‘State Guest’ to ‘Terrorist’: Yasin Malik’s chilling affidavit
The Affidavit That Shook Delhi
In August 2025, the Delhi High Court received an affidavit unlike any in recent memory. It was penned by Yasin Malik, once the most prominent face of Kashmiri separatism, now a convicted prisoner serving a life sentence under terror charges.
At 58, Malik no longer wields the megaphone at Srinagar’s rallies, nor does he command the same street power he once did. Yet, with his 85-page affidavit, he reignited a haunting question: Was he a terrorist who betrayed the nation, or a peace envoy betrayed by the state?
“From PMs to tycoons, I was their man,” Malik declared in the document, recounting decades of covert meetings with prime ministers, intelligence officials, and even corporate magnates. He claimed his 2006 meeting with Lashkar-e-Taiba founder Hafiz Saeed in Pakistan—used by the prosecution to seal his fate—was not a personal misadventure but a state-directed peace effort after the devastating 2005 Kashmir earthquake.
The affidavit is less a legal defense and more a political time capsule—a reminder of the dangerous ambiguity that has always defined New Delhi’s Kashmir policy. To understand it, we must revisit the turbulent history of Yasin Malik’s transformation: from insurgent commander to peace negotiator, from “state guest” to “terrorist.”
The Rise of Yasin Malik — From Streets to Spotlight
Born in 1966 in Srinagar’s Maisuma locality, Yasin Malik grew up during the most volatile years of Kashmir’s post-Partition story. By the late 1980s, discontent against New Delhi had boiled over. Malik emerged as a fiery youth leader in the Muslim Students League, organizing protests that clashed with police forces.
In 1989, as militancy erupted in the Valley, Malik co-founded the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF), one of the first armed groups demanding independence rather than merger with Pakistan. The JKLF carried out attacks, kidnappings, and assassinations—including the 1989 abduction of Rubaiya Sayeed, daughter of then Union Home Minister Mufti Mohammad Sayeed, which forced the release of jailed militants.
For years, Malik was seen as the face of Kashmir’s “azadi” movement. His arrest, torture, and repeated imprisonments in the 1990s only added to his mythos among supporters. But even as violence escalated, Malik would take a path few predicted.
The 1994 Ceasefire — A Rebel’s Gamble
In 1994, after spending years in jail, Malik made a dramatic announcement: the JKLF would renounce violence and pursue its cause through peaceful means. The declaration shocked both Pakistan and India.
Behind the scenes, however, Malik now claims this “conversion” was not entirely spontaneous. According to his affidavit, he had already begun engaging with Indian politicians like Rajesh Pilot, who initiated secret dialogues in the early 1990s. Intelligence officials allegedly saw in Malik a figure who could be “rehabilitated” as a bridge between the underground and New Delhi.
The gamble paid off. Malik was released, and for the next decade, he positioned himself as a “non-violent” separatist—meeting visiting diplomats, addressing civil society gatherings, and quietly exploring backchannels with Indian leaders.
But as Malik narrates, this new role was precarious. He was neither fully trusted by Delhi nor entirely accepted by the militant ecosystem that still saw violence as the only path.
The Backchannel Years — “I Was Their Man”
Between the late 1990s and 2000s, Yasin Malik’s relevance was redefined. He may not have commanded armed cadres, but he commanded credibility among separatists and legitimacy in New Delhi’s eyes.
His affidavit details a web of clandestine interactions:
-
Rajesh Pilot’s overtures: Secret meetings that convinced Malik to abandon arms in the early 1990s.
-
Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s aides: Informal contacts exploring whether JKLF’s shift to non-violence could open a political window.
-
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh: Personal acknowledgment, Malik claims, for his willingness to meet Pakistan’s political and militant leaders in 2006.
-
NSA M.K. Narayanan & IB officials: Regular debriefings, especially after his return from Pakistan visits.
-
Corporate magnates like Dhirubhai Ambani: Alleged informal meetings where Kashmir’s stability was discussed in the context of economic interests.
For Malik, these interactions were proof that he was a state-managed peace interlocutor—used by Delhi when convenient, discarded when political winds shifted.
The Hafiz Saeed Meeting — A Peace Gesture or Betrayal?
The most explosive part of Malik’s affidavit revolves around his 2006 meeting with Hafiz Saeed, the founder of Lashkar-e-Taiba and mastermind of numerous terror attacks against India.
