is inevitably waiting to happen. 

On 04.04.2011, one Writ Petition (Civil) No. 127 of 2011, P.V.Ravi Chandran Vs. The Union of India and Others preferred as a public interest litigation by an Advocate hailing from Ponani, Bharata Pužha, Malappuram, Kerala practicing in the Honourable High Court of Madras, P.V.Ravi Chandran came up for hearing in the Honourable Supreme Court of India. It was a sui generis case wherein in addition to the Union of India, the State of Jammu and Kashmir and the Survey of India were arrayed as parties, and was profound in its significance and ramifications and had enough merits and was a magnum opus that it would have been not just admitted during admission but also even allowed in limine as prayed for had it been any other country. It was an opportunity to save India like never before and just in time and was waiting to happen and the Apex Court ought to have seized the opportunity. Instead, the Apex Court dismissed it in a single line order, not on merits and hence there is no res judicata, and without hearing the party- in - person and with false observation that the Petitioner had been heard, which was in the first place a lie.

Writ Petition  (Civil) No. 127 of 2011, P.V.Ravi Chandran Vs. The Union of India and Others, dated 04.04.2011 was dismissed with an oral observation that  the Petitioner therein could give a complaint or representation which in fact  had already been  meticulously done and exhausted. It was per se a fraudulent, dishonest, deceitful and treacherous and a corrupt judgement based on altogether extraneous considerations which were not germane to the merits of the case, and the oral observations did not even feature in the printed  copy of the judgement received by the Petitioner therein and was obiter dictum. The issue is that the upper Indian Judiciary right from the Honourable Supreme Court of India is all powerful and not accountable and some of the Honourable Judges can do as they please in accordance with their perverse whims and fancies and are bereft of morals, integrity or convictions, and where does a small person like the Petitioner therein fit in the scheme of things?

India is per se a subservient and servile state  whose population has been effectively emasculated and rendered effeminate in a process and procedure set in motion, and laid in place established and consolidated by the notorious Jawaharlal Nehru regime in India since १९४७! The three wings of the State, are irredeemably corrupt and cannot be redeemed in the present scenario. 

But we Indians are in the first place ignorant and oblivious about map reading and understanding our country's borders depicted in maps. Secondly, we do not feel angry, outraged, indignant, upset, or repulsive when the borders of India are depicted wrongly and incorrectly by Pro-Chinese agencies like Wikipedia or even the so-called Indian Press media, and we do not hold massive rallies and demonstrations  and demand that the publishers be punished and the company or publisher like the notorious Hindu, India's Anti-national Newspaper, be stormed, confiscated and  shut down. This is because we were manipulated to be a meek, submissive, subservient, effeminate and emasculated people by policies which were put in place by the notorious Jawaharlal Nehru! To sum up, we  are programmed and designed over a period of time to be utterly shameless! We lost that martial spirit of Ashfaqullah Khan or Bhagat Singh after  the scheming, conniving  regime of Mr. Jawaharlal Nehru who was verily an wolf in sheep's clothing who ran with the hare & hunted with the hounds, in collusion with the Chinese took over & converted India into a nation full of effeminate and emasculated Indians!