news details |
|
|
| Is APHC of Mirwaiz really moderate, secular? | | Misinformation Campaign | |
MINCING NO WORDS
NEHA
JAMMU, Oct 28: Is All-Party Hurriyat Conference – Mirwaiz (APHC-M) really moderate and secular? It is not. Paradoxically, however, it has become customary with Indian intellectuals, think-tanks and commentators to term the APHC-M as “moderate” and the one which is being headed by Syed Ali Shah Geelani as a pro-Pakistan extremist outfit. The argument these intellectuals, including social scientists, invariably advance is that APHC-M is moderate because it talks of independence from both India and Pakistan and the Geelani’s outfit is extremist and fundamentalist because it seeks the state’s integration in the Pakistani state on the basis of religion. This is a flawed argument.
The APHC-M is not moderate. It is an extremist and communal separatist formation having no faith in the Indian political system. It believes in two-nation theory. It is as pro-Pakistan as the Geelani’s outfit is. Its agenda is in no way different from the Geelani’s agenda. The only difference is that while Geelani is vocal, Mirwaiz says the same things but he uses a different idiom. Geelani says Kashmir must become part of Pakistan because it is Muslim majority. He also sings day in and day out the highly monotonous and irritating right to self-determination song. Mirwaiz and his outfit also insist that the Kashmir issue needed to be resolved as per the aspirations of Kashmiri Muslims, as also as per the UN resolutions, which provide for a plebiscite in the state for determining the people’s will. Both Geelani and Mirwaiz refuse to acknowledge that the UN resolutions had laid down certain very specific conditions for organizing plebiscite in Kashmir. The relevant UN resolutions say that Pakistan must vacate the aggression, that Indian forces should reoccupy the “occupied” territories and maintain law and order there and that plebiscite will be organized in the state as it existed on August 15, 1947 and it will be state-wide, and not region and district-wise.
Besides, both Geelani and Mirwaiz consider Pakistan as one of the most important factors. Geelani says Pakistani claim over Jammu & Kashmir is genuine because of its Muslim-majority character. Geelani also says, and wrongly, that Jammu & Kashmir was part of the 1947 partition plan and that the Indian presence in the state is unlawful. Mirwaiz also says the same thing. He also says that if the Kashmir issue is to be resolved to the satisfaction of all, then the discussions have to trilateral. In other words, he advocates dialogue between three parties – India, Pakistan and Kashmiris (read Kashmiri Muslim leadership) – dialogue between Kashmir and Pakistan, between Kashmir and New Delhi and between New Delhi and Islamabad. This is precisely what Geelani says almost every Friday. Not only this, both Geelani and Mirwaiz hate India from the core of their heart and consistently urge Islamabad to extend political, diplomatic and moral support to them so that are able to achieve what they want. But more than that, both Geelani and Mirwaiz, who are fanatics by any yardstick, have been demanding separation from India on purely sectarian grounds and their constituencies, whatever be their size, are out and out communal.
It is indeed shocking that our intellectual, think-tanks and commentators are so naïve that they have not been able to find any similarity between Geelani and Mirwaiz. They could be legitimately accused of misleading people. They would do well to recognize that Mirwaiz is more dangerous as compared to Geelani. For, he conducts himself in a dubious manner; he hobnobs with many forces simultaneously. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
