What a mockery they have made of it. A cruel joke played with all Kashmiris in general and victims in particular, writes Zulfikar Majid.
Finally the report of one-man enquiry commission of Justice Muzzafar Jan (Retd) probing rape and murder of two girls of Shopian is out. It took the commission almost one and a half month to complete the probe. But after such a hectic exercise the questions regarding the death of two innocent girls remains unanswered. Instead of reaching the conclusion and identifying the culprits of the heinous crime, the Commission has tried to find scapegoats. Somewhere they have defamed the victims and somewhere they have questioned the character and background of the victims’ relatives. It seems that whole exercise is to save the culprits, Justice Jan has tried everything to create the confusion.
Isn’t it ridiculous to discuss caste of the two girls who were raped and then mercilessly killed? What is Justice Jan trying to prove by saying that victim Nelofar Jan and Roomi Jan (sister of other victims Asiya Jan) were frequently visiting their orchard where Nelofar might have developed some relation with someone else. Is visiting one’s orchard a crime? Assumptions and presumptions of the commission have not only hurt the sentiments of the victims’ relatives, but whole Kashmir is infuriated by such allegations.
To hide its incompetence, the investigating agency has leveled wild allegations against the victims and their families. It was a simple case of gang rape and murder and it didn’t need any mysterious method to establish it. What people of Shopian have been saying from day one, Jan Commission has come up with it after a hectic exercise spanned over a more period of more than one month? People said that it wasn’t a case of drowning, and active role of some police officials in the occurrence of crime can’t be ruled out.
The allegations against the brother of Nelofar, Syed Zeerak Shah, according to commission report, is that he slapped a doctor who was conducting post mortem and instigated the public to protest against the crime. What do you expect from a brother whose sister has been gang raped and then brutally murdered? No brother on this earth can remain cool and calm after such an outrageous assault on the modesty of his sister.
For slapping a doctor and protesting against the government, Justice Jan has recommended that sustained questioning/interrogation of Zeerak Shah be carried out so as “to work out the possibility of his involvement in the rape and murder of Nelofar and Asiya.” Similarly, about Asiya’s brother and Nelofar’s husband, Shakeel Ahmad Ahnager, the commission has recommended an in-depth investigation to “work out the possibility of his and his friends’ involvement in the crime.” His fault is that he has a Maruti car and maintains a good living standard. This is the height of things. At the least, this whole report is ridiculous and absurd. Does Justice Jan expect us to believe that a brother would get his sister raped? It can’t be thought of. Didn’t Justice Jan think twice before scripting such outrageous statements in his diary? The commission has trivialized the grave and serious issue. The way the commission has questioned the modesty of the victims is more outrageous than there rape.
The Jan Commission has also poked its nose in the working of media for which it had no mandate. It has recommended firm guidelines to ensure that the authenticity of the news be verified and only after proper satisfaction of the guidelines of the news, it be published. The local media by and large reported in a professional manner throughout these weeks and they don’t need any lessons on that from Justice Jan.
The tragedy and its initial handling had already put the credibility of the government at stake. Police refused to register an FIR against the rape and murder. It flared up the whole valley and relentless protests were held. Two people lost lives in the protests while dozens others were injured after which police finally registered the FIR. Initially the chief minister, Omar Abdullah, was mislead that it was a drowning case and he even stated it before the mediamen in a press conference on June 1. In the same press conference, Omar said that Commission has been setup to probe the incident and within a month it would come up with the facts. Where are the facts and who has been arrested? People had little hope with the commission as Justice Jan is known for his political proclivities to a particular political party.
When people were demanding probe by a sitting judge of a High Court, government excused itself that it was time consuming to seek permission from Supreme Court for such a probe. He had stated that facts would be before the people within a month. What happened to Omar’s promise?There are some questions, which need answers from both the commission and the government. Who destroys evidences after the occurrence of the crime? Even in a normal crime, police registers FIR without any delay. What is Justice Jan trying to establish when he says that it seems that the investigating agency i.e. SI, SHO, Dy SP and SP are unaware of the mandatory provisions of section 174 CRPC, Rule 580 of Police Manual, Rule 614 of Police Rules and 157 (b) CRPC. It seems Justice Jan has left no stone unturned to cover up the issue.
The way Justice Jan Commission has investigated the outrageous tragedy of rape and murder of two women in Shopian and has absolved the security agencies of suspicion, has trivialized the collective honor of the Kashmiri nation and the modesty of womenfolk in general.
The whole Kashmir was aghast over this very shameful and outrageous incident justifiably enraging the people. Had this tragedy struck elsewhere, the whole world would have rallied behind the victims, seeking punishment to culprits. Mukhtartan Mai’s case became a hot new across the globe because the incident had happened in Pakistan and not elsewhere.
Over the past two decades, number of commissions have been setup in Kashmir to probe the human rights violations. But a minuscule few had come up with the facts. It has dented the credibility of the institutions. Government should keep in mind that not less than Prime Minster of India has intervened in Shopian incident and assured that culprits would be brought to the book, irrespective of their position.
The case is already being monitored by the High Court and Special Investigation Team of Police is also probing it. It is high time that all the police officials whose names have figured in destruction of evidence be arrested and interrogated thoroughly. Prime Minister and Chief Minister should come up with a clear statement on the issue. And if local agencies aren’t able to crack the case, let it be handed over to premier investigating agency CBI, which have requisite expertise to investigate such cases. Jan Commission either lacked the competence to solve the case, or had ulterior motives.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Not as black as painted
Journalists are not ‘angels’ from heaven. You can’t ignore the good work they have done in harsh conditions and label them whatever you want, writes Zulfikar Majid.
“Sentiment doesn’t belong to any particular individual, group or banner, but it belongs to whole Kashmiri nation. It has no exclusive copyright.” These were the words of Kashmir’s prominent columnist, Aijaz-ul-Haq in a seminar tilted “Kashmir - A Way Forward” organized by Greater Kashmir Foundation. Well said Mr Haq. Kashmir needs realistic people like you who can show the way to the suffering nation.
Unfortunately, over the years an environment of mistrust has been created here, where labelling others as traitors, agents, assignment holders and so on have become a routine. Initially, labelling was limited to militants and militancy itself, but now it has left almost no person and no profession untouched.
In a recent write up in Greater Kashmir, one of the prominent columnists of the Valley had left no stone unturned to demean journalists and journalism in Kashmir. Agreed Indian TV channels remain indifferent towards the sufferings of Kashmiris at the hands of troops. But that doesn’t give you authority to tarnish the image of whole community. I don’t agree with your viewpoint that journalists of the Valley have been coerced to submission. Then who are the people who have been reporting relentlessly for the past 20-years highlighting the atrocities committed by Indian troops on Kashmiris? Kashmiri nation should be proud of many journalists who despite pulls and pressures never compromised with ethics.
Nearly a dozen journalists have lost their lives while performing their professional duties in the last two decades of turmoil, while many more have been tortured, jailed and humiliated by the police and troops. Calling them incompetent, roadside vendors and motor mechanics is immaturity on part of the writer. Journalists put their lives at risk to give due coverage to the events when police and troops unleash reign of terror on people. Last hope in the hour of crisis for most of the people is to call journalists and narrate their sufferings to them. Recently when a women’s protest rally was being held in Lal Chowk, a police officer passed an indecent remark on them. A photojournalist who was covering the event couldn’t tolerate it and dared to ask the officer to mend his ways. He had to pay a price for it, as the policemen beat up him to pulp. There are hundreds of such examples where journalists have put their lives at risk while caring for the honor and dignity of their nation.
Agreed, journalists too might have committed mistakes at times, but they aren’t angels from heaven. They are humans and to err is human. You can’t ignore the good work they have done in harsh conditions. For God’s sake don’t doubt on the integrity of every Kashmiri. Everybody has an opinion. You may agree or disagree with others viewpoint, but that doesn’t give you authority to label everybody. Hartal is a tool of resistance, but it’s over use is a self-destruction.
The author in the recent GK Foundation seminar in his forceful speech quoted Mahtama Gandhi’s Non-Cooperation Movement. The movement was to be nonviolent and to consist of the resignations of titles, the boycott of government educational institutions, the courts, government service, foreign goods, and elections and the eventual refusal to pay taxes. But somewhere we need to do self-introspection. When vice-president, Hamid Ansari was scheduled to attend Kashmir University’s convocation function on June 20, separatists had called for a complete strike. Whole Kashmir observed a strike that day, but there was overwhelming response to the convocation function in KU. Nobody dared to talk about Shopian rape and murder incident before the vice-president. Nobody raised a voice against the human rights violations. Hardly anybody boycotted the function.
