'Not A Pakistani But A Kashmiri Parrot'

The raging controversy over the meeting of the Pakistan President, GeneralMusharraf, and the Hurriyat is a part of a disinformation campaign aimed atprojecting the Hurriyat as an impediment to the upcoming summit. The Hurriyathas been at pains to give a proper concept of its aims and objectives in anattempt to clear the misconceptions created by the Government of India.

The Government of India has launched a sustained campaign against theHurriyat in its endeavour to portray the Hurriyat as a rabidly communalorganisation centred in extremism and terrorism. Every action of the Hurriyat isascribed to Pakistan. The actions of the Government of India are buttressed byhuge financial resources; an envious hold over the print and electronic media,easy access to diplomatic channels.

The Hurriyat in comparison is a representative organisation, with theaspirations of the 15 million people as the core of their objectives. Theycannot compete with the Government of India in terms of resources and are oftenthe victim of false portrayal.

The letter, addressed to the Prime Minister of India and Gen. Musharraf, isan attempt by the Hurriyat to put the facts in the proper perspective. Theletter may have been addressed to the administrative heads, but the realaudience is supposed to be the civilised civilian structure within the twocountries. It is addressed to people who uphold the principles of fair play, whoare moderate in their outlook and who have a strong belief in democratic values.

Our letter is an attempt to make them understand that we have not mortgagedourselves with Pakistan, as India would like to portray. It has been theconsistent effort of the Hurriyat to explain the Kashmir point of view to bothIndia and Pakistan, that the Kashmir issue is a political problem, wherein thesentiments and the aspirations of the people of Jammu and Kashmir are involved,and the fulfillment of these aspirations are essential to the solution of thisproblem. 

The Kashmiris have suffered the most in the shadow boxing between thetwo nations and are bound to suffer more, if the prevalent, persistent obstinatestance is any indication.

The Kashmiri psyche is in a desperate urge that the Kashmir viewpoint beexplained without any corruption to the basic facts. It is the people of Kashmirwho are suffering the most, while the Kashmir issue and the sufferings areunabashedly being used as inputs for political sports, and diplomaticbrinkmanship, tailored as per the needs and interests of the two countries.

The hullabaloo over the proposed meeting is uncalled for. Two heads of statecan meet. But an aspiring state representing the crux of the problem, involvinga hapless suffering population has no right to meet. We may not be a state yet,but we represent the people. Are people irrelevant in the field ofgeo-political sphere of bilateral interests?  

The Hurriyat wants the civilisedstructure in the two countries to form a constructive opinion and help defeatthe forces of destruction. The administrative set up within the two countries should not be a hostage tothe reactive opinion of a possible climbdown, instead the administrative set upin both the countries should be hostage to the yearning for peace and conflictresolution. The civilised structure has to rise upto the occasion and brushaside the right wing apprehensions and paint a realistic picture of the ongoingstruggle. Distortion of facts from either side has to be thwarted.

Right from the outset, the Hurriyat was approached by the Government of Indiafor a dialogue. The Hurriyat did not go in for a dialogue, because the IndianGovernment has left a chain of broken promises in the past. India hadreligiously adhered to Machiavellian philosophy in the past. The presence of theBJP at the centre rekindled the hopes of an honest resolution of the problem.The Hurriyat unwittingly viewed the BJP as a patriotic party with the interestsof the country close to their heart.

The Hurriyat did not want to lose the opportunity and was averse to use thehistorical misdeeds of the previous governments as a yardstick to gauge theintentions of the BJP. It reciprocated the ceasefire call of the BJP-ledGovernment, and went a step ahead by praising the Prime Minister and describinghim as sincere, despite the continued bloodshed in Kashmir at the hands of thesame Prime Minister's armed forces. The intention was to make a break from thecruel past. Hurriyat further initiated the idea of a visit to Pakistan.

The idea and the objective of the visit were well received by the IndianGovernment at the informal level. Once the intentions of the visit were madepublic, the Government of India took a diametrically opposite view at the formallevel and did not allow the visit to go ahead. Whatever the rationale behind therefusal of the visit, the people of Kashmir saw it as an attempt by theGovernment of India to unfairly cut down the Hurriyat to size. The erroneousdecision in not allowing the Hurriyat to go to Pakistan could have beencompensated by facilitating a meeting with Gen. Musharraf during his visit toIndia.

Instead, a controversy has been generated to the detriment of the upcomingsummit. "The Kashmiris cannot visit Pakistan, The Kashmiris cannot meetMusharraf. They can meet Mr. K. C. Pant". This blatant didactic approach of theIndian Government has only helped to reinforce the colonial image of India.

