Friday, March 29, 2024
 
 News Details
Mirwaiz on Delhi politics


By Dr. Syed Nazir Gilani

Hurriyat (M) chairman Mirwaiz Umar Farooq has made important observations on the merits of Vajpayee’s Kashmir policy and the character of elections in Jammu and Kashmir. In view of Parliamentary and State elections the two observations remain quotes of the week. He has lauded Atal Biharee Vajpayee for his initiatives on Kashmir and at the same time has termed elections in Jammu and Kashmir as a fraud. The two observations need to be considered with seriousness by Delhi and its compliant agency in Srinagar. The NDA and UPA Governments have performed differently in Jammu and Kashmir and have etched different impressions on the common mind in the Valley in particular and outside the State in general.

Any Government that returns to power in Delhi and Islamabad has to start with an undeniable understanding that “The present territorial Partition of the State of Jammu and Kashmir is temporary. It is based on the UNCIP brokered cease-fire agreement reached between India and Pakistan in 1949. Under the agreement India, Pakistan and UN have accepted that the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir is disputed. Cease-fire has granted both signatories interim administrative authority, pending, the final resolution of the dispute. UN Mechanism precludes India and Pakistan on their own from extending claims to sovereignty over all or at least part of the State. There is a confused amalgam of partial and overlapping sovereignties”. (JKCHR UN Document A/HRC/25/NGO/106 dated 27 February 2014)

What are the merits of these two observations? The question needs to be answered on the strength of evidence in hand. Syed Ghulam Nabi Fai and I have received Mirwaiz Umar Farooq and Maulvi Abbas Ansari as Hurriyat (united) delegation at the Islamic Summit in Casablanca, Morocco, in December 1994. Kashmiri contingent was represented at the Summit by four Kashmiris namely President of PaK Sardar Sikandar Hayat Khan, Prime Minister PaK Sardar Abdul Qayyum Khan and two of us from the Valley. Prior to this we (Fai and I) had met Atal Bihari Vajpayee as leader of the Indian delegation at the UN World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna, in June 1993. I had been elected at the World Conference to represent the Unrepresented Peoples and Nations of the World and as a member on the UN-NGO Diplomatic Liaison Committee to liaise between various delegations, in particular Indian and Pakistani delegations. Pakistani delegation was led by Mohtarma Nusrat Bhutto (late). I had the privilege to have worked with her in Pakistan when she was the chairperson of Pakistan Red Cross and had remained with her during the trial of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto in the Supreme Court of Pakistan.

Mirwaiz has a substantial point to rate NDA Government’s Kashmir policy more favourably than that of UPA Government. Vajpayee even as opposition leader in 1993 had a serious concern on the situation in Jammu and Kashmir. During our meeting with him at the UN World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna he was very patient and eager to listen to us and had been fully briefed on our address to the Plenary, Main Committee, Exhibition on violation of human rights and our press briefing arranged by the President of UN Correspondents Association in Vienna on Friday 18 June 1993.

Common faith in Kashmir would support Mirwaiz on the observation that NDA Government was more serious and showed an on-going interest to focus on Kashmir. On the other hand UPA Government did not capitalise on its direct connections with the people of Kashmir. It remained indecisive, confused, relaxed and in shreds on the matter. It failed to take stock of the unprecedented loss of life and the unimpressive process of life of the common man and woman in Kashmir.

Vajpayee did not hesitate to take the peace mission to Pakistan and to the people of Kashmir. In fact his sense of humanity had no parallel when he rescued the Kashmiri leadership from a “between deep sea and the devil” situation and proposed a dialogue within the Constitution of “Insaniyat”. It was a genuine and badly needed political subsidy for a hesitant Kashmiri leadership. Vajpayee had faith in his statesmanship and in the strengths of his parliamentary democracy. Therefore, as a humanist he had full faith that Constitution of India embedded a duty to “Insaniyat” and the two more or less mean the same.