Those who forcefully advocate for strikes were part and parcel of the function. Why didn’t author dare to write about such episodes? Isn’t their need to prepare the nation for Non-Cooperation movements, before calling for a strike? Whose role it is? Who should take the lead? If someone dares to talk about such things, you label him and try to shut his mouth.
He calls journalists as assignment holders of status quo, who according to him, resort to proxy writings to malign the resistance and genuine leadership through their write ups against stone pelting, hartals and every other mode of resistance. Another prominent writer in his recent write up ‘in defence of hartals’ had lashed out at those, who had dared to write against hartals and making veteran pro-freedom leader, Syed Ali Shah Geelani, in person a target of this issue. He had also quoted last year’s example when Coordination Committee headed by Geelani had given “breathing space” to the people from long spell of hartals which later on became topic of discussion. Why are we people so afraid of debating and discussing vital issues pertaining to the nation? Geelani is a symbol of resistance. Nobody abuses him or screams at him. But, if at times his policies or politics isn’t suited to the nation, everybody has a right to criticize him. I don’t understand why some intellectuals are behaving like intolerant people? Geelani is a matured and seasoned leader and he should take criticism in positive perspective.
You call people who are with National Conference, Peoples Democratic Party, Congress and other mainstream political parties as ‘traitors’. Then you don’t also like people like Sajjad Gani Lone who contested elections. Moderate separatists are also under you scanner. Gujjars, Bakerwals and Paharis have no stakes in freedom movement. Then same applies to nearly one-lakh families of policemen. More than 60 percent people who voted in last year’s Assembly elections, according to your logic, are also anti-movement. Then what remains left for whom you are seeking Azadi? Don’t divide Kashmiris in the name of party, region and allegiance to a particular ideology. Freedom movement is as dare to every Kashmiri as it is to you. One-lakh people who offered their lives for the cherished goal weren’t from a particular ideology. They belonged to every party, ideology and region.
“Sentiment doesn’t belong to any particular individual, group or banner, but it belongs to whole Kashmiri nation. It has no exclusive copyright.” These were the words of Kashmir’s prominent columnist, Aijaz-ul-Haq in a seminar tilted “Kashmir - A Way Forward” organized by Greater Kashmir Foundation. Well said Mr Haq. Kashmir needs realistic people like you who can show the way to the suffering nation.
Unfortunately, over the years an environment of mistrust has been created here, where labelling others as traitors, agents, assignment holders and so on have become a routine. Initially, labelling was limited to militants and militancy itself, but now it has left almost no person and no profession untouched.
In a recent write up in Greater Kashmir, one of the prominent columnists of the Valley had left no stone unturned to demean journalists and journalism in Kashmir. Agreed Indian TV channels remain indifferent towards the sufferings of Kashmiris at the hands of troops. But that doesn’t give you authority to tarnish the image of whole community. I don’t agree with your viewpoint that journalists of the Valley have been coerced to submission. Then who are the people who have been reporting relentlessly for the past 20-years highlighting the atrocities committed by Indian troops on Kashmiris? Kashmiri nation should be proud of many journalists who despite pulls and pressures never compromised with ethics.
Nearly a dozen journalists have lost their lives while performing their professional duties in the last two decades of turmoil, while many more have been tortured, jailed and humiliated by the police and troops. Calling them incompetent, roadside vendors and motor mechanics is immaturity on part of the writer. Journalists put their lives at risk to give due coverage to the events when police and troops unleash reign of terror on people. Last hope in the hour of crisis for most of the people is to call journalists and narrate their sufferings to them. Recently when a women’s protest rally was being held in Lal Chowk, a police officer passed an indecent remark on them. A photojournalist who was covering the event couldn’t tolerate it and dared to ask the officer to mend his ways. He had to pay a price for it, as the policemen beat up him to pulp. There are hundreds of such examples where journalists have put their lives at risk while caring for the honor and dignity of their nation.
Agreed, journalists too might have committed mistakes at times, but they aren’t angels from heaven. They are humans and to err is human. You can’t ignore the good work they have done in harsh conditions. For God’s sake don’t doubt on the integrity of every Kashmiri. Everybody has an opinion. You may agree or disagree with others viewpoint, but that doesn’t give you authority to label everybody. Hartal is a tool of resistance, but it’s over use is a self-destruction.
The author in the recent GK Foundation seminar in his forceful speech quoted Mahtama Gandhi’s Non-Cooperation Movement. The movement was to be nonviolent and to consist of the resignations of titles, the boycott of government educational institutions, the courts, government service, foreign goods, and elections and the eventual refusal to pay taxes. But somewhere we need to do self-introspection. When vice-president, Hamid Ansari was scheduled to attend Kashmir University’s convocation function on June 20, separatists had called for a complete strike. Whole Kashmir observed a strike that day, but there was overwhelming response to the convocation function in KU. Nobody dared to talk about Shopian rape and murder incident before the vice-president. Nobody raised a voice against the human rights violations. Hardly anybody boycotted the function.
Those who forcefully advocate for strikes were part and parcel of the function. Why didn’t author dare to write about such episodes? Isn’t their need to prepare the nation for Non-Cooperation movements, before calling for a strike? Whose role it is? Who should take the lead? If someone dares to talk about such things, you label him and try to shut his mouth.
He calls journalists as assignment holders of status quo, who according to him, resort to proxy writings to malign the resistance and genuine leadership through their write ups against stone pelting, hartals and every other mode of resistance. Another prominent writer in his recent write up ‘in defence of hartals’ had lashed out at those, who had dared to write against hartals and making veteran pro-freedom leader, Syed Ali Shah Geelani, in person a target of this issue. He had also quoted last year’s example when Coordination Committee headed by Geelani had given “breathing space” to the people from long spell of hartals which later on became topic of discussion. Why are we people so afraid of debating and discussing vital issues pertaining to the nation? Geelani is a symbol of resistance. Nobody abuses him or screams at him. But, if at times his policies or politics isn’t suited to the nation, everybody has a right to criticize him. I don’t understand why some intellectuals are behaving like intolerant people? Geelani is a matured and seasoned leader and he should take criticism in positive perspective.
You call people who are with National Conference, Peoples Democratic Party, Congress and other mainstream political parties as ‘traitors’. Then you don’t also like people like Sajjad Gani Lone who contested elections. Moderate separatists are also under you scanner. Gujjars, Bakerwals and Paharis have no stakes in freedom movement. Then same applies to nearly one-lakh families of policemen. More than 60 percent people who voted in last year’s Assembly elections, according to your logic, are also anti-movement. Then what remains left for whom you are seeking Azadi? Don’t divide Kashmiris in the name of party, region and allegiance to a particular ideology. Freedom movement is as dare to every Kashmiri as it is to you. One-lakh people who offered their lives for the cherished goal weren’t from a particular ideology. They belonged to every party, ideology and region.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
KASHMIR – THE LAND OF HARTALS
Hartal yesterday, Hartal today, Hartal tomorrow
We are complicating the problem for ourselves. A weak nation goes weaker as there are no days to work in. It’s paramount duty of separatists to devise a new way to protest. This one has damaged a lot, comments Zulfikar Majid.
While the recent rape and murder of two innocent girls in Shopian (south Kashmir) has sent shock waves across the Valley and beyond, subsequent strikes called by separatists against the incident have multiplied the woes of the already suffering Kashmiris. The Shopian incident is so grave that no sane person can close his eyes. It happened with innocent Aasiya and Nelofar today, it can happen with anybody tomorrow. But can we save honor and dignity of our women by calling strikes? Or we need to do something beyond strikes. Is strike only weapon with us? Whom we are punishing by calling strikes on every small and big issue? Incidentally there is no evidence of strikes in Muslim history. Neither is there any significant correlation between strikes and successful liberation movements across the world. Striking work emerged mainly as a communist concept where the daily waged worker wants to inflict economic costs on the capitalist owners.
But whom we are punishing here and how does India get affected if we boycott economic activity and work. Indian state must be feeling elated when Kashmiri children do not go to school, the sick can’t go to doctor, the daily waged lose their daily wages. I don’t subscribe Hurriyat Conference (G) chairman, Syed Ali Shah Geelani’s theory that a nation which aspires for independence has to give some sacrifices like strikes. History is witness that no country or nation has achieved freedom by abstaining from the work. I ask Geelani Sahib what a person, who earns his livelihood on daily basis and has to feed his family, will do when you call strikes for weeks together. The families of street vendors and daily wagers might be starving during strike days. Is anybody bothered about those poor souls? How hapless patients feel when they aren’t able to visit a doctor.
Isn’t Geelani punishing the victims (read Kashmiris) who are already at the receiving end of Indian establishment? The unending era of strikes started right from 1990 when armed insurgency broke in Kashmir. From an arrest of a militant commander to the killing of civilians, everything was followed by days or at times weeks of strikes. This crippled the economy of Kashmir. Students of that generation were the worst sufferers as their studies got severely affected by the strikes. Separatists groups never gave rethink or debated the hartal strategy. Infact, at times different separatists groups to show their presence call unnecessary strikes.
