news details |
|
|
| Kashmir’s Political Future: Clash between Geelani and Malik - I | | |
RUSTAM
EARLY TIMES REPORT
JAMMU, Mar 16: On Sunday, the supporters of Syed Ali Shah Geelani attacked JKLF chairman Yasin Malik and his supporters in Sopore. The following day, the supporters of Yasin Malik attacked the office of Geelani and shouted slogans against him. The clash between the two separatist leaders has been described by some as a clash between two personalities, who, like other separatist leaders, including APHC chief Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, are seeking to expand their support-base in Kashmir. Some media persons have also described the clash between the two as an indication that Kashmir may witness a civil war.
They are partly right and partly wrong. It is true that the number of separatist leaders in Kashmir is increasing manifold with each passing day, that the likes of Geelani, Malik, Farooq and Shabir Shah are trying their best to let down each other and that each one of them is seeking to create an impression that he is the sole factor in the Kashmir’s political situation. It is also true that most of the separatist leaders hate each other and refuse to come on one platform fearing that such an action on their part would weaken their position, harm their financial interests and ultimately lead to the closure of their money-minting shops.
It is also true that there are many similarities between Geelani and Malik, or for that matter between them and other Kashmir-based separatist leaders. For example, each one of them wants separation of Jammu and Kashmir from India, despite the fact that none of them has any support-base either in Jammu province or Ladakh region where the people link their fate with New Delhi, for better, for worse.
Each one of them hates India and asks New Delhi to quit Jammu and Kashmir at once saying the Indian presence in the state is illegal and unwanted. Each one of them holds New Delhi responsible for what they call the “Kashmiri woes”; for the “violation of human rights”; for the “erosion of the Kashmiri Muslim identity”; and for the ongoing bloody conflict between the “Kashmiri freedom fighters and the alien Indian Army and paramilitary forces”. Each one of them accuses New Delhi of going back on its promise of right to self-determination. Each one of them advocates that Jammu and Kashmir is a disputed territory and its political future is yet to be decided under the United Nations resolutions on Jammu and Kashmir.
Each one of them wants to give a particular type of orientation to everything in Kashmir so that Islamic rule is established in the state. Each one of them terms the ongoing secessionist movement in Kashmir as “freedom struggle” and those involved in it or those forced to join it or those who join it under compulsion to escape the wrath of extremists and terrorists as “freedom fighters”. Each one of them wants the internally displaced Kashmiri Hindus to return to their homes and hearths but on the condition that they would be permitted to enter Kashmir if they hold out a solemn commitment that they would join the ongoing anti-India freedom struggle.
Each one of them wants the withdrawal of the Indian Army and paramilitary forces from the state. Each one of them also wants the withdrawal of the anti-terror laws from the state, including the Armed Forces Special Powers Act and the Public Safety Act. The Kashmiri separatists and PDP leaders like Mufti Mohammad Sayeed and his daughter Mehbooba Mufti term these anti-terror laws as “draconian” legislations.
Each one of them wants to cultivate Pakistan for the reason that the Pakistani unstinted moral, diplomatic, political and financial support is essential for the ongoing separatist movement in Kashmir. Each one of them talks of trilateral talks – talks between India, Pakistan and Kashmiri separatists – and believes if a lasting peace in Kashmir is to be forged, Pakistan has to be brought on board. Each one of them seeks international intervention in Kashmir.
In short, there are several similarities between Geelani and Malik and between them and other Kashmiri separatists and extremists, who call themselves as “freedom fighters” and denounce India as an oppressor.
At the same time, there are various dissimilarities between Geelani and the likes of Malik, the Mirwaiz and Shabir Ahmed Shah. Some of them are fundamental in nature and one of the most notable ones is their contradictory stand on the future status of Kashmir. Should Kashmir become part of Pakistan or should it become independent and sovereign or should there be India-Pakistan joint control over Jammu and Kashmir? (To be concluded) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
