J&K: The Hopes and Despairs of the Peace Process

In first week of January, Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad left a meeting of his Congress party rapt when he said that all proposals on Kashmir resolution deserve discussion and therefore should not be rejected as such. In response to a query from one of his party legislators, Azad was actually referring to a series of proposals including those mooted by Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf –self rule, joint control, demilitarisation etc. Chief Minister’s this assertion came with an element of surprise for Congress legislators as he is the man who did not miss even a single occasion to pooh-pooh self-rule proposal ever since President Musharraf tossed this idea a year back and the ruling coalition partner in Jammu and Kashmir –the Peoples Democratic Party –picked this up as road map to resolve Kashmir issue. When Chief Minister made this statement, he was just back from New Delhi after a meeting with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and several other central leaders –most significantly External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee who was just preparing for an important visit to Islamabad where he later had discussions with President Musharraf and his Foreign Minister Khurshid Kasuri.

Another significant aspect of the Chief Minister’s statement, sources privy to discussion, told the Epilogue, was his strong and authoritative assertion that the present year -2007 –is all set to be historical for Jammu and Kashmir as according to him New Delhi was close to ‘something’ landmark on conflict resolution. A week later, the Chief Minister yet again left many surprised while speaking in the state legislative council, currently in session, as he counselled that new ideas on Kashmir deserve attention. He went on to explain that what all President Musharraf’s formulae mean and to what extent any or all of them can be applied to conflict resolution. Climbing down from his known opposition to demilitarisation, the Chief Minister said that options of replacing Armed forces with the local police on internal security duties can be a possibility but the force concentration on the Line of Control –which divides Jammu and Kashmir into India and Pakistan controlled territories –has to be maintained.

Even a cursory look at the history and precedence reveals that the Chief Ministers of Jammu and Kashmir –beginning with Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah to the present incumbent –have had little at their disposal on the core issue except for creating a conducive situation. It is always New Delhi which decides as which way to move. Since the present Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Azad is a man who has spent most of his nearly three decades long political career in the power looms of New Delhi, his sudden mellowing down on proposals which he has been opposing and indications that something significant is up for Jammu and Kashmir can not be simply brushed aside. Picking up different developments of the recent months and then seeing them under a close prism suggests that there is definite forward movement on Kashmir. Since the inconsistent and unstable approach of New Delhi, Islamabad and all other groups and parties engaged in the issue have enormously contributed to prolonging of the conundrum to over five decades; therefore a conclusive analysis will always be wrong. However, the developments, one after the other, over some recent months have more in them than what meets the eye.

The Jammu engagement

Of the various incidents, one significant development is the engagement of separatist leaders with the Jammu region. The phenomenon which is described as a conflict, dispute, problem or crisis involves the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir –comprising Jammu region, Kashmir Valley and Ladakh region –and not only Kashmir Valley. As against Kashmir Valley which presently has 99 per cent Kashmiri speaking Muslim population, the Jammu region has a non Kashmiri speaking majority with Hindus comprising nearly half of the total population. However, the separatist leadership of Kashmir which at least for last decade and half has been claiming to represent the aspirations of entire Jammu and Kashmir has never included Jammu region in their dialogue discourse. With their Kashmir centric discourse, the separatist leaders have assumed a hate symbol in Jammu region particularly among the Hindu nationalists. Even among the Muslims they never enjoyed popularity and support of thought as they were never heard of speaking about this region.

Interestingly, the occasion of Eid-ul-Zuha, which incidentally also happened to be the New Year eve, the pro-Pakistan hardliner separatist Syed Ali Shah Geelani created ripples in the winter capital city as he attracted several hundred people to his impromptu public address. Most of his audiences, however, comprised the Kashmiri youth who are usually in Jammu during the winters and they were just on their way home back from Eid congregation. Geelani begin talking about the execution of deposed Iraqi President Saddam Hussein which stirred the emotions of Muslim youth and then he intelligently switched over to his separatist discourse and put across his view point on the “struggle for independence”. Later first Police report of the New Year was slapped on the aging separatist for preaching secession but he was not arrested. Ever since, Geelani is putting up in Jammu though during the month he made a brief visit each to New Delhi and then to Srinagar to mobilise a strike against the Pakistan visit of the Mirwaiz Farooq led moderate Hurriyat delegation. “I am a citizen of Jammu and Kashmir and I have liberty to visit and stay in any part of the state. I am here in Jammu for another couple of months. I advise all those who are opposed to my ideas that instead of making unnecessary noises they should come for a discussion with me”, says Geelani who is currently headquartered in the winter capital city. In Jammu –popularly known as city of temples –Geelani’s daily engagements include meeting around two to three dozen people individually and in groups and circulating among them some literature on the freedom struggle, the ills with the present Kashmiri society and his brief biographical account. This is the first time since the cult of separatist politics came to be known that a separatist leader stayed for such a long time in Jammu.