Hundreds of days of work has been lost in the past two decades due to the strikes. If we could have achieved freedom by continuously abstaining from work for a year, still it wouldn’t have been a bad bargain. But I want to ask Geelani Sahib and other separatist leaders would India leave Kashmir, because of strikes.
No nation can achieve freedom when it is feeble and strikes makes Kashmiri nation even feebler. Our students had started to compete at national and international level from the past few years. Starting from last years Amarnath land row agitation till this time, there was complete or partial strike almost 50 percent of the days. Nations aspiring freedom have to be economically self-reliant. By calling unnecessary strikes our economic dependence on India increases every day. These illogical strike calls would scuttle any move by Kashmiris to achieve economic self-reliance. Not only on local issues, at times strikes are enforced on Kashmiris on death anniversary of any leader of Muslim world.
Nobody can deny that troops commit human rights violations in Kashmir. An alternative strategy needs to be evolved to protest and counter the HR violations. If we would provide conducive atmosphere to our students for studies, they would thrive at national and international level where they can project the plight of Kashmiris at bigger forums. This is the age of Internet and modern means of communications can be used to protest the HR violations.
When last year whole Kashmir was under siege and media was gagged, Kashmiri students outside the state used youtube to highlight the HR violations.Blackout in the night, pen down strikes in offices for an hour and other ways can be devised to protest against the atrocities committed by the troops. Students, lawyers, doctors wearing black badges during work is a better way to protest and can be sustained for long.Strikes have never been able to attract international attention towards Kashmir. How many times due to strikes international human rights organizations have taken cognizance of any HR violation and pressurized New Delhi to be cautious? Strikes remain localized to a few localities of Srinagar and other towns. They miserably fail to achieve their objective which is to internationalize HR violations in Kashmir.
If one tries to introspect what went wrong with last year’s uprising when lakhs of people were on streets demanding freedom, frequent strikes was one of the main reason for its failure. People were fatigued which was even acknowledged by Geelani Sahib himself when on October 6, 2008 strike call was taken back. Geelani that time agreed that children have to go to schools, farmers have to reap the harvest and marriages had to be solemnized. From November 2008 to March or April 2009, it seemed separatist leadership was in deep slumber. They were in shock and awe after massive participation of people in the Assembly elections immediately after massive uprising against Indian state. Massive participation of people in Assembly elections wasn’t vote in favour of India, but anger against wrong policies of separatists. Kashmiris are politically mature enough now and they can’t be fed with hollow slogans. Beware Geelani Sahib, calling a press conference and announcing strikes won’t be acceptable to the people for long now.
Leadership in Kashmir is in desperate need of strategy. Hartals, protests, sacrifices are means to an end. They cannot be an end in themselves. We need a mission statement, a clear demarcation of short term, medium term and long-term objectives. One hartal or two hartals in a year, is understandable. If we don’t allow our children to go to the schools, where will be the human resources to make it a great nation which we dream of? It is a self-inflicted wound, which desperately needs a re-think.
(Zulfikar Majid, a senior correspondent with Greater Kashmir, is a member of Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow Global network and can be mailed at zulfikarmajid@gmail.com)
We are complicating the problem for ourselves. A weak nation goes weaker as there are no days to work in. It’s paramount duty of separatists to devise a new way to protest. This one has damaged a lot, comments Zulfikar Majid.
While the recent rape and murder of two innocent girls in Shopian (south Kashmir) has sent shock waves across the Valley and beyond, subsequent strikes called by separatists against the incident have multiplied the woes of the already suffering Kashmiris. The Shopian incident is so grave that no sane person can close his eyes. It happened with innocent Aasiya and Nelofar today, it can happen with anybody tomorrow. But can we save honor and dignity of our women by calling strikes? Or we need to do something beyond strikes. Is strike only weapon with us? Whom we are punishing by calling strikes on every small and big issue? Incidentally there is no evidence of strikes in Muslim history. Neither is there any significant correlation between strikes and successful liberation movements across the world. Striking work emerged mainly as a communist concept where the daily waged worker wants to inflict economic costs on the capitalist owners.
But whom we are punishing here and how does India get affected if we boycott economic activity and work. Indian state must be feeling elated when Kashmiri children do not go to school, the sick can’t go to doctor, the daily waged lose their daily wages. I don’t subscribe Hurriyat Conference (G) chairman, Syed Ali Shah Geelani’s theory that a nation which aspires for independence has to give some sacrifices like strikes. History is witness that no country or nation has achieved freedom by abstaining from the work. I ask Geelani Sahib what a person, who earns his livelihood on daily basis and has to feed his family, will do when you call strikes for weeks together. The families of street vendors and daily wagers might be starving during strike days. Is anybody bothered about those poor souls? How hapless patients feel when they aren’t able to visit a doctor.
Isn’t Geelani punishing the victims (read Kashmiris) who are already at the receiving end of Indian establishment? The unending era of strikes started right from 1990 when armed insurgency broke in Kashmir. From an arrest of a militant commander to the killing of civilians, everything was followed by days or at times weeks of strikes. This crippled the economy of Kashmir. Students of that generation were the worst sufferers as their studies got severely affected by the strikes. Separatists groups never gave rethink or debated the hartal strategy. Infact, at times different separatists groups to show their presence call unnecessary strikes.
Hundreds of days of work has been lost in the past two decades due to the strikes. If we could have achieved freedom by continuously abstaining from work for a year, still it wouldn’t have been a bad bargain. But I want to ask Geelani Sahib and other separatist leaders would India leave Kashmir, because of strikes.
No nation can achieve freedom when it is feeble and strikes makes Kashmiri nation even feebler. Our students had started to compete at national and international level from the past few years. Starting from last years Amarnath land row agitation till this time, there was complete or partial strike almost 50 percent of the days. Nations aspiring freedom have to be economically self-reliant. By calling unnecessary strikes our economic dependence on India increases every day. These illogical strike calls would scuttle any move by Kashmiris to achieve economic self-reliance. Not only on local issues, at times strikes are enforced on Kashmiris on death anniversary of any leader of Muslim world.
Nobody can deny that troops commit human rights violations in Kashmir. An alternative strategy needs to be evolved to protest and counter the HR violations. If we would provide conducive atmosphere to our students for studies, they would thrive at national and international level where they can project the plight of Kashmiris at bigger forums. This is the age of Internet and modern means of communications can be used to protest the HR violations.
When last year whole Kashmir was under siege and media was gagged, Kashmiri students outside the state used youtube to highlight the HR violations.Blackout in the night, pen down strikes in offices for an hour and other ways can be devised to protest against the atrocities committed by the troops. Students, lawyers, doctors wearing black badges during work is a better way to protest and can be sustained for long.Strikes have never been able to attract international attention towards Kashmir. How many times due to strikes international human rights organizations have taken cognizance of any HR violation and pressurized New Delhi to be cautious? Strikes remain localized to a few localities of Srinagar and other towns. They miserably fail to achieve their objective which is to internationalize HR violations in Kashmir.
If one tries to introspect what went wrong with last year’s uprising when lakhs of people were on streets demanding freedom, frequent strikes was one of the main reason for its failure. People were fatigued which was even acknowledged by Geelani Sahib himself when on October 6, 2008 strike call was taken back. Geelani that time agreed that children have to go to schools, farmers have to reap the harvest and marriages had to be solemnized. From November 2008 to March or April 2009, it seemed separatist leadership was in deep slumber. They were in shock and awe after massive participation of people in the Assembly elections immediately after massive uprising against Indian state. Massive participation of people in Assembly elections wasn’t vote in favour of India, but anger against wrong policies of separatists. Kashmiris are politically mature enough now and they can’t be fed with hollow slogans. Beware Geelani Sahib, calling a press conference and announcing strikes won’t be acceptable to the people for long now.
Leadership in Kashmir is in desperate need of strategy. Hartals, protests, sacrifices are means to an end. They cannot be an end in themselves. We need a mission statement, a clear demarcation of short term, medium term and long-term objectives. One hartal or two hartals in a year, is understandable. If we don’t allow our children to go to the schools, where will be the human resources to make it a great nation which we dream of? It is a self-inflicted wound, which desperately needs a re-think.
(Zulfikar Majid, a senior correspondent with Greater Kashmir, is a member of Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow Global network and can be mailed at zulfikarmajid@gmail.com)
Friday, May 1, 2009
Muslims targeted. Responsible who?
