• Investment World
• eWorld
• Catalyst
• Mentor
• Life
• Canvas
• Praxis
• Urban Pulse
• Brand Quest

Rasheeda Bhagat

in Srinagar

Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, President of the Awami Action Committee, is easily the most modern and moderate face of the Hurriyat. In an interview to Business Line in Srinagar, he expressed disappointment that the Prime Minister, Mr Atal Bihari Vajpayee, "can talk to the Nagas but not to us". He added that "compromise and flexibility would be required from both India and Pakistan to solve the Kashmir issue".

Excerpts from the interview:

How much of `healing touch' has the Mufti brought to Kashmir?

Well, the phrase is more a slogan than a reality in Kashmir. They have failed on both this and the promise during the elections of facilitating a dialogue between the separatists and Delhi, and finding a peaceful and honourable place for the people of Jammu and Kashmir.

In the Mufti's era, till last week, 673 people have died; we have seen an increase in human rights violations, innocents being targeted by the police and the army, though there was a hue and cry about the disbanding of the Special Operations Group (SOG). But the SOG is still functioning unofficially — still abducting people and asking for money and violations are going on in the name of law and order.

The best example is last week's incident when an Imam of a local mosque was gunned down with his 11-year-old son.

They said it was a mistake.

Well such mistakes are being regularly committed. The very presence of the army and paramilitary forces in huge numbers shows no healing has taken place.

The government says militancy-related incidents have gone down. If true, the number of troops should have gone down. Of course, we do not hear about fidayeen attacks or suicide bombings any more but I don't think we have any concessions on the ground.

So nothing has changed...

One thing has: The Mufti Government is trying to highlight issues of unemployment, economic concerns and proper administration and accountability.

Which you welcome...

Of course, as these are issues connected with good administration.

So, compared to the National Conference Government, is there more accountability?

Yes, we have to be honest. There is some betterment in administrative issues. But the problem is the Government view that an administrative change would dilute the political issue in J&K. They have been hoping and trying through economic packages and provision of jobs.

But would such initiatives not help?

They would, provided, side by side, there is a political process aligned with these initiatives.

So, how do you read the Prime Minister's visit here?

Even the separatist camp had a lot of expectations, in the sense, here is a person who is seen as the only hope in a hard line, fundamentalist BJP government.

He talks about humanity and human values; reading his musings one gets the impression he is a humanist. But we were quite disappointed. He did offer a hand of friendship to Pakistan but there was nothing for the people of Kashmir.

What about the Rs 1,000 crore package, the promise of one lakh jobs?

This is something likezakhmon pey namak chhidakna (rubbing salt into your wounds). Here is a problem which needs a human and political touch and here is a Prime Minister saying I will give Rs 1,000 crore. It is a slap on your face.

You have suffered a lot... but nobody recognises your pain or agony or trauma and a prime minister comes and says I will give you jobs and money, so forget about what has happened. Maybe people will forget but they will not forgive.

There is nothing concrete on the table. We thought he would invite the separatists for talks.

But Mr N. N. Vora has been appointed as a central interlocutor for talks with all.

He prefers those parties and groups which have no differences in opinion with the Government of India and which follow the same line. You have to talk with those who have a different opinion from you.

But he did extend an invitation...

It is so non-political. Mr Vora comes to Kashmir, gives an ad saying when he will be available for talks This is a non-serious attitude. If you are coming to Kashmir, you have to reach out to the people.

Why cannot the Hurriyat reach out to him? After all, it is your problem.

We expect something at a higher level. We do not know what is his political space or ideology nor what is his mandate. We expect the Indian Prime Minister to take the initiative and invite us. If he can talk to the Nagas, why not to the people in Kashmir?

How hopeful are you that this time the dialogue with Pakistan will bear some fruit?

