Self-Governance: No Master, No Surrogate

The bottomline is there cannot be any solution within the framework of the Indian Constitution

MIRWAIZ UMAR FAROOQ
Leader, Hurriyat Conference

TO UNDERSTAND Kashmir, it is important to understand the new mood. Two significant things have happened and they demand attention. There has been a successful shift of the struggle to Generation Next which is taking charge. Equally important, the indigenous nature of the movement has come to the forefront. Earlier, whatever happened in Kashmir was always attributed to Pakistan. Nobody can say that now. Eyebrows were raised by some quarters that Pakistan remained silent, but as a Kashmiri I feel it has worked to our benefit. If you look at the Indian public’s perception, they have always looked at Kashmir through the Pakistani prism. That has shifted, ensuing a serious debate over the issue, which is encouraging.

The gun has definitely played a role. It was the mujahideen who brought the Kashmir issue out of the cold storage into the limelight. But, at the same time, we need to remember that militancy is only a part of it. The gun has already taken a backseat in the sense that they are supporting us from the back. And I think they should continue to support peaceful means of putting forward our point of view. Indian agencies are working hard to convert this peaceful struggle into a violent one. No chance should be provided to them. It is very good that the mujahideen have understood that and are supporting peaceful protests.

New Delhi jumps at the mention of the word azadi. It is not an abstract idea, but a very tangible reality that can be practised. It denotes both physical and emotional non-dependence. There are some who are apprehensive. They say that the state is land-locked between three major powers who will not allow it to remain free; besides, they say, it will be unable to survive economically. To them I say, look around you, you will find many entities much smaller than our state not only existing but prospering. The principle of peaceful co-existence and mutual cooperation is what we believe in. For us, if freedom is important, it is equally important to have good and workable relations with all our neighbours, including India. We harbour no ill will towards the people of India. It is the policies of the Government of India that are the main source of discord among the people of the region. When General Musharraf came up with a four-point formula, we supported it because the first thing it talked about was self-governance — based on the universal principle of “no master, no surrogate.” It was meant to place Kashmiris as masters of their own destiny and not as dependents of India or, for that matter, Pakistan.

Nobody can deny the fact that after 1947, a majority of the people talked of merger with Pakistan. Similarly, for a long time the only resolution of the dispute was seen in the implementation of the UN resolutions. But with time things changed; the idea of an independent state came up. Likewise, for the first time the idea of tripartite dialogue was suggested by my late father, Mirwaiz Molvi Farooq, as an alternate solution. Since then, many new ideas have come up. For example, we talk about the United States of Kashmir, the Dixon Plan, various proposals given by the Kashmir Study Group, Musharraf’s four-point formula, etc. Suggestions and proposals which can show a way forward should be welcome.

I don’t see any shift in Pakistan’s policy; only the strategy may have changed. Over the years, both at the domestic and the international level, the Government of India has tried to link the Kashmir issue with what it calls Pakistan’s ambitions around it, thus justifying all that it does here. They have repeatedly been telling their people that Pakistan wants to annex Kashmir, grab the land and terrorise the people, playing upon their nationalist sentiments. To counter it, Pakistan, for the past few years, has put itself in the background and Kashmiri interests in the foreground. Before that, for Pakistan it was only about Kashmir banega Pakistan, as for India, it is still an atoot ang (indivisible part). Such an approach kept limiting this human issue to just being a territorial dispute between two neighbouring countries, with no hope of relief for the suffering people. Today, India is being forced to reciprocate.

India missed an opportunity by not working on Musharraf’s proposals. I believe that Musharraf’s approach was basically to bring India to the negotiation table, giving them very little room to excuse themselves. At the international level, India kept saying that it was ready to address the problem but couldn’t allow Kashmir to become Pakistan. They portrayed the Kashmiri struggle only in the garb of Pakistan’s aspirations. Musharraf tried to beat them at their own game, and said that whatever is acceptable to Kashmiris is acceptable to Pakistan.

WE ENGAGED in a dialogue with the Centre, but if anyone expected the Hurriyat to resolve the Kashmir problem at once, it can only be termed as wishful thinking. For the first time, there were direct talks between those representing the aspirations of the Kashmiri people and New Delhi. Both were coming from a position and sticking firmly to it. Confidence-building measures required to carry the process forward were not honoured by New Delhi and promises made were not kept. The sincerity exhibited on our part was, unfortunately, not reciprocated. We felt let down. But, for the first time, Kashmiris were accepted as a party to the dispute, which was an important step. Let me also put it on record again that there were no conditions put forward by New Delhi when we entered into the dialogue with them. The talks were absolutely unconditional and only for the resolution of the issue. Moreover, no one can deny the importance of dialogue at any juncture. We believe the resolution of the issue can only come through either the implementation of the UN resolutions or tripartite dialogue. In this regard, the ball is in India’s court now. If India has something else in mind, let them put it to us.

New Delhi is happy portraying normalcy by focusing on Kashmir’s tulip gardens and trade across the Line of Control (LoC ). But let me make it absolutely clear that cross-LoC trade isn’t a matter between India and Pakistan but between two provinces of Kashmir. We want unconditional trade. This shouldn’t be symbolic like the bus service, but a viable alternative route. We are going to Pakistan soon and we would make it clear that Kashmir should be made an open trade zone.

The only way of ensuring a permanent end to the issue is the meaningful involvement of the people of Jammu and Kashmir in any resolution regarding their future. Kashmiris cannot, and should not, be taken for granted either by India or Pakistan. No one can decide our fate. We have earned what we are demanding. Too many sacrifices have been made. The bottomline — no solution is possible within the framework of the Indian Constitution. Apart from that, we are ready to discuss every possibility, suggestion and proposal on the basis of merit.

Holding elections to portray normalcy is also no solution. Elections to what end? If for day-to-day governance, then such an exercise is meaningful only in sovereign states. What meaning does it have in a place where you have five lakh troops converting the place into a garrison, gross violation of human rights, and day-in-and-day-out killing of unarmed people demanding basic rights? I’d say again: dialogue is the way forward. It is extremely important that even the mujahideen are supporting the current mass movement. •