Has West been the soul exploiter. Are Muslims themselves responsible for the mess they are in. Did situation worsen for them catching them unawares. To this effect, reasons are many, writes Zulfikar Majid
What went wrong for the world to become such a difficult place for a Muslim to live. On introspection, it becomes very hard to find one factor entirely and absolutely responsible. Many people believe and argue that it is the Muslim world in general and the Muslim leadership in particular that has failed itself, yet they agree that the non-Muslim world did not fulfill its responsibilities either. The only major concern rather grievance of the Muslim world of the pre-cold-war times was the Palestinian conflict. The cause and the grievance was genuine which is corroborated by the fact that majority of the non-Muslim world shared the Muslim concerns with regard to Palestine. The concerns remain, although a huge support base for the cause has been lost owing to the changing world scenario where economic, military and diplomatic interests find preference over humanity and justice.
During the cold war the world was divided and polarized. The world powers were more interested in exploiting the conflicts like Palestine for their own benefits rather than solving them on the grounds of justice and humanity. America made use of the so called Mujahideen in Afghanistan to defeat the Soviet Union with the help and active support of Pakistani military and intelligence which played a pivotal role in the Taliban uprising. Before leaving the Afghans alone, the United States had the moral obligation to see to the matter that the mess of warlords was cleared and the country was set in order.
While the Afghan war was still on, it gave vent to a dormant Kashmir dispute which had already forced Hindu majority India and Muslim majority Pakistan to go to war, at least twice after their independence from the British in 1947. Kashmiris demanded right to self determination as envisaged in the UN resolutions on Kashmir which was out -rightly rejected by India. The mass uprising took a violent turn when Kashmiri youth took to arms against the Indian state in 1989. Fighting has left tens of thousands dead and raised fears that the stubborn conflict could escalate into a full-scale nuclear war. Both countries tested nuclear devices in 1998 which was the peak time of a resistance movement started by Kashmiris in late eighties.
Around one hundred thousand people have lost lives in this conflict, about one million rendered homeless, thousands of houses destroyed and thousands of men and women disabled physically or mentally. Once again the world leaders disappointed the Muslim world by giving a deaf ear to the Kashmiri people. The torture and violations of human rights inflicted on the Kashmiri Muslims generated sympathies for them all around the Muslim world, which resulted in diversion of many warriors just relieved from the Afghan war to join Kashmiris in their struggle. The appearance of the hard core warriors and fidayeen (suicide bombers) from the non-local outfits gave it a more extremist outlook.
In 2002, armies of both the nuclear powers (India and Pakistan) stared each other eye-ball to eye-ball on the borders of Kashmir after attack by some terrorists on Indian Parliament in New Delhi. Both countries mobilized more than million troops on the border and it raised fears of a nuclear catastrophe. But after mobilizing troops, both the countries realized that war was no option and a peace process started between the two before it broke down in November 2008 after ten heavily armed terrorists attacked financial capital of India Mumbai killing atleast 200 civilians. India accused Pakistani hand in the attack while the later denies it. War hysteria is on in both the countries right now.
Kashmir is the root cause of problem between India and Pakistan and has a potential to become a nuclear tussle if the conflict remains unresolved. By this time there were three burning issues for the Muslim and the non-Muslim worlds to tackle and solve; undoubtedly the Muslim world has always looked towards the West to solve its issues. The lack of unity among the Muslim nations and Muslims as a whole is evident from the war and differences between Afghan factions, the Palestinian parties and the different separatist forces in Kashmir. Apart from this the world powers have shown reluctance and sluggishness in addressing the genuine concerns of the Muslim world while being capable of doing so by sacrificing some petty national, political and diplomatic interests.
Of late new US president Barrack Hussein Obama’s statement that he would appoint a special envoy for Kashmir has rekindled hopes among Kashmiris. Kashmir conflict is giving an excuse to the extremist organizations in Pakistan and even Afghanistan to exploit the situation. One has to agree that in the short term the world had to launch a concerted effort against terrorism which it did in the form of so called War on Terror although in an exaggerated manner. But in the longer term the world powers also had the responsibility to look into the root cause of the extremist and militant outbursts, and try to eliminate them as far as possible. On the contrary a generalization was done and just struggles for freedom and human rights were termed as terrorist and extremist movements which only exacerbated the situation.
Terrorist and extremist forces need favorable conditions and moral support among their societies to thrive and flourish just as much as fish need water to survive. The world powers ensured that they keep getting this support and these favorable conditions by intimidating Muslim world for reasons that were either too insignificant or unknown. The invasion on Iraq, insults of Abu Ghraib, inhuman treatment at Guantanamo bay, silent spectatorship of Palestinian siege, ruthless bombing of Afghanistan, arm twisting of Iran and Pakistan were the realities that made the Muslim world trust the theories and notions of the extremists who at least appeared to be fighting for their concerns and shared their faith.
Slow but sure, the Muslim world lost faith in US and Europe casting serious doubts on the intentions of the world powers. It is a common notion among Muslims that the West is after the Muslim nations as it wants to control the oil reserves that they possess. They feel that the West has made excuses like war on terror and weapons of mass destruction to further its interests of controlling oil reserves or capturing strategically important locations. Many people draw parallels between the nuclear aspirations of Iran and North Korea and the difference in reactions by the US towards the two countries. Abetting Israel in mass killing of helpless Palestinians, Signing MoUs with Israel while it was still busy committing war crimes in Gaza are the realities out of which young Muslims of today draw their conclusions.
The challenge for the United States, Britain and other world powers is to win over the hearts of Muslims across the globe and exhibit that they really believe in peaceful co-existence with the Arab and the Muslim world. They need to assure the Muslim world that their genuine concerns will be resolved in a fair and neutral way. Finding the root cause of the extremist and terrorist activities/movements and giving much of their attention to address them will be the real challenge before the world powers. Whether? When? And how the West does so, will surely determine the future of this planet.
(Zulfikar Majid, a senior correspondent with Greater Kashmir is member of Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow Global Network and can be mailed at zulfikarmajid@gmail.com)
What went wrong for the world to become such a difficult place for a Muslim to live. On introspection, it becomes very hard to find one factor entirely and absolutely responsible. Many people believe and argue that it is the Muslim world in general and the Muslim leadership in particular that has failed itself, yet they agree that the non-Muslim world did not fulfill its responsibilities either. The only major concern rather grievance of the Muslim world of the pre-cold-war times was the Palestinian conflict. The cause and the grievance was genuine which is corroborated by the fact that majority of the non-Muslim world shared the Muslim concerns with regard to Palestine. The concerns remain, although a huge support base for the cause has been lost owing to the changing world scenario where economic, military and diplomatic interests find preference over humanity and justice.
During the cold war the world was divided and polarized. The world powers were more interested in exploiting the conflicts like Palestine for their own benefits rather than solving them on the grounds of justice and humanity. America made use of the so called Mujahideen in Afghanistan to defeat the Soviet Union with the help and active support of Pakistani military and intelligence which played a pivotal role in the Taliban uprising. Before leaving the Afghans alone, the United States had the moral obligation to see to the matter that the mess of warlords was cleared and the country was set in order.
While the Afghan war was still on, it gave vent to a dormant Kashmir dispute which had already forced Hindu majority India and Muslim majority Pakistan to go to war, at least twice after their independence from the British in 1947. Kashmiris demanded right to self determination as envisaged in the UN resolutions on Kashmir which was out -rightly rejected by India. The mass uprising took a violent turn when Kashmiri youth took to arms against the Indian state in 1989. Fighting has left tens of thousands dead and raised fears that the stubborn conflict could escalate into a full-scale nuclear war. Both countries tested nuclear devices in 1998 which was the peak time of a resistance movement started by Kashmiris in late eighties.
Around one hundred thousand people have lost lives in this conflict, about one million rendered homeless, thousands of houses destroyed and thousands of men and women disabled physically or mentally. Once again the world leaders disappointed the Muslim world by giving a deaf ear to the Kashmiri people. The torture and violations of human rights inflicted on the Kashmiri Muslims generated sympathies for them all around the Muslim world, which resulted in diversion of many warriors just relieved from the Afghan war to join Kashmiris in their struggle. The appearance of the hard core warriors and fidayeen (suicide bombers) from the non-local outfits gave it a more extremist outlook.
In 2002, armies of both the nuclear powers (India and Pakistan) stared each other eye-ball to eye-ball on the borders of Kashmir after attack by some terrorists on Indian Parliament in New Delhi. Both countries mobilized more than million troops on the border and it raised fears of a nuclear catastrophe. But after mobilizing troops, both the countries realized that war was no option and a peace process started between the two before it broke down in November 2008 after ten heavily armed terrorists attacked financial capital of India Mumbai killing atleast 200 civilians. India accused Pakistani hand in the attack while the later denies it. War hysteria is on in both the countries right now.
