Hurriyat Needs A Rethink
Dr. Syed Nazir Gilani
Time
and tide wait for none. The caution is as important to a leader as to a common
person. It is more important for a leader because he remains in charge or
claims to be keeping the trust of many others. He has to look into and
beyond tomorrow. There are many tomorrows.
India
and Pakistan are homes for people of many faiths and people of non-faith also
live here. Leaders of these two countries have a duty to their people, settled
without a dispute within their territories. Leaders have a duty to make
sincere efforts in the interests of their own people, in the interests of
neighbours, in the interests of world at large and to use the instrument
of dialogue to resolve disputes.
Nawaz writes to Manmohan
Pakistan has brought forward Ambassador Shahryar Khan for
conducting track-II diplomacy in order to improve ties with India. On Friday 5
July 2013 Khan delivered a letter from Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to
Indian PM Manmohan Singh in New Delhi. Nawaz Sharif has expressed his sincere
desire to move forward on improving relations with India. The letter contained
good wishes for PM Singh, the government and the people of India as well, and
conveyed Pakistan’s sincere desire to move forward on improving relations with
India.
These sentiments were warmly reciprocated by Prime Minister Singh. The special envoy also met with Indian National Security Adviser Shivshankar Menon and Indian Foreign Secretary Ranjan Mathai. He would also be calling on the India’s External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid.
Outstanding Issues
During
the June 19-23, 1997 India Pakistan talks at Islamabad the two countries
have identified eight ‘outstanding issues of concern to both sides’ and have
decided to set up working groups to address these eight outstanding issues of
concern, in an integrated manner. Kashmir is an include in these eight concerns
and not a ‘core issue’ any more. There is a substantive evidence that Pakistan
has agreed to disturb its earlier stand on Kashmir. Salman Haider at that
point in June 1997 said, “We have our own very strong and active concerns on
Jammu and Kashmir and how are we to advance our concerns if not through dialogue”.
Salman
Haider further added, “When we talk about the Jammu and Kashmir dispute, there
is a juridical element to that. We make the point that parts of Jammu and
Kashmir are under Pakistani occupation by military force and that is something
that we would certainly discuss”. Without prejudice to the respective positions
of India and Pakistan the initiative taken by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif sits
well with the common desire to use the civilised instrument of a dialogue to
serve the interests of the people and resolve disputes.
Hurriyat Narrative
There
is no denying that Hurriyat surfaced as an attractive political alliance on 31
July 1993 with at least 31 political, social and religious organization in the
fold. It was on 13 September 1995 that an amendment was carried out and around
10 groups were deleted from the list.
Hurriyat
owned the political and a militant components of a struggle. We know that
the beginnings of Hurriyat started from the meeting on 27 December 1992 held at
Mirwaiz Manzil. We have yet to know about the authors of militancy except what
has been reported by various analysts and admitted by Musharraf. Hurriyat was
able to give its political narrative in its Constitution. It has never looked
back to appraise any progress on its documented political agenda.
Losses in succession
Hurriyat
made a fundamental error in not engaging the unionist parties at home and other
political parties in Delhi. Today Hurriyat is not prepared to accept that
Kashmir has lost a generation and this loss in numerical translation means the
death of self-determination for a long time to come. Over the last 20 years
(1993-2013) Hurriyat has never looked back to note that it has failed in making
any progress on its objective 2 (i) listed under chapter II of its
Constitution.
Hurriyat
does not have the benefit of an independent input and does not seem to have
made any genuine efforts to involve the non-Party experts from the civil
society and various disciplines of life. It had to content itself with a script
and a short list handed over to it. There is a difference between taking on an
anti-India agenda and executing the collective interests of all people of the
State living under three administrations.
Delhi Awareness Bureau
Hurriyat
failed to use overwhelming embrace of Delhi to advance the interests of Kashmiri
people. Indian civil society came forward to help Hurriyat to establish its
first mini embassy in Delhi in 1995. It could not emerge as a credible seat of
Kashmiri Narrative and gradually started losing its glitter. Our leaders failed
to respect the obligations towards the host administration (that is Delhi), and
turned the Awareness Bureau into a habitat which was not compatible with
diplomatic or genuine political activities. Ultimately it was closed down in
February 2003 under most unfortunate circumstances. It was first failure of
this leadership.
CW1, CW2 and John
Hurriyat
succeeded to launch itself at the December 1994 Islamic Summit held in
Casablanca, Morocco. Although it did not encompass all regions and all
communities, yet the prevailing circumstances in the Valley helped it to
attract the sympathy and support. It was looked upon as a genuine alliance of a
people engaged in Rights Movement. It has been a victim of its own doing and
has reached a dead end.
Hurriyat
knew very little about militancy and yet decided to own it. In the same manner
it knew very little about the three Kashmir Centres established in Washington,
Brussels and London and yet decided to own them. These three Centres have
caused the conviction of so called Kashmir diplomacy in USA and for the first
time in the history of Kashmir, USA has three witnesses, CW1, CW2 and John who
have agreed to give evidence in the case brought against Kashmir Centre,
Washington.
These
three witnesses have helped FBI to prepare a 44 page affidavit in the United
States of America v Syed Ghulam Nabi Fai and Zaheer Ahmad case. Who are these
three witnesses? Are they from Valley, PAK, GB, Pakistan or India? And are
these three still in Hurriyat ranks or sitting in its proximity?
The
other two Kashmir Centres situated in Brussels and London have been closed
down. The FBI affidavit has defamed these Centres as being run by elements in
the Government of Pakistan (ISI). It has never happened in the history of
Kashmir struggle since October 1877 when Kashmiris presented their first
memorandum of grievances that a just movement and its leadership has been ever
discredited in this manner. Hurriyat has to explain its people in regard to the
manner in which these three Centres were established, run, defamed and have now
been closed down.
Hurriyat PaK Chapter
The
chapter at one point carried a semblance of commitment and dignity.
Unfortunately, it was exposed to free Umras, free Hajs, free trips around the
world and to the discipline where selling soul to the Lucifer appeared a
lucrative option. In no time, as listed in FBI affidavit ‘Rathores’ had their
hands on the Kashmir handle and many constituents in the chapter adjusted their
loyalties in the local circumstances. Hurriyat in Srinagar may have claims of
any control over the chapter, it is yet another tale like the three Centres.
These individuals have a fixed monthly worth and have surfaced unworthy as
custodians of a trust.
Accountability Factor
Political
parties (Union parties) represented in the assembly are subject to an oath and
could be questioned on the floor of the house. They remain exposed to a
criticism of all kind in the assembly, on the street and in Delhi. Hurriyat
continues to benefit from a ‘no holds barred’ and “aut Caesar aut nullus”, that
is, either Caesar or nobody (obtain all or lose all) kind
of uninterfered politics. It is happening at the expense of a
people who have been humiliated, dishonoured and abused in a manner never seen
in the last 167 years since 1846.
It
appears that Hurriyat usefulness has passed its sell by date. It has reached a
dead end in itself and until it corrects itself, rejuvenates itself, makes
itself transparent and accountable, very little will be gained. It does not
however, mean that failure of Hurriyat or Unionist parties in Kashmir, spells
an end to a negotiation between India, Pakistan and the People of Kashmir on
the question of “equality” and “right of self-determination” of the
people.
Author is London based
Secretary General of JKCHR – NGO in Special Consultative Status with the United
Nations. He is on UN register as an expert in Peace Keeping, Humanitarian
Operations and Election Monitoring Missions. He could be reached on emaildr-nazirgilani@jkchr.com
No comments:
Post a Comment