The context, Malik insists, was crucial. After the 2005 earthquake in Kashmir, Indian intelligence allegedly approached him to “use his channels” with Pakistan’s political and militant ecosystem to strengthen the ongoing Manmohan Singh–Pervez Musharraf peace process.
Malik recounts being asked by IB Special Director V.K. Joshi to travel to Pakistan and meet both mainstream politicians and militant leaders, including Saeed. His mission: to push the idea of humanitarian cooperation and political reconciliation.
During the meeting, Malik claims he urged Saeed to embrace peace, even quoting Islamic teachings on reconciliation. On his return, he says he was debriefed by the IB and personally thanked by Manmohan Singh and NSA M.K. Narayanan.
Fast forward two decades, and that very meeting is now cited in court to paint him as a terrorist conspirator. Malik’s affidavit describes this as the “classic betrayal”: what was once celebrated as a peace outreach is now criminalized as treason.
The Unraveling — From Article 370 to Incarceration
For years, Malik straddled the line between separatist and interlocutor. But the political climate shifted dramatically after 2014, with the rise of the BJP government in Delhi.
-
2016 Burhan Wani protests: The separatist camp regained street power, and Malik was once again arrested amid violent unrest.
-
2019 Abrogation of Article 370: Old cases against separatists were reopened; Malik, already under investigation, was now seen less as a peace partner and more as a threat to national security.
-
2022 Conviction: In May 2022, Malik was sentenced to life imprisonment in a terror-funding case by an NIA court in Delhi after pleading guilty.
By the time of his 2025 affidavit, Malik had spent three years in solitary confinement, watching his past life rewritten in courtroom narratives.
A Betrayal or Realpolitik?
Malik’s affidavit forces uncomfortable questions about India’s handling of Kashmir’s peace processes.
-
Was he truly a peace envoy, deployed as a pawn by the state to test waters?
-
Or was he always a separatist opportunist, reinventing himself when convenient and blaming betrayal when caught?
Scholars of conflict point out that backchannel politics often operates in this grey zone. “States use unofficial actors to open doors that official diplomats cannot,” notes a former Indian intelligence officer. “But those actors also carry their own agendas. The problem is when political climates change, yesterday’s peacemaker becomes today’s traitor.”
For many Kashmiris, Malik’s story is symbolic: a man who gave up arms in hope of politics, only to find that politics had no stable place for him.
The Message to Future Intermediaries
Beyond his personal fate, Malik’s affidavit delivers a chilling warning:
“I understand the balance of scales isn’t tipped in my favour… being a diehard romantic, I would accept it as the ultimate endgame of my fate, gleefully.” — Yasin Malik
The underlying message is stark: if the state can disown and punish its own informal envoys, why would any militant or separatist trust future peace overtures?
In conflict resolution, trust is currency. Malik’s downfall may have bankrupted it for a generation.
The Kashmir Peace Process — A Pattern of Broken Bridges
Malik is not alone. His affidavit fits into a broader pattern where Kashmir’s “bridges” to peace have been burned repeatedly:
-
Mirwaiz Umar Farooq: Once engaged in talks with Delhi, now marginalized and restricted.
-
Hurriyat moderates: Bypassed or jailed as Delhi shifted to a security-heavy policy.
-
Pakistan track: Collapsed entirely after 2016 Uri and 2019 Pulwama attacks.
Each collapse deepens the narrative that dialogue is a trap, strengthening hardline positions on all sides.
The Affidavit as History, Not Just Defense
Legally, Malik’s affidavit may not overturn his conviction. Courts tend to prioritize hard evidence over political memoirs. But historically, it ensures that his version of events is on record—a counter-narrative to the state’s portrayal.
For future historians of Kashmir, the affidavit will be a primary source, revealing not just the facts but the fragile psychology of backchannel politics.
Bottom-Line: The Ghosts of Peace
Yasin Malik’s journey is both personal tragedy and political parable. Once hailed as a symbol of Kashmir’s shift to non-violence, he now sits in a high-security cell, condemned as a terrorist.
His affidavit is not merely a legal plea—it is an epitaph for a peace process that thrived on ambiguity but collapsed under the weight of political shifts.
From “state guest” to “terrorist” in a single lifetime, Malik’s story may yet define how future generations judge New Delhi’s approach to Kashmir: pragmatic, or perfidious.