Geelani’s moderate counterpart Mirwaiz Umar Farooq too followed his suit to Jammu and kept himself engaged with the public for two days ahead of his Islamabad visit. He had separate meetings with the groups of exiled Kashmiri Pandits, some “intellectuals” and some other selected members of the civil society. Since Mirwaiz was in Jammu while on way to Pakistan, he made a point that he has come for consultations with the people of Jammu region so as to carry along their view point to Islamabad.

The repeated visits of separatist leaders to Jammu and their statements underlining the seriousness to take along people of this region suggest that they are in know of something which can not happen without a broad regional consensus.


Mirwaiz in Islamabad: The paradigm shift

In early 2004, after a meeting with the then Deputy Prime Minister of India Lal Kishan Advani, the leader of the Kashmir’s moderate faction separatist amalgam All Parties Hurriyat Conference, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq said that the next meeting of his group with the Government of India will be while on way back from Islamabad. At that time there was an embargo on the visit of separatist leaders to Pakistan. The Mirwaiz’s statement that they will hold further talks with the Indian establishment while coming back from Islamabad was actually putting a condition that dialogue process can not move forward till they are not allowed to have a meeting with the ruling establishment and other people in Pakistan. On January 18, 2007, when Mirwaiz Umar Farooq left for Islamabad along with his colleagues Abdul Gani Bhat and Bilal Lone, this was his fifth visit since 2004 when he said that dialogue can take a concrete shape only after a visit to Islamabad. It is pertinent to mention here that when the Hurriyat leaders first visited Pakistan via Srinagar-Muzaffarabad route they had to return disappointed. After having meetings with President Pervez Musharraf and other leaders in Islamabad, the Mirwaiz while on way back to Srinagar told a public meeting in Muzaffarabad that Pakistan has nothing to offer on Kashmir. This statement reflected that President Musharraf had not given him enough assurance to support the “freedom struggle”. Back from Pakistan, the Mirwaiz group has behaved quite differently as they used to before going there. For several years the Hurriyat has been toughening its stand on the involvement of Pakistan in a trilateral dialogue on Kashmir. In what can be described as a diplomatic victory for India, President Musharraf is believed to have told the separatist leaders they need to engage themselves in a dialogue with New Delhi as Islamabad is already into and an option of trilateral dialogue –Kashmiri separatists, New Delhi and Islamabad sitting across the same table –was not a possibility.

Ever since the visits of Mirwaiz group to Pakistan had been more like academic than political though each time they had opportunity to have a meeting with either President Musharraf or Prime Minister Showkat Aziz. However, the latest visit of Mirwaiz to Pakistan and its administered Kashmir seemed to have full backing of New Delhi and in concurrence of Islamabad. The very reason that instead of flying straight from Srinagar to New Delhi, for onward journey to Islamabad, his coming to Jammu for two days where he had wide ranging consultations with different people can be seen more as a paradigm shift in policy in line with New Delhi’s approach than a mere change of heart. A series of developments suggest that the largest separatist political group is finally seized of the ground realities. On January 20, Mirwaiz created ripples among the separatist political and militant cadres when, after a meeting with President Musharraf, he said that in Islamabad that the militancy in Jammu and Kashmir has not achieved anything other than creating "more graves", as he went on suggesting the militants to give up the armed struggle to find a solution to the vexed issue. Ranging from Jammu and Kashmir Governor and Chief Minister to central leaders all jumped in to welcome the Mirwaiz’s change of heart. The overwhelming response to Mirwaiz’s statement seemed, at a point, as all these leaders were already expecting such an assertion from the separatist leader currently on Pakistan tour. His stand came in for a rather more harsh criticism from several militant and separatist organisations. Even flattening the balloon of expectations, a day after Mirwaiz’s statement, Pakistan officially pronounced that this was his individual opinion.