Forget I am a political person or a religious head; all ordinary Kashmiris crave for Indo-Pak friendship because we know that without that our issue cannot be resolved. So we would welcome any small step in the direction of peace with Pakistan. We are craving for an official dialogue between the two countries. Though our position is that the people of Kashmir need to be involved in a dialogue, at the moment, we are prepared to forget that; let the two countries start a dialogue and take the initiatives to bring peace in J&K. We are prepared to support the initiative with all the might and authority that we have here.

What do you see as a solution?

The emphasis should be on the process rather than the solution. Once we have a process where the two countries are talking, automatically a solution will come up.

What about their stated positions?

Its unlikely that any of the stated positions would be accepted and a resolution emerge along those lines. So when you are talking about Kashmir, you are talking about compromise, flexibility and a negotiated settlement. We are ready to help.

What do you see as a negotiated settlement?

First of all, we have to have a political approach. India's concern is cross-border terrorism or whatever. I do not think Pakistan would accept that they are supporting cross-border terrorism. But we are ready to help.

They say it is indigenous. What do you say? Is it indigenous or supported by Pakistan?

It is indigenous in the sense it would be wrong to say there are no Kashmiris involved in this struggle.

But without Pakistan's support, it cannot thrive.

True, and I accept that. I know that Azad Kashmir is very much involved and active. That is another political issue. I do not see Azad Kashmir as part of Pakistan. It is as disputed as this part of Kashmir.

So in my view, if Azad Kashmir is supporting militancy here, technically it is not Pakistan. We do not accept Paksitan's claim over Azad Kashmir. We had given a proposal to the Indians through interlocutors or a third-party saying that if their concern was cross-border terrorism, the Hurriyat was ready to help. Allow us to go to Pakistan, we will talk to the boys and the leadership in Azad Kashmir and we will force a ceasefire.

So what happened?

On the one hand, they do not want to give any recognition or political space to the Hurriyat conference.

Why don't you take that space by contesting the elections, and prove your representative character?

Because the problem with elections is that the real story of Kashmir in India is based on mistrust.

But this time the election was free and fair.

If India has nothing to hide and the election is indeed free and fair, why can't they have official (international) observers as Pakistan and Bangladesh?

The second problem is that when you sign the nomination paper, you give in writing that you believe that the accession of Kashmir to India is final. But that is the very basis of our political struggle.

So if these two issues are sorted out, we are willing to participate in any process that will prove our credibility and leadership status in Kashmir. And we are not asking for much. History is witness to the fact that the relationship is based on so much mistrust and there is so much of inherent inhibitions vis-à-vis each other that we need to give something to the people.

Now that the new government is installed, how do we move forward?

The basic element of peace in Kashmir should start from ceasefire — a cessation to hostilities on both the sides. And we are ready to work for that. I fail to understand how, by appreciating the stand taken by the Hurriyat, the Government has anything to lose. If we go to Pakistan and Azad Kashmir and force a ceasefire we are on a track of political resolution. If we fail to do so, we are exposed. We have no right to say tomorrow that nobody is listening to us.

But instead of appreciating our stand they suspend our passports.

You are the latest in the list!

I was the only person who could move out and mine is also gone for the last six months. I was to join my wife's family in the US for the first time after marriage (she is a Kashmir Muslim with an American passport) but I could not go.

You are seen as a moderate within the Hurriyat. So by all this is the Government pushing you against the wall?

Of course. They are creating problems instead of supporting that sentiment within the Hurriyat which talks about peace, resolution, flexibility and compromise.

So how hopeful are you?

Not much, because we also know that the general elections are due, and I do not think India is ready for a major compromise. And everybody knows it is the US pressure which is driving both the sides.

Well, the BJP needs the votes of the hardcore Hindus.

Exactly. Second, the US is still busy with Iraq and they also have Palestine. They are trying to prove they want to help Muslims with their problems, be it in Palestine or Kashmir. Their new love for Kashmir is not because of concern on human rights.

Response can be sent to rasheeda@thehindu.co.in

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication

Stories in this Section
Weeding out subsidies

Copyright © 2003, The Hindu Business Line. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu Business Line