Kashmir is the root cause of problem between India and Pakistan and has a potential to become a nuclear tussle if the conflict remains unresolved. By this time there were three burning issues for the Muslim and the non-Muslim worlds to tackle and solve; undoubtedly the Muslim world has always looked towards the West to solve its issues. The lack of unity among the Muslim nations and Muslims as a whole is evident from the war and differences between Afghan factions, the Palestinian parties and the different separatist forces in Kashmir. Apart from this the world powers have shown reluctance and sluggishness in addressing the genuine concerns of the Muslim world while being capable of doing so by sacrificing some petty national, political and diplomatic interests.
Of late new US president Barrack Hussein Obama’s statement that he would appoint a special envoy for Kashmir has rekindled hopes among Kashmiris. Kashmir conflict is giving an excuse to the extremist organizations in Pakistan and even Afghanistan to exploit the situation. One has to agree that in the short term the world had to launch a concerted effort against terrorism which it did in the form of so called War on Terror although in an exaggerated manner. But in the longer term the world powers also had the responsibility to look into the root cause of the extremist and militant outbursts, and try to eliminate them as far as possible. On the contrary a generalization was done and just struggles for freedom and human rights were termed as terrorist and extremist movements which only exacerbated the situation.
Terrorist and extremist forces need favorable conditions and moral support among their societies to thrive and flourish just as much as fish need water to survive. The world powers ensured that they keep getting this support and these favorable conditions by intimidating Muslim world for reasons that were either too insignificant or unknown. The invasion on Iraq, insults of Abu Ghraib, inhuman treatment at Guantanamo bay, silent spectatorship of Palestinian siege, ruthless bombing of Afghanistan, arm twisting of Iran and Pakistan were the realities that made the Muslim world trust the theories and notions of the extremists who at least appeared to be fighting for their concerns and shared their faith.
Slow but sure, the Muslim world lost faith in US and Europe casting serious doubts on the intentions of the world powers. It is a common notion among Muslims that the West is after the Muslim nations as it wants to control the oil reserves that they possess. They feel that the West has made excuses like war on terror and weapons of mass destruction to further its interests of controlling oil reserves or capturing strategically important locations. Many people draw parallels between the nuclear aspirations of Iran and North Korea and the difference in reactions by the US towards the two countries. Abetting Israel in mass killing of helpless Palestinians, Signing MoUs with Israel while it was still busy committing war crimes in Gaza are the realities out of which young Muslims of today draw their conclusions.
The challenge for the United States, Britain and other world powers is to win over the hearts of Muslims across the globe and exhibit that they really believe in peaceful co-existence with the Arab and the Muslim world. They need to assure the Muslim world that their genuine concerns will be resolved in a fair and neutral way. Finding the root cause of the extremist and terrorist activities/movements and giving much of their attention to address them will be the real challenge before the world powers. Whether? When? And how the West does so, will surely determine the future of this planet.
(Zulfikar Majid, a senior correspondent with Greater Kashmir is member of Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow Global Network and can be mailed at zulfikarmajid@gmail.com)
Friday, March 6, 2009
Does the West Have a Role?
Understanding Kashmir
By ZULFIKAR MAJID
Srinagar, Kashmir:
The resolution of the Kashmir issue will help eradicate religious extremism in Pakistan. Militant elements in the region will find little reason to blame the West for negative interference once the issue of Kashmir is resolved. There is rise of Taliban in Afghanistan and the rise of Muslim extremism in Pakistan. Pakistan along with Americans is presently fighting resurgent Talibans in its area bordering Afghanistan. But the Kashmir dispute, which dates back to 1947 partition of the Indian sub-continent into India and Pakistan, continues to be the biggest hurdle in peace in the region. The lingering Kashmir dispute allows the extremist elements to incite passions among the masses and get recruits for the global Jihad.
It seems the West understands it. The British Foreign Secretary David Miliband wrote in the Guardian after his recent visit to south Asia: “On my visit to south Asia, I am arguing that the best antidote to the terrorist threat in the long term is cooperation. Although I understand the current difficulties, resolution of the dispute over Kashmir would help deny extremists in the region one of their main calls to arms, and allow Pakistani authorities to focus more effectively on tackling the threat on their western border.” The comment, angering the Government of India that considers Kashmir as its integral part, is valid in so far as Kashmir continues to be the hot spot in South Asia and a potential source for the nuclear confrontation.
The Kashmir problem began in 1947 with the partition of the British India that led to formation of two sovereign countries India and Pakistan.
Pakistan immediately claimed the right over Muslim-dominated Jammu and Kashmir state, in accordance with the principles of the two-nation theory, which stated Muslim majority areas should become part of new dominion called Pakistan.
The first war between India and Pakistan over Kashmir started in 1947 with Pakistan gaining control over 1/3rd of Kashmir that is called Pakistan administered Kashmir. Pakistanis call it Azad (independent) Kashmir. The major portion remained under India and is called Jammu and Kashmir. The war ended only after the UN intervention and the UN resolutions that called for withdrawal of troops from both the Kashmirs and the holding of plebiscite.
However, India refuses to hold the plebiscite, saying the bilateral agreements between India and Pakistan have made the Kashmir a bilateral issue and any third party including the UN has no role.
But still the issue of Kashmir consistently threatens peace in South Asia by straining relations between the two nuclear neighbors, India and Pakistan, and giving rise to increasing militancy and religious extremism amongst the local population. Three wars and ongoing conflict between both the countries has led extremist groups to use religion to garner support amongst Pakistanis and Muslim Kashmiris for their cause.
The anti-India armed insurgency backed by mass uprising erupted in Jammu and Kashmir or in Indian controlled Kashmir in 1989 and since then it has consumed some 100,000 people. The human rights activists say that there are some 10,000 persons who were subjected to enforced disappeared by the Indian security forces for the past 20 years.
The insurgents in early 90s sought support from the religious elements in Pakistan who support Kashmir jihad and describe it as unfinished agenda of the partition. While as in India the Hindu organizations like RSS consider Kashmir a part of Hindu civilization and oppose its secession.
Situation changed for better with the governments of India and Pakistan starting a bus–service between the divided Kashmirs in 2005. Former President of Pakistan Parvez Musharraf advocated demilitarization of Kashmir, a proposal which had several takers in Kashmir-both separatist and mainstreams. Demilitarization was considered to be the prologue to solution of Kashmir problem which would not only bring a much needed political reprieve to the people of Kashmir but will also help in social and economic reconstruction of Kashmir. As the same discourse had picked up in the sub-continent, the November 26 terror attacks in Mumbai changed the scenario with India blaming Pakistani elements for the attacks and Pakistan denying the same.
With the Mumbai attacks, Kashmir has again proved to be the only major obstacle in normalization of relations between India and Pakistan as it serves as an inspiration to some militant quarters across the region. General perception is that if this issue is resolved, it will rule out any possibility of a nuclear confrontation between the two neighbors besides denying extremist elements a call for arms. Further, the solution of Kashmir problem will open new possibilities of reduction in burgeoning defense expenditure of India and Pakistan, which will help in poverty alleviation in the region.
If the West intervenes in Kashmir and helps in finding a lasting solution to Kashmir problem, it will be seen as a groundbreaking goodwill gesture to the Muslims of the world, which will open new possibilities of dialogue between the West and the Muslim world. It will help Muslims shed off the impression that the West is indifferent to their sufferings across the globe. The separatists or secessionists including some prominent religious leaders argue that the Western intervention is imperative as the bilateral dialogue between India and Pakistan has failed to deliver any substantial result. Despite being Muslims, Kashmiris don’t perceive the West as their enemies. The United Nations Militarily Observers Group office in Srinagar, the summer capital of Kashmir that oversees peace agreement brokered by the UN in 1947 between India and Pakistan and symbolizes the West in Kashmir is thronged by people who submit detailed memoranda seeking the UN and the US intervention in the dispute.
(Zulfikar Majid is a journalist covering low intensity Kashmir conflict for the last six years and can be emailed at zulfikarmajid@gmail.com)
By ZULFIKAR MAJID
Srinagar, Kashmir:
The resolution of the Kashmir issue will help eradicate religious extremism in Pakistan. Militant elements in the region will find little reason to blame the West for negative interference once the issue of Kashmir is resolved. There is rise of Taliban in Afghanistan and the rise of Muslim extremism in Pakistan. Pakistan along with Americans is presently fighting resurgent Talibans in its area bordering Afghanistan. But the Kashmir dispute, which dates back to 1947 partition of the Indian sub-continent into India and Pakistan, continues to be the biggest hurdle in peace in the region. The lingering Kashmir dispute allows the extremist elements to incite passions among the masses and get recruits for the global Jihad.
It seems the West understands it. The British Foreign Secretary David Miliband wrote in the Guardian after his recent visit to south Asia: “On my visit to south Asia, I am arguing that the best antidote to the terrorist threat in the long term is cooperation. Although I understand the current difficulties, resolution of the dispute over Kashmir would help deny extremists in the region one of their main calls to arms, and allow Pakistani authorities to focus more effectively on tackling the threat on their western border.” The comment, angering the Government of India that considers Kashmir as its integral part, is valid in so far as Kashmir continues to be the hot spot in South Asia and a potential source for the nuclear confrontation.
