Missing the Wood for the Trees- Mirwaiz is not all bad!
The ongoing spat between the ‘G’ and ‘M’ factions of the Hurriyat has once again fuelled the speculation that the APHC remains a house divided and this is indeed unfortunate. The latest disagreement revolves around the statement of Mirwaiz Umar Farooq that the APHC was willing to ‘forgo international facilitation’ for resolution of the Kashmir issue.
I will admit that, I neither belong to the Geelani camp nor to that of the Mirwaiz. I belong to the masses which are looking for emancipation- we have suffered enough during the last two decades and our patience is fast running out. For many today, it doesn’t really matter whether we go to Pakistan, become an independent State or even continue to be a part of India. All most people want is a settlement which brings back peace!
Coming back to the difference of opinion between the ‘G’ and ‘M’ factions of the APHC. Geelani sahib has a point when he accuses the Mirwaiz of “going beyond the Hurriyat constitution.” And even though in a previous article titled ‘Espousing Kashmir Cause- Lessons from Geneva’, (Kashmir Observer, 24 March 2012) I too had criticized him for the same, in retrospect I think that what the Mirwaiz said has some substance. First of all, it demonstrates magnanimity which makes good diplomatic ‘sense’. Secondly, it is an extremely well crafted and politically ‘correct’ statement as it is also ‘conditional’ in that, while ‘international facilitation’ could be dispensed with, the inclusion of the Hurriyat during the final stages of negotiations between India and Pakistan was mandatory!
Even at the risk of being accused of committing sacrilege, I would like to draw a parallel purely for the purposes of furthering my arguments. To me, Geelani sahib is much like the Chinar- majestic and upright but unyielding, while the Mirwaiz is more like the Willow- elegant, upright and supple. In the international fora, adamancy as regards adherence to principles, ideals and virtue is at times is perceived as obstinacy which proves detrimental in furthering one’s cause. The fact of the matter is that today the international community is not inclined to embroil itself in the Kashmir issue. So, the ‘offer’ made by the Mirwaiz is in effect a very cleverly crafted statement which while stating the obvious does not compromise the position of the APHC as the final authority on Kashmir.
What plagues Kashmir polity today is that we are missing the wood for the trees. Like an ostrich, we have shied away from reality by burying our heads in the sand. We have remained prisoners of the past; expecting the cruel world to suddenly take notice of our cause and expecting that the assurances and promises made years ago but forgotten for all these years would suddenly be honoured now. Next, the APHC fails to understand that though it projects itself as the ‘true representatives’ of the wishes and aspiration of the Kashmiris and may have a large following to prove this point, the international community considers the AHPC a self appointed body proclaiming to be representing the wishes and aspirations of Kashmiris without seeking this mandate through any democratic process.
What is most damaging to the Kashmir cause is the fact that while our leaders have termed the migration of Kashmiri pundits from the valley as a ‘grand conspiracy’ hatched by the Indian Government to malign the movement for ‘self determination’, they have not been able to convince them to return. By announcing a decent economic package plus other help to the Kashmiri pandits willing to return, the Indian Government has successfully managed to project to the world that it is sincere in its efforts to rehabilitate this community. However, even though the APHC leaders have given numerous assurances of safety, they have not been able to infuse a sense of security amongst the people of this displaced community to return to the valley. This has given a powerful lobby the opportunity to question the very credentials of the AHPC as the true representatives of the Kashmiris.
So, while the unwavering stance adopted by Geelani sahib is laudable as it provides consistency to the APHC policies, the approach adopted by the Mirwaiz too should not be condemned since it adds a reconciliatory and pragmatic. Today, we cannot afford to continue living in the past by cocooning ourselves from the present day realities. Whether we like it or not, the fact is that the past is History and has no practical relevance today. Issues like the UN resolution or what Nehru promised may make interesting reading in editorials or news articles, but offer no solutions. Let us therefore try something new and at least give the Mirwaiz a chance!
Author can be reached at: niloofar.qureshi@yahoo.com
Leave Your Comments