dailyO
Politics

Is New Delhi proving Geelani right?

Advertisement
Daanish Bin Nabi
Daanish Bin NabiAug 30, 2015 | 12:13

Is New Delhi proving Geelani right?

Dialogue, no doubt, is a part of a freedom struggle. Many conflicts in the world were known to have been resolved only through dialogue, after sustained violent clashes between various groups. The conflict in Northern Ireland was resolved through a proper and sustained conflict resolution process (read dialogue). The Kashmir conflict is no different from any other, and this "dispute" has to be resolved through a process of conflict resolution.

Advertisement

The chairman of the All Parties Hurriyat Conference (APHC), Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, said in an interview that dialogue was the only way forward - a theory with which many of his close aides and associates also agree.

On the opposite end of this divide is the lone but upbeat old stalwart of the Tehreek-e-Hurriyat, Syed Ali Shah Geelani. He also says that he is ready for a dialogue with New Delhi, but has put forth five points before sitting for talks. Some of these points are highly loathed by New Delhi, like the one which calls for recognising Kashmir as an “international dispute”.

For the past one decade, the people of Kashmir have had a wrong notion that by invoking “Vajpayee’s dream of Kashmir”, New Delhi will resolve the dispute through dialogue. When one looks at Vajpayee’s meeting with the Hurriyat leaders, one can't be too hopeful about a resolution of the conflict by invoking “Vajpayee’s dream of Kashmir”.

These meetings (between New Delhi and Hurriyat) have been reasonably described by the former Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) chief AS Dulat in his book, in which he writes that nothing much was achieved other than photo ops, implying that the exercise of “dialogue” and “Insaniyat ke Dariya” proved to be humbug as nothing substantial came out of these meetings. One of the reasons why nothing was achieved during these meetings, according to Dulat, was that that the Hurriyat had no idea of what to talk about and what its real motive was.

Advertisement

Since the 2000s, the Hurriyat has been blowing the trumpet that the Kashmiris are ready for dialogue under the ambit of “Vajpayee’s Insaniyat”. The fact that the Hurriyat is every ready with a "begging bowl" to engage New Delhi has eroded its respect among the Kashmiris, especially the youth.

It doesn’t, in any sense, say that the we, the Kashmiris, are not peace-loving people and do not want a dialogue. We have always proved that we are not communal people (history bears witness to this). The Kashmiris have always been ready for a result-oriented dialogue with New Delhi, but this dialogue should come with dignity. New Delhi has to shun its stepmotherly attitude towards a result-oriented dialogue.

When separatist Kashmiri leader Shabir Shah returned from Delhi, after the talks between the national security advisors of India and Pakistan collapsed, he held a presser in Srinagar arguing that by not agreeing to have a peaceful dialogue on Kashmir, the Indian government has not only repeated its rigid approach, but also rejected "Vajpayee's dream for Kashmir". He again invoked the “Vajpayee’s dream” without considering if the Hurriyat really knows what to talk about with New Delhi. Does the Hurriyat have an agenda for any meeting with New Delhi?

Advertisement

On the other hand, Indian minister of external affairs, Sushma Swaraj, in her response to Pakistani national security advisor (NSA) Sartaj Aziz has categorically referred to the Hurriyat as the "third party" on the Kashmir issue, without realising that the Kashmiris and Hurriyat are main the stakeholders of this “dispute” between India and Pakistan. While New Delhi is not ready to give an iota of space to the Hurriyat, the Hurriyat is clinging on to its begging bowl in the hope that New Delhi will offer some pennies.

AS Dulat, in his book writes, “Let us talk about the talks” - till New Delhi eschews this approach towards the dialogue process, it is futile for the Hurriyat to be a part of any dialogue process that is not a result-oriented one.

In today’s Kashmir, the alienation has grown manifold since Nehru’s times. So India must initiate a result-oriented dialogue soon. The chairman of the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front, Mohammad Yasin Malik, on a number of occasions, has said, “Don’t push Kashmiris to the wall.” Still, it is unfortunate to see New Delhi’s approach towards the people of Kashmir.

While describing “militants” as Bhagat Singhs of Kashmir, Shabir Shah, who also was a hardcore militant in the 1980s and 1990s, still believes, “They (militants) are fighting, but dialogue is inevitable to find solution to the issue of Kashmir.”

New Delhi’s stubbornness in not engaging the Hurriyat in a result-oriented dialogue has proved the lone sailor, Syed Geelani, right when he says we have had over 100 dialogue processes with New Delhi, but none proved to be fruitful for Kashmiris because, in his view, New Delhi is not serious about solving the Kashmir issue and is only buying time.

Last updated: August 31, 2015 | 11:18
IN THIS STORY
Please log in
I agree with DailyO's privacy policy