The Kashmir problem began in 1947 with the partition of the British India that led to formation of two sovereign countries India and Pakistan.
Pakistan immediately claimed the right over Muslim-dominated Jammu and Kashmir state, in accordance with the principles of the two-nation theory, which stated Muslim majority areas should become part of new dominion called Pakistan.
The first war between India and Pakistan over Kashmir started in 1947 with Pakistan gaining control over 1/3rd of Kashmir that is called Pakistan administered Kashmir. Pakistanis call it Azad (independent) Kashmir. The major portion remained under India and is called Jammu and Kashmir. The war ended only after the UN intervention and the UN resolutions that called for withdrawal of troops from both the Kashmirs and the holding of plebiscite.
However, India refuses to hold the plebiscite, saying the bilateral agreements between India and Pakistan have made the Kashmir a bilateral issue and any third party including the UN has no role.
But still the issue of Kashmir consistently threatens peace in South Asia by straining relations between the two nuclear neighbors, India and Pakistan, and giving rise to increasing militancy and religious extremism amongst the local population. Three wars and ongoing conflict between both the countries has led extremist groups to use religion to garner support amongst Pakistanis and Muslim Kashmiris for their cause.
The anti-India armed insurgency backed by mass uprising erupted in Jammu and Kashmir or in Indian controlled Kashmir in 1989 and since then it has consumed some 100,000 people. The human rights activists say that there are some 10,000 persons who were subjected to enforced disappeared by the Indian security forces for the past 20 years.
The insurgents in early 90s sought support from the religious elements in Pakistan who support Kashmir jihad and describe it as unfinished agenda of the partition. While as in India the Hindu organizations like RSS consider Kashmir a part of Hindu civilization and oppose its secession.
Situation changed for better with the governments of India and Pakistan starting a bus–service between the divided Kashmirs in 2005. Former President of Pakistan Parvez Musharraf advocated demilitarization of Kashmir, a proposal which had several takers in Kashmir-both separatist and mainstreams. Demilitarization was considered to be the prologue to solution of Kashmir problem which would not only bring a much needed political reprieve to the people of Kashmir but will also help in social and economic reconstruction of Kashmir. As the same discourse had picked up in the sub-continent, the November 26 terror attacks in Mumbai changed the scenario with India blaming Pakistani elements for the attacks and Pakistan denying the same.
With the Mumbai attacks, Kashmir has again proved to be the only major obstacle in normalization of relations between India and Pakistan as it serves as an inspiration to some militant quarters across the region. General perception is that if this issue is resolved, it will rule out any possibility of a nuclear confrontation between the two neighbors besides denying extremist elements a call for arms. Further, the solution of Kashmir problem will open new possibilities of reduction in burgeoning defense expenditure of India and Pakistan, which will help in poverty alleviation in the region.
If the West intervenes in Kashmir and helps in finding a lasting solution to Kashmir problem, it will be seen as a groundbreaking goodwill gesture to the Muslims of the world, which will open new possibilities of dialogue between the West and the Muslim world. It will help Muslims shed off the impression that the West is indifferent to their sufferings across the globe. The separatists or secessionists including some prominent religious leaders argue that the Western intervention is imperative as the bilateral dialogue between India and Pakistan has failed to deliver any substantial result. Despite being Muslims, Kashmiris don’t perceive the West as their enemies. The United Nations Militarily Observers Group office in Srinagar, the summer capital of Kashmir that oversees peace agreement brokered by the UN in 1947 between India and Pakistan and symbolizes the West in Kashmir is thronged by people who submit detailed memoranda seeking the UN and the US intervention in the dispute.
(Zulfikar Majid is a journalist covering low intensity Kashmir conflict for the last six years and can be emailed at zulfikarmajid@gmail.com)
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Dialogue means accommodation and dialogue is the key
Miracles don’t happen so often. We will have to strive for the goal with a positive approach. No hegemonies, no diktats, let it be everyone’s voice that must matter. Prof. Abdul Gani Bhat, a senior Hurriyat Leader, in an exclusive interview with ZULFIKAR MAJID.
How do you view present situation in Jammu and Kashmir?
I’m not an analyst, but in terms of politics, I’m an eyewitness to peoples’ glances, shrugs and chance remarks. These glances, shrugs and chance remarks are more revealing than many articles writers produced on Kashmir. If you interpret these glances, shrugs and chance remarks, I trust you can hear the cry of the soul of Kashmir. You can locate in the depth of the soul of the Kashmir, the sentiment. When you talk with reference to current uprising at the peoples’ level, I will give you four elements which need to be addressed by India, Pakistan and by Kashmiri leadership primarily.a) The sentiment is alive and kicking. The sentiment that no Kashmiri will accept Indian political hegemony. b) The youth who were born amidst the roar of the gun, constituted the frontline in the recent uprising which means that sentiment has been transferred from older generation to younger one. That means sentiment is alive for tomorrow also. But for India, it is a huge problem which needs attention. c) Kashmiris are caught up in conflict situation and political hegemony of the India is not acceptable to Kashmiri ethos. But at the same time he recognizes that he lives in India. Therefore he has to strike either a balance or work out an adjustability and adaptability whereby he can fight and live together. To mix up these two is a gigantic task to any community. d) The divide between Jammu and Kashmir is total. It is regionally, politically, economically and unfortunately religiously too. This has to be addressed.
In clear terms tell us what is the sentiment of a common Kashmiri?
In clear terms tell us what is the sentiment of a common Kashmiri?
I repeat, Kashmiris consider that they are the master of their destiny and are the final arbitrators of their fate.
Are they fighting against Indian rule in Kashmir?
Are they fighting against Indian rule in Kashmir?
To be straight, yes off course, because India made promises to the people of Kashmir. The promises were honored more in breach rather than in observance.
Is session or Azadi from India achievable?
Is session or Azadi from India achievable?
This is a different proposition. I talked with reference to the questions you asked. When you ask me are they fighting Indian rule, I said yes. But is Azadi achievable or not, is entirely a different proposition. What is achievable and what is not achievable is entirely a different proposition which in an answer to a question of a journalist is not possible to give.
Then what for Hurriyat Conference is fighting of which you were chairman and now a senior leader?
Then what for Hurriyat Conference is fighting of which you were chairman and now a senior leader?
If you draw lines on running water, you can never come up with a picture. In politics 2+2, they say never makes 4, but less than 5 and more than 3. But in my politics 2+2 makes 4 and just 4. I consider that nuclear weaponasation of India and Pakistan has entirely changed the situation in the sub-continent. In this regard, we have to understand that war between India and Pakistan is never possible now. And if is the situation, what we can do next. Armed struggle. But for it you need to garner supporter at international level. But in my opinion I suspect we can’t get it and if we can’t get it, probably with armed struggle you can’t get desired results. So armed struggle no solution, war no solution, what do you next. Dialogue. In a dialogue, the principle is, you accommodate the other party. I accommodate you, you accommodate me. Accommodation is the principle. You have to rise above your traditional position on an issue where you believe you can reach the compromise. And that compromise is that Kashmiri wants an acceptable, honorable and durable solution of the problem.
You people were engaged in a dialogue with New Delhi for years. What was the end result?
You people were engaged in a dialogue with New Delhi for years. What was the end result?
Smiles. Well those who talk in terms of UN Security Council resolutions have been waiting for last six decades, nothing happened. Not a single resolution was implemented in 61 years. How come we could work wonders in one or two meetings with the Government of India or the Government of Pakistan. Dialogue is a process and a process is a process which continues till you achieve your target. And I say it is a dialogue which probably can produce a compromising solution.
But why did dialogue process broke down?
But why did dialogue process broke down?
No process has broken down, because India and Pakistan are talking. And they aren’t talking weather, but Kashmir. Kashmir constitutes a potential threat to nuclear peace in sub-continent. The Indians and Pakistanis are caught up in the situation where they have to talk and come up with solution.
But will it be acceptable to the people of Kashmir?
But will it be acceptable to the people of Kashmir?
When we talk about the aspirations of Kashmir we talk about the aspirations of people of Jammu, Ladakh and the valley. Aspirations are fractured. Some of us seek accession with Pakistan, some independence and some like Farooq Abdullah and others seek India. They are Kashmiris. Aren’t they? So there is not a single voice as a matter of principle. Discordant voices as far aspirations go. And therefore when we talk of Kashmir, considering the contradiction, it is a compromise formula which will work. That is how I look at it, I may be wrong.
Are you ready to enter into a dialogue with New Delhi again?