The United Jehad Council –an umbrella organisation of several militant outfits and headed by Syed Salahuddin –was the first to call Mirwaiz’s bluff. Hours after Mirwaiz’s statement in Islamabad, a spokesman for UJC said, “such statements can’t change the ground realities”. He added, “Kashmiris resorted to armed struggle only after the political, constitutional and diplomatic struggle of 42 years failed to bear any fruit and one hundred thousand people have lost their lives in this struggler…..If Mirwaiz and others are feeling fatigued, they should rest in their homes but not propagate the lessons of cowardice,”. On UJC reaction, a member of the Mirwaiz group says, “this is the tragedy of the situation. There are certain sections of society who are out to politicise the atmosphere for vested interests and keep the conflict running. But I don’t think that will last for long in the current atmosphere”.

Though the delegation had quite meaningful meetings with President Pervez Musharraf and leaders of the Pakistan administered Kashmir, but on the top of Mirwaiz’s agenda was building a consensus on the trans-LoC contact groups and meeting with some militant leaders, particularly the Al Umar chief Mushtaq Ahmed Zargar alias Latrum –a key conspirator in 1999 Kandhar hijacking. He failed on bringing the Pakistan administered Kashmir leaders on board for the proposed contact groups, but Mirwaiz is reported to have won over the support of some militant groups particularly those owing allegiance to Zargar.

That there is groundswell of support for the peace process, actually set in motion by the then Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee and meticulously continued by the UPA government, is a fact discernible. But there is manifold higher risk of its collapse. As big the expectations are still bigger is the bubble which holds this process. There are quite a few points which underline fragility of the peace process: Mirwaiz’s sudden stepping out of the bellicosity, condemning the cult of gun and jumping into the peace wagon is fast earning him the wrath of fundamentalists who in his own opinion have a vested interest in continuation of violence. Such peace overtures of past can not be overlooked at this juncture. One of the seasoned Kashmiri leaders and widely respected separatist Abdul Ghani Lone was in fact a step ahead of what Mirwaiz is seen doing today in engineering a meaningful dialogue for resolution of Kashmir issue. But he had to fall prey to the bullets of fundamentalists on May 21, 2001 –the day when then Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee was in Jammu and Kashmir and a possible meeting that would have changed entire course of Kashmir peace dialogue was widely rumoured.

Second major factor which has the potential of endangering peace process is the fact that this year Pakistan is headed for general elections. It has to be seen what happens to the position of General Musharraf. In context of the present peace process, Musharraf can be described as man of the moment and best bet for India to move forward. His loss at the helm of affairs can be a direct loss to the peace process. Unlike India where Foreign policy is always an institutional mechanism, in Pakistan much of it depends on the person who holds the chair. And when demits chair, left behind is a clean slate. It may be recalled here that New Delhi and Islamabad had made a substantial forward movement on Kashmir and other bilateral relations but Kargil misadventure collapsed the process and eroded the dividends Prime Minister Vajpayee’s landmark Lahore sojourn. Little later when Mian Nawaz Shrief regime was toppled, India had to make a fresh beginning with the new man –President Musharraf. It has taken pretty seven long years to reach a point of hope. Therefore, the current year is really most significant for Jammu and Kashmir and it has to be keenly watched how things unfold.


INTERVIEW

Miwaiz Umar Farooq


Epilogue: There is a visible change in your stance vis-à-vis the dialogue process going between India and Pakistan. Would you explain the circumstances?

Mirwaiz: Firstly, we have not changed our stance. We always believed in peaceful resolution of the Kashmir conflict. Our long standing position has been that if negotiations, discussions and dialogue can lead to a lasting solution, then there is no need to doubt anybody’s intentions.

Epiloge: But hardliners especially Syed Ali Shah Geelani have branded you as a traitor and even given a strike call to protest against your participation in the dialogue process and in this connection your visit to Pakistan?

Mirwaiz: I do not need a certificate from anybody to substantiate his claim that he represents the aspirations of people of Jammu and Kashmir. As for as our participation in the dialogue process ss concerned, we want to give both the countries a chance to settle the issue once and for all. We do not want to miss this opportunity when Gen. Musharraf and PM Manmohan Singh have agreed in principle to address out genuine concerns.

