Gowhar Geelani
In the last couple of weeks some interesting developments have taken place in Jammu & Kashmir on the political front. Some ‘controversial’ statements from public representatives across the ideological divide have generated a lot of debate in social and political circles.Former Chief Minister Dr. Farooq Abdullah made a couple of statements that only he can make. The senior Abdullah never fails to amuse.
Then, we also had a detailed interview of Tehreek-e-Hurriyat chief Syed Ali Geelani, conducted by Rising Kashmir, in which the veteran Hurriyat leader made certain remarks about the ‘character’ of Kashmiri people vis-à-vis their approach towards the political struggle. Not surprisingly, his statements stirred up a political hornet’s nest.
As far as Farooq Abdullah is concerned, he has an uncanny knack of making controversial statements. It largely depends on whether his party National Conference is in power or in opposition.
The news agency, ANI, quoted Abdullah as having said that “Pakistan-administered Kashmir (PaK) is in Pakistan, and will remain. Jammu and Kashmir is in India, and will remain. We need to understand this.”
If we jog our memory a bit we may recall that Farooq Abdullah, not that long ago, had demanded “India should bomb the terrorist camps established inside Pakistan-occupied Kashmir”.
When in power, Pakistan-administered Kashmir (PaK) or ‘Azad Jammu & Kashmir’ is ‘Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK)’ for him. Once out of power, it becomes PaK.
However, going by his past record all of this is pretty normal. He has been making outrageous statements and retracting them throughout his political career.
I vividly recall a television episode of ‘Devil’s Advocate’ hosted by Karan Thapar in 2010 in which Farooq Abdullah said on record that he doesn’t care about reputation and credibility.
Mr. Thapar’s question: “Your party, the National Conference passed a resolution for the restoration of autonomy, New Delhi rejected it; your party demanded partial withdrawal of Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), New Delhi rejected it; you, your son and your party demanded change in the status quo in Kashmir; New Delhi rejected it too, aren’t you disappointed, isn’t your party marginalized, isn’t your credibility eroded?”
Farooq Abdullah’s reply: “No, not at all. I’m not disappointed. Credibility is a temporary thing, it isn’t important. It comes and goes. What do you want me to do? Should I jump into a well?”
That says it all.
Now let me come to the statements made by the octogenarian Hurriyat leader, Syed Ali Geelani.
First, a caveat: I have respect for Geelani sahib and believe that he has the capacity to listen to criticism and tolerate and respect it.
Even if one does not subscribe to his political ideology (‘that Kashmir is a natural part of Pakistan’), there is always that respect for his steadfastness and credibility as a political and religious figure. Inarguably, he remains the most popular political leader in Kashmir’s modern political narrative, as he continues to enjoy support from young and old Kashmiris.
In a recent interview, Geelani surprised a lot of people in the Kashmir valley when he declared that “…it is not due to disunity among Hurriyat but due to weakness of Kashmiris that we are unable to take the Kashmir issue to its logical conclusion. When we ask people to boycott polls, people do not follow our programme and came out to vote. Kashmiris are weak and do not follow programmes given by the Hurriyat in letter and spirit.”
Hardly anyone would have expected such a sweeping statement (a certificate of disloyalty) about the character of Kashmiri people coming from a leader of Geelani’s stature. It is unclear what Geelani’s real intention was. It so appears that he perhaps wanted people to go for some introspection and soul-searching.
However, the generalisation could have easily been avoided. Many in Kashmir feel offended by his latest statements, and rightly so.
The truth lies somewhere in the middle. While it is a fact that people collectively may have failed on certain occasions to stand the test of times, it is equally true that the leadership has also failed to deliver at various times.
What Geelani should have said was that both the leadership as well as Kashmiri people need to introspect collectively. By putting entire blame on the people of Kashmir, Geelani has made a politically incorrect statement.
The sacrifices that the people of Kashmir have been making for the last 68 years, especially since 1989, are a strong statement about their character and resilience.
People have died in fake encounters; were buried in mass graves; languished in jails; braved third degree tortures; and faced the music of bullets while staging peaceful protest demonstrations, so on and so forth.
Geelani’s statement may have unwittingly ended up insulting the people’s sacrifices. Geelani sahib owes an explanation to the people of Kashmir what he actually meant by putting entire blame of failures on the people alone.
Knowing Geelani sahib up close, I believe that he is open to constructive criticism and will never mind people raising genuine queries.
May we humbly ask Geelani sahib on behalf of the people of Kashmir: When he at the end of the strike calls he showers praise on the ‘people’ for observing “faqeed-ul-misal hartal”, who are the ‘people’ whose contribution he acknowledge “bila khouf-e-tardeed”?
May we ask: who are the ‘people’ who in thousands participate in a slain militant’s funeral, when most leaders are probably enjoying kehwa, hot and sour chicken soup and wazwan at home?
May we ask: who are the ‘people’ who in hundreds got disappeared in custody?
May we ask: who are the ‘people’ who braved bullets in 2008, 2009 and 2010 when most leaders were reluctant to come out of their cosy drawing rooms?
May we ask: what he meant by the statement that “…if people have lost confidence in their leaders, it also is the weakness of people. The leaders cannot be blamed for it…. the real weakness is in people of Kashmir not the leaders. People have failed leaders not vice versa.”
May we ask: what is the basis of his claim that more than two million (20 lakh) Kashmiris would have participated in the Hurriyat’s proposed Million March on November 7 had the PDP-BJP government not put curbs on the movement of people, because he says people have failed their leadership?
Who would those two million people be?
And, is there an admission when Geelani sahib says that people do not pay heed to Hurriyat’s election boycott calls? Doesn’t Hurriyat need to introspect why their election boycott call strategy (the tried-and-tested failure) isn’t working? Can people be blamed for caring for better healthcare, quality education, roads, electricity and jobs?
It would be worthwhile to quote the late Ved Bhasin sahib (he left us recently) when he said in an earlier interview with Rising Kashmir that “…separatists are a divided lot. They are not relevant now. Their reach is limited to Kashmir valley. They are not even able to reach out to the Chenab valley and Pir Pinchal range. The separatists are weak but the Kashmir movement is strong. The Kashmir struggle is relevant. People want an independent Jammu and Kashmir and they are chasing this dream.”
Mera Rehbar Mere Jaisa,
Main Bhi Apne Rehbar Jaisa,
Usse Wafa Se Bair Hai,
Main Makr-o-Fareb Ka Shaidai’ee