Are you ready to enter into a dialogue with New Delhi again?
If you ask me, I’ve no problem. Sanity demands that I should be talking. When I know that no military solution is available with me, when I know UN resolutions aren’t implemented, when I know India and Pakistan are talking, I should be talking.
What is the reason you people aren’t talking?
What is the reason you people aren’t talking?
This is an issue which involves strategy. If we aren’t talking, we in matter of fact are impressing the leadership in New Delhi and Islamabad that we want a meaningful, purposeful and productive dialogue.
OK, coming to Hurriyat unification proposal. Where does it stand now?
OK, coming to Hurriyat unification proposal. Where does it stand now?
Well the unity is what everybody would want to happen. But it can’t happen in a vacuum. You have to do the talking and sorting out issues. Issues that separate you or that sometimes probably make you speak what you never should. While sorting out issues, you have to agree on amicable minimum political programme. And if you can do it, unity is possible. And unity is what everybody would love to see happening in Kashmir at Hurriyat level.We should work hard for unity, but hegemony is never acceptable to all of us.
Hegemony from which side?
Hegemony from which side?
Any side. Umar Farooq’s side, Geelani Sahib’s side, Yasin Malik’s side. Hegemony isn’t acceptable. Collectivism in politics in need of the hour.
Was hegemony the reason for Hurriyat breakup?
Was hegemony the reason for Hurriyat breakup?
One of the reasons, no doubt it.
From which side?
Well I don’t want to go to the sides of the episode which happened a few years back. Don’t flock the dead horses that will give you nothing. I think we should move forward towards brighter tomorrow rather than talk about yesterday’s darkness.
Is there any timeframe for unity?
Is there any timeframe for unity?
Difficult to say, a week, a month or more than it. It is situational. If a situation develops favoring unity, it must happen. But if it develops against it, it may take more time.
Coming to recent huge protest rallies in Kashmir. Prof Bhat was missing.
Coming to recent huge protest rallies in Kashmir. Prof Bhat was missing.
Yes I was missing. No doubt about it. But silence sometimes speaks more than louder voices in streets. Hurriyat was represented by none other than its chairman Mirwaiz Umar. Hurriyat was represented by a team nominated for Coordination Committee. I was not a member of it. I would therefore not be with them. But there was no bar either for me to be with them. I was involved politically and intellectually. I ask you a question. Was whole Kashmir on roads? And those who didn’t come out, were they not involved? If my son or daughter was involved, I was there and if my chairman was involved, I was there very much. Entire leadership is not required to represent the forum in an agitation or uprising. It isn’t done anywhere in the world. I’m the author of the agenda which Hurriyat gave after economic blockade of the Valley. The agenda was that if Jammu people of two and half district seek separate state, we have no problem. They implemented economic blockade, and we in exercise of our right to live talked about alternative route, Muzafferabad Chalo. Then we also talked about alternative market, Rawalpindi.
Was this agenda set by Prof Bhat?
Was this agenda set by Prof Bhat?
Yes. We were in a meeting and some people said we should carry out a dialogue. I said this is traditional politics, we should produce an agenda which should look revolutionary.
Was Hurriyat leadership ready for the situation which arose after economic blockade?
Was Hurriyat leadership ready for the situation which arose after economic blockade?
I don’t think. No leaders expected the upsurge so massive as it turned out to be. Events overtook the leadership and that is why they couldn’t give movement a direction and fix the targets.
What should be the strategy now?
What should be the strategy now?
I think leadership is aware of the hazards. We have taken on India which is world’s second largest country. It is a huge adventure. I won’t call it a mis-adventure, but it is an adventure. To win, we need a strategy. I think entire leadership should join heads together, workout a strategy and implement it as effectively as they should.
What is your say about elections?
What is your say about elections?
Election for us is a non-issue. We seek a settlement of the dispute.
What about holding of elections under neutral observers?
What about holding of elections under neutral observers?
We have to draw a line between an election and a plebiscite. Election is a democratic process as far as government formation is concerned and plebiscite is a democratic exercise as far as future dispensation of Kashmir is concerned. The people of J&K have been fighting for plebiscite not for elections. We are ready for any elections under any neutral organization like SAARC, ASEAN or Common Wealth or United Nations any time.
What is the practicable solution of Kashmir?
What is the practicable solution of Kashmir?
I think general (Parvez Musharaf) gave us a good idea. He said if you can implement four-point formula in step by step manner, we could reach to a stage where we can workout a permanent solution of K-dispute.
Do you accept that gun played a role in highlighting Kashmir issue?
Do you accept that gun played a role in highlighting Kashmir issue?
Yes, no doubt it. Gun created a roar and it was heard all over. People focused on Kashmir. But now we can’t garner the global support for gun. For any movement in world you need three elements. One is Hulchul, which is where the movement is launched, there has to be some uprising, some expression of anger and some manifestation of alienation. Second you should enjoy support at global level and three is that doors for talks should never be closed.
People say that Hurriyat leaders demand Azadi from India, but are themselves living under security provided by the India?
People say that Hurriyat leaders demand Azadi from India, but are themselves living under security provided by the India?
(Smiles). Leader isn’t a rare commodity. All governments wherever you go ensure the safety of not only leadership but all people. But leaders are more exposed to dangers and therefore more care is taken by the governments. There are (security) men around the leaders in Kashmir, but they don’t deter them from their advancement towards their destination.
One of the failures of Hurriyat is that it couldn’t take care of orphans, widows and destitute of militancy?
One of the failures of Hurriyat is that it couldn’t take care of orphans, widows and destitute of militancy?
There is bound to be what you call inadequacies or glaring weakness in forum politics. Inherent weaknesses in forum politics. If you say you should have been running an office like secretariat, it was not possible because of many reasons. We are doing our little bit whatever we can do. Whatever little we have or we can, we do it. Probably doing it as generously as you can.
There are allegation from certain quarters that Hurriyat receives massive funds from different counties, but they never utilize it for the purpose they have been sent.
There are allegation from certain quarters that Hurriyat receives massive funds from different counties, but they never utilize it for the purpose they have been sent.
There are organizations which have been banned by the Government of India. No donations can reach to such organization. Even if this is conceived as a matter of argument, yes, they have money. Where does the money come from isn’t my problem. Do they squander the money or spend it on organizational matters, on political and diplomatic exercises and peoples welfare, yes they are doing it. And if there are any mishaps or mistakes, I would only want that such mistakes should never ever happen.
Your message for youth of Kashmir.
Your message for youth of Kashmir.
The youth is my future and I was my youth to use their brain and shine like stars do on the skies.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Nothing less than the right to self-determination
If all the parties of Kashmir dispute reach a consensus, then independent Kashmir is also a possibility. But nothing less than right to self-determination is acceptable to us and accession to Pakistan would be conditional. Syed Ali Shah Geelani in an exclusive interview with GK senior correspondent ZULFIKAR MAJID.
How do you view present crisis in the state?
Sometimes our enemy does something which harms us in short term, but in the long term that is beneficial. Same happened here. The state government transferred 800 kanals of forestland to Shrine Board on the instructions of New Delhi. But the grace of Almighty Allah it awakened people of Kashmir and hundreds and thousands of people are on the streets demanding freedom.
Did it provide impetus to the ongoing freedom struggle?
Definitely. Any nation who wants to achieve freedom should first realize that we are slaves. When people realize that their life, property, honor and dignity isn’t safe at the hands of oppressor, then people fight for their rights.
Whom would you blame for the present crisis?
If you look at the history of J&K you will come to know that the leadership has always ditched people of J&K. On July 13, 1931, our 22 people sacrificed life while fighting against Dogra rule. In 1932, Muslim Conference came into existence to safeguard these sacrifices. But in 1938, MC was divided and National Conference created. The excuse made to divide MC was that it represents only Muslims while Hindus are also living in the state. But that was not justified, as in that period government was of Hindus. They were in administration, police and army. They had no problems. It was the conspiracy of Indian National Congress. They knew that India would achieve freedom from British and after that there should be someone who would give Kashmir to them and they created Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah.
But my question is regarding present crisis, not the past.
See, if you will forget your past, you will fall in quagmire where from you can never come out. Past has direct impact on the present. Had we not been occupied in 1947, there would have been no wars between India and Pakistan. No country would have acquired atom bomb and beg before USA. Whatever present crisis we have, it was because of the past. When militancy broke out in 1990, it created fear among Indian troopers in Kashmir, which no one can deny. There was sense of upper hand. But in 1996, Farooq Abdullah came forward and became Chief Minister with the help of Army. There is no difference between Kuka Parray and Farooq Abdulla. Kuka Parray was created by the Army and Farooq Abdullah was also made Chief Minister by the Army.
Do you mean that NC is responsible for every problem of Kashmiris?