During NDA Government the Conference on “Next Step in Jammu and Kashmir: Give Peace A Chance” organized by International Centre for Peace Initiatives, Mumbai, India and Institute of Regional Studies, Islamabad, Pakistan, held in Gurgaon, Haryana, India was a path breaking effort. It was attended by all schools of opinion from both sides of ceasefire line and Hurriyat as well. The effort gave birth to a series of many other like efforts by the State Subjects in London, Toronto and Brussels. The constituency of participation broadened and in addition to Kashmiris, leading politicians from Pakistan (like Benazir Bhutto), Shafqat Mahmood, Mir Hasil Bizenjo (Baloch politician) and others and senior politicians, judges, lawyers and other notables from India started making a contribution to the constituency of tolerance and peace.

Vajpayee as a humanist and as a statesman did not miss out on the jurisprudence of Indian obligations in Kashmir case. It was on 23 October 2001 when he hit the status quo on Kashmir politics and put a cat in the pigeon politics that had remained in practice between India and Pakistan. He made a lead statement in reference to the Kashmiri people living on the side of Pakistan. He asked, “What is the condition of the area occupied by Pakistan? There is no democracy, no rights for the people living there. Recently there was an election, but the power was handed over to an Army General”. Vajpayee’s political vision started changing the mindset of hard core politicians in Delhi, Islamabad and in Kashmir. He was conscious of a “sacrifice for change”.

It is unfortunate that the template of his vision and the tempo generated in Delhi, Islamabad, Srinagar and abroad could not be incremented and maintained. UPA Government as rightly felt and pointed out failed to take the next step. Its political radar failed to spot the habitat and people of Kashmir. All these years the common man and woman in Kashmir has continued to endure the daily loss of life, restraints on travel, violation of human rights and tales of corruption. People are engulfed by uncertainty and frustration.

Mirwaiz’s observation that elections in J&K are a “big drama enacted by New Delhi to hoodwink the world community”, should attract a due attention of all in Delhi. He has qualified his statement saying that “no poll process can be a substitute to the right to self-determination and people of Kashmir should stay away from all such exercises.” It is no more a secret that elections in J&K are not an instrument in the hands of people to administer a political change in the manner in which votes in rest of India are an instrument of change. Delhi should not shy away from its duties under the terms of accession and the UNCIP Resolutions in regard to ensuring the dignity of the vote in J&K. Vajpayee has queried the status of elections (23.10.2001) in the “area occupied by Pakistan”. It follows from this principle that elections in J&K should not attract any similar rebuke. The question that merits attention is the ‘mechanism of fraud’ and the need to inflict a fraud on the right of a common Kashmiri to vote. A democratic India can’t afford to be an accomplice in the fraud and if there are fringe elements in various disciplines in Delhi, the practice has to end.

In addition to the question mark on the dignity of these elections, it has to be brought to the attention of J&K Government and the Government in Delhi that article 48 of J&K Constitution and UN Security Council Resolution of 30 March 1951 regard J&K Assembly infirm and incomplete in representation. It is elected only from a part of the territory and lacks the inclusiveness defined in article 4 of the Constitution. The fault lines pointed out by Mirwaiz have a representative sanction and need to be addressed. Delhi has to open up to the constituency of sacrifice and peace. It can’t be possible if the various communities in Kashmir take adversarial positions and there are elements in Delhi who in manner are selfish and in argument racist. It would not be in the interests of New Delhi if the old fashioned practice to use, abuse and discredit the Kashmiri Muslim does not end. If BJP returns to power it should hasten to reconnect with all parties where they have left the Vajpayee template and if Congress returns, all parties should force it to reconnect on Kashmir.



(Dr. Syed Nazir Gilani is Secretary General –JKCHR, NGO in Special Consultative Status with the United Nations, Can be reached at [email protected])




(Opinions expressed in write-ups/articles/Letters are the sole responsibility of the authors and they may not represent the scoopnews.in)


Editor, Scoop News.
...
Share this Story
 
 
  Comment On this Story
 
 
 Back Issuesk Issues
If you are looking for Issues beyond today. You can simply use this calendar tool to view Issue of Scoop News for any particular Date.
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
© Scoop News, Jammu Kashmirr
Home || About Us || Advertise With Us || Disclaimer || Contact Us
Powered by Web Design Jammu