Epilogue: In view of the fact that various militant outfits are backing the hardliners, don’t you think it is important to bring them on board?

Mirwaiz: See, I cannot compel anybody to walk alongside me. Hardliners have to see themselves, whether they want to remain stuck to the historical blunders or they aspire to see the wounds of the Kashmiris being healed. Hardliners, whosoever they are, have to decide themselves. As far as Militant organizations are concerned, many are willing to join the peace process. They want to be a part of this faith building exercise being done by APHC lead by me. I may also assure you that time is not far off, when those who are talking of UN Resolutions would also be forced to join the peace march. And if they don’t join, people would isolate them.

Epilogue: Hardliners maintain that nothing has changed on ground, so why should we participate in the dialogue process? How would you like to read this?

Mirwaiz: I agree that nothing has changed on ground. But what is the harm in talking to those, who have the powers to change the ground situation. It is only a matter of time before the circumstances would compel the two countries to take stringent measures for changing the ground situation. Further, if the ground situation, somewhere we are also responsible for that. We have failed to build a consensus among us. How could you expect a divided house to compel the largest democracy of the world to take steps for changing the ground situation? Now as for as our participation in the dialogue process in concerned, even if nothing happens, we have to keep on talking. Because post 9/11, things have taken an altogether different course. Dialogue is the only solution.

Epilogue: But hardliners say that being young and dynamic, you want to fulfil your political ambitions. They accuse you of plying deceit with the People of the state.

Mirwaiz: A person who had a history of sacrifices behind him, can not be politically ambitious? People of Kashmir cannot be blinded by such falsified and ill-intended slogans. Those throwing such canards at me must understand that I cannot be cowed down like this. Fearing closure of their political establishments, they are talking in such tone and tenor. But forthcoming events will explain who has played deceit with whom

Epilogue: May we know about those events?

Mirwaiz: It is better to allow the time to reveal the events as they happen.

Epilogue: How would APHC like to see the issue getting resolved?

Mirwaiz:- APHC believes that Jammu and Kashmir should be a conglomeration of five regions which are all autonomous in their functioning. These five regions are Jammu, Kashmir, Ladakh, Azad Kashmir and Northern areas. All these regions would have autonomous regional structures. Then there would be Joint Assembly with equal representations from all the five regions. Over all, it would be a federal structure. Thereafter, the Joint Assembly would send its representatives to Parliaments of both India and Pakistan. These are some of the broader parameters of the formula which we can help in addressing the aspirations of people of Jammu and Kashmir.

Epilogue: Is it the Joint Assembly or Parliament?

Mirwaiz: Of course, Joint Assembly, because both India and Pakistan may have some reservations in accepting the word Parliament. Further, our formula is an open document which could be discussed and debated.

Epilogue: Would you ask India for demilitarization as the first step towards resolving the dispute?

Mirwaiz: Demilitarization, soft borders and other such issues would be taken up with Government of India and we expect that they would do away with the casual approach that they have adopted since long. Something must happen on ground.

Epilogue: Are you suggesting that you would not press for demilitarization?

Mirwaiz: No, we would like to press for demilitarization but at the same time, we would also not like to jeopardize the entire peace process.

Epilogue: How would you like to describe various formulas and ideas of other mainstream and separatist organization like self-rule of PDP, Autonomy of National conference and “Achievable Nationhood” of Sajjad Lone.?

Mirwaiz: Self-Rule and Autonomy are two faces of the same coin. Self-Rule is old wine in a new bottle. As far as “Achievable Nationhood” of Sajjad Sahib is concerned, the documents needs to be studied. Sajjad has done a lot of hard work in putting together a number of ideas in a beautiful shape. I can comment over the entire document only after reading it thoroughly.

Epilogue: In view of the demand from certain quarters in Jammu for separate statehood, how would Hurriyat address this quarter?

Mirwaiz: When we say about a regionally autonomous structure, it in itself signifies that regional aspirations would be the prime concern. People of Jammu feel that they have been discrimination since long by the Kashmiri leadership. Same is the case of other three regions. Once the regional structures are in place and regions are autonomous in functioning, such demands would die their own death.

Epilogue: Are you hopeful that things would change to shape the destiny of people of this region?

Mirwaiz:- I hope my voice is heard, thought of, debated, discussed and under stood. Things will have to be change for betterment.