NC is the main accused and is responsible for every misery of Kashmiris. I’ve said it in the assembly before Sheikh Abdullah.
But you always say that NC, PDP, Congress and other mainstream parties are equally responsible for the present mess?
Yes, all are responsible, but NC figures first
When Action Committee Against Land Transfer was formed, it announced that after SASB land transfer issue will be sorted and that it would fight against what it called illegal occupation of 8 lakh kanals of land under Army? What happened later?
Their job was done. Rest of the issues are political in nature. ACALT had representatives from Traders Federation, chamber of commerce and they can’t interfere in political issues. For basic issue, political parties will take care. Regarding Hurriyat unification proposal, what is the latest on that? Talks are on. Three-member committee from both the sides is discussing unification proposals.
Is there any timeframe?
There is no timeframe. Our stand is based on principles. Till people of J&K aren’t given right to self-determination, our struggle would continue. Outside this, accepting any proposal is to weaken our stand. From March 23, 1952, talks have been held on Kashmir at least 130 times. But it yielded nothing. If now we will start bilateral talks with India, it will be futile till it accepts disputed status of the state in clear terms. And till Disturbed Area Act and Armed Forces Special Powers Act aren’t revoked, we won’t talk to India.
Isn’t Hurriyat (M) ready to accept these conditions?
Our stand is based on the principles. In past they Hurriyat (M)) started bilateral talks with India and Pakistan without seeing the consequences. Without analyzing Musharaf’s four-point formula on Kashmir, they accepted that. In future, there should be no scope for bilateral talks and only right to self-determination should be the basis of our struggle.
Is there any proposal from Hurriyat (M) for the unity?
There are no proposals and they are ready to accept our formula. But we are yet to reach any conclusion.
Do you think a united Hurriyat would be more effective in highlighting the Kashmir issue in international forums?
If we will remain steadfast on our stand, it would be more important. Hurriyat was united for 10 years from 1993-2003, but couldn’t deliver properly.
What was the reason?
Ideological differences. Apart from that for 10-years India didn’t give much importance to united Hurriyat for 10 years. India’s attitude is rigid as they think they can occupy Kashmir by force always. In such a situation resistance forces have to take every step carefully.
From the past several elections, you have been vigorously launching boycott campaign. But several people say Geelani himself fought elections under Indian constitution?
I defend my decision before people and Alhamdullilah they accept it. When I fought elections, people used to vote for developmental issues. Congress, NC and other parties were strengthening Indian occupation in Kashmir. We used to make people aware that pro-India parties seek votes in the name of development, but in assembly they are working against Islam. Vote had same power that time which later bullet had. We fought elections on two principles. We projected Islam as way of life in comparison to Socialism, Communalism and Secularism. And during election campaign we used to highlight Kashmir issue. Even in assembly, I used to talk about the Kashmir dispute. We never talked of perks and privileges during election rallies and in the assembly, but about Kashmir issue.
Is Geelani Sahib receiving the pension as a former MLA and how would you defend it?
It is not your question, but created by Indian agencies. When a government employee retires, pension is his right. Similarly, an MLA who spends 10 or 15 years in assembly has the right to get pension.
But when you say no elections under constitution of India, how would you defend your decision?
(Smiles) You can say when cause is so sacred and high profile, then a person should prefer it over perks. For your information, I’ve stopped taking the pension from July 2005 despite it being my right.
Separatists frequently call for strikes which affect the common masses. How would you defend the decision of strike calls?
Nation, which is engaged in a struggle for freedom, has to give sacrifices. You can’t keep everything intact and also achieve freedom. When India was fighting against British, they too offered sacrifices and strike calls. In freedom struggles, sacrifices are a must. In the present situation, how can you show your resentment?
One more accusation against separatist leadership is that they didn’t allow their children to join militancy. Instead their children and relatives either are settled aboard or are holding good positions in the state government?
(Smiles) You can’t forcibly ask anybody to join militancy. Till someone isn’t willing to join, he can’t deliver.
You have been advocating for UN resolutions and tripartite talks but now even Pakistan says that UN resolutions are obsolete and there is need to show flexibility. Your comments?
Despite being a colony of America this time, Pakistan overall is an independent country. But we are salves and we have to decide what we need. We have to see what is best for Kashmiris. Pakistan or its leaders have no right to give roadmaps on Kashmir.
Pakistan Peoples Party co-chairman, Asif Ali Zardari recently stated that Pakistan should forget about Kashmir for a time being and leave it to next generations.
He can forget, but we can’t. We aren’t dependent on their roadmaps.
Greater Autonomy, United States of Kashmir, four-point formula, integral part of India, jugular vein of Pakistan, independent Kashmir. Between all these options do you have any other practical solution for the settlement of Kashmir issue?
Nothing less than right to self-determination which is peaceful, democratic, viable and very much a practicable solution. Everybody wants that J&K shouldn’t get divided on regional or religious lines. How is it possible? If you will solve Kashmir through talks, you have to apply give and take formula. In such a scenario state would be divided. To keep the geographical identity of the state intact, it is most essential that people of J&K should be given the right to self-determination. And we have time and again said it that we would accept the decision of majority.
New Delhi often accused that separatist movement in Kashmir is being sponsored by Islamabad?
Most of the times, they used to say it about me that I am pro-Pak. But I never accepted dictations from Pakistan. I’m not talking about General Musharaf regime only. When I was Chairman of APHC in 1998, Shamshad Sahib was Pakistan’s representative to UN, and he had given a statement that Pakistan represents the sentiments of people of J&K and whatever decisions they would take, Kashmiris would accept. When I was asked about it, I rejected the statement and said that we have not given them this right.
Of late, you have been talking about independent Kashmir as one of the options.
I’ve been saying it for long that accession with Pakistan would be conditional and it won’t be a merger. Similarly, I’ve said If India, Pakistan and people of J&K would be ready by consensus for independent Kashmir, we would accept it.
And what about third option in a plebiscite? In UN resolutions there is no mention of third option.
I said if all the parties of dispute reach a consensus, then only independent Kashmir is possible, not in a plebiscite as it would divide our vote.
In a recent interview with GK, state Congress president Prof Saif-ud-Din Soz said that if separatists claim to be representatives of the people, they should show it in elections. Are you people ready to fight elections to show your representative character?
He is wrong. Those who are elected in so-called elections aren’t genuine representatives. I fought election from 1971 to 1987. They were all rigged. There is no credibility of such elections through which people like Soz Sahib have been elected.
Who is the real representative of the people of J&K?
Separatists or mainstream parties? People who represent the aspirations and sentiments of Kashmiris are the real representatives. And I can say it with authority that those who represent sentiments for Azadi are the real representatives of the people of J&K.
Do you think that mainstream parties like NC and PDP have a role to play in resolution of K-issue?
They have no right, as they are the people who are responsible for the slavery of Kashmiris. Their role is only limited to participate in so-called elections.
NC president Omar Abdullah recently in an interview with GK said that he has no problems in sharing any platform with the separatists. Do you hold the same view about the mainstream parties?
What can they do to settle the K-issue? They accept accession to India as final solution. NC’s stand is autonomy and Mufti (Muhammad Sayeed) Sahib’s stand is status quo with Pakistan. Congress wants complete occupation. What can you achieve by sharing table with such people?
You are being considered hardliner and several people in India say that Hurriyat Conference (Mirwaiz) is the better group to talk to.
When they (Mirwaiz Hurriyat) went to New Delhi in 2004 for talks, I was addressing a rally at Chotta Bazar where a youth had been martyred. I announced it from there, if they can bring freedom, I would be the first one to welcome them. Today, again I say, if they can achieve freedom b y talking to India, we are with them. Ask them now, what they achieved by talking to India. Musharaf also talked to India, but achieved nothing. When militancy broke out in Kashmir in 1990, like most of the leaders that time you also supported gun. Do you think gun has any role to play now? Do you think we supported gun that time because of any compulsion. Our policy this time is also that gun is a factor in the solution of Kashmir issue. We have no direct contact with them (militants) and we won’t use gun in our struggle. Infact, our policy is that even we won’t use even a stone in our struggle. When some youth raised some provocative slogans like against India recently, I stopped them. We won’t use gun in our struggle, but gun is a factor till we won’t achieve freedom.
Has militant leadership any role to play? They have a definite role.
Their representation is a must in any solution.
Apart from implementation of UN resolutions, is there any other solution of Kashmir issue?
By consensus, if all the parties involved in the conflict agree for total independence of whole of the J&K including AJK. But the best solution is implementation of UN resolutions.
When Army and other security agencies are involved in human rights violations, you highlight them. But some people say when militants are involved in such violations you keep mum?
In the second edition of my book Qasia Dard, I’ve highlighted the wrongdoings of militants on 13 pages. Militants weren’t angles, they were also human beings and humans commit mistakes.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