What is the problem in meeting Gen. Musharraf? And what is the problem inmeeting Mr. Vajpayee? The Hurriyat wants to meet both the heads, becauseKashmiris are segregated on both sides of the LoC. Both the parts are underillegal occupation. Any meeting in isolation of either head is a futileexercise, like the upcoming summit, which is mired in bilateralism, fuelled bythe arrogance of power.

India has a history of arrogance of power in Kashmir. Sheikh Abdullah riskedhis political career and was overtly seen as pro- India. The moment he startedmaking pro-Kashmiri noises, he was unceremoniously dropped, arrested andreplaced by a new Kashmiri - Ghulam Mohd. Bakshi.

Ghulam Mohammed Sadiq was used to oust Bakshi Sahib; Mir Qasim replaced Mr.Sadiq after his death. It is a different matter that death saved Mr. Sadiq frombeing dropped unceremoniously. Sheikh Sahib was used to oust Mir Qasim; Dr.Farooq Abdullah succeeded Sheikh Sahib after his death; Mr. G. M. Shah was usedto oust Dr. Farooq Abdullah; Farooq Abdullah, was then again used to oust Mr. G.M. Shah.

The present situation smacks of the same imperialistic fervour. The Hurriyatwas informally engaged in negotiations by the Government of India. Futileengagement took precedence over sincere efforts to find a solution right fromday one. Take the example of the K.C. Pant episode.

The informal parleys were on, with Mr. Pant nowhere on the scene. SuddenlyMr. Pant appeared formally out of nowhere and took the Hurriyat by surprise.This was followed by the invitation to Gen. Musharraf. The story goes on and on.

The Hurriyat is not a Pakistani parrot. It is a Kashmiri parrot. Pakistan isplaying its cards well and taking care of the sentiments of the people ofKashmir. India is arrogant in the belief that the occupation will last for ever.

The Hurriyat constitution is not averse to any option. Pakistan is as wary ofthe third option as India. The role of Pakistan too has come under fire from asection of the Hurriyat. Yet, the Indian establishment is busy painting theHurriyat as a Pakistani parrot.

The involvement of the Hurriyat in a tripartite dialogue would have signalleda clean break from the past and heralded a new era, based on both realistic andmoralistic politics. The exclusion of the Hurriyat is a mutual decision of bothIndia and Pakistan. Pakistan has been able to feign commiseration over theexclusion, while India is bending backwards to express its glee over theexclusion. This is nothing but an exercise in self destruction. The HomeMinister of India, Mr. L.K. Advani, loses no opportunity to berate the peaceparleys.

A few days back, he was at his audacious best and tried to draw parallelsbetween Sindh and Kashmir. The vitriolic of Mr. Advani represents the symptomsof a deeper malaise afflicting the Indian psyche. They are trying to consecratedenial of just rights by making incongruous comparisons. 

Not to be out-done inthe race to vilify the Hurriyat, some Opposition parties in India have rewrittena new chapter in apartheid by threatening to boycott the tea reception of thePakistan High Commissioner, if any Hurriyat member is invited. Are the Kashmirisless human than the Indians.

Both India and Pakistan have stuck to rigid posturing over the past fivedecades at the cost of thousands of Kashmiri lives. The right wingers are havinga field day, whipping up an emotional frenzy. The reactive costs of this rigidposturing and emotional frenzy is not borne by either these right wingers ortheir kith and kin. It is borne by the impoverished citizens, especially thoseinducted into the armed forces out of domestic economic compulsions. 

The rightwingers want rigid posturing to be the guiding force as against realisticeconomics. Poverty breeds and provides the necessary fodder for rigid extremistposturing.

This is not the first time that bilateral talks are being held between Indiaand Pakistan. They have been taking place in the past as well, with similarmedia hype and have often ended without any progressive or constructive content.A major portion of the time and scarce resources of each country are used to puteach other down and, now they want us to believe that, overnight they havedeveloped pangs of sincerity and want to change history. The exclusion of theHurriyat from the talks is an indicator of lack of sincerity in any resolve tosolve the issue.

The Government of India should understand that Gen. Musharraf needs anexplicit Hurriyat endorsement in order to sell any peace package, back home. Asincere effort for the resolution of the Kashmir issue will take the Kashmiriroute. If you want to change history within or outside the stated positions, theKashmiris will have to be the integral part of any such effort. They are thebasic party and any solution acceptable to them will have to be accepted by thesecondary parties.

(The writer is a member of the All-Party Hurriyat Conference executive)

Don'tDesecrate Places Of Worship
Lone Blames Pak For Growth Of Political Outfits In J&K
MoreStories on the Hurriyat Conference