India will never say yes to K-resolution, says Yasin Malik
Srinagar: At a time when the BJP’s Prime Ministerial candidate Narendra Modi asserts that he will follow Atal Bihajri Vajpayee’s mission on Kashmir, the JKLF Chief Muhammad Yasin Malik Friday said given “my personal experience of holding talks with both the UPA and the BJP, India will never say yes to Kashmir solution.”
Malik said Indian leaders want to buy time through Kashmir-specific overtures just to keep the issue lingering. He, however, has not left the hope saying resolving issues through peaceful negotiations is a globally-accepted phenomenon “and who knows better sense may prevail in India one day vis-à-vis Kashmir.”
In an interview with Greater Kashmir, the JKLF chief said he has a bitter experience of sharing table with the UPA, BJP, Left parties, and even RSS over the past two decades.
“I fully subscribe to what my friend and a noted writer, Prof Stephen P. Cohen, (a political scientist and expert on South Asia) states in his book—India: Emerging Power—that for many foreign officials, dealing with New Delhi can be a frustrating experience. Cohen says that Indians are patient negotiators who will wait until the terms improve. They rarely feel pressed to reach an agreement because of domestic politics or bureaucratic compulsions,” Malik said. “Cohen further states that Indian diplomats do not put their careers at risk by failing to reach an agreement. Indians will drag out negotiations in the hope that prices will fall or terms will soft.”
Malik, while again quoting Cohen, says Indian officials tend to negotiate to gain information. “Indian officials see negotiations as a cheap means of gaining information. This practice is so common that it has contributed significantly to India’s notoriety as a negotiating partner,” he said.
The JKLF chairman said in 1999, the then Hurriyat leaders were arrested and lodged in Jodhpur jail. “All of us were released in 2000 when (Bill) Clinton arrived. India sent its interlocutors. There was a meeting that continued for two days. The contact between Hurriyat leaders headed by (Syed Ali) Geelani and Indian interlocutors remained on for three months,” Malik said. “It was the Vajpayee-led NDA government. And all of a sudden, those interlocutors vanished. It was the first Hurriyat-Delhi track-two dialogue.”
Malik said the then Hurriyat witnessed elections and Prof Abdul Gani Bhat was elected as its Chairman. “In 2001, Vajpayee announced Ramadhan-ceasefire and Hurriyat responded positively after taking the United Jihad Council on board. A five-member team was constituted to visit Pakistan that includes Syed Ali Geelani, (late) Sheikh Abdul Aziz, (late) Abdul Gani Lone, Moulana Abbas Ansari and Mirwaiz Umar Farooq. Pakistan had extended the invitation but India later backtracked,” Malik said.
He said in 2002, Lone was assassinated. “Hurriyat got divided into two parts and JKLF remained separate. The then BJP government led by Atal Bihari Vajpayee initiated a dialogue with the Hurriyat and nobody knows what happened inside the room; either the BJP leader LK Advani or Mirwaiz Umar Farooq know (about it),” he said.
Quoting from senior BJP leader LK Advani’s book, ‘My country, My life’, Malik said the book clearly mentions that his (Advani’s) talks with the Hurriyat leaders were indeed, an integral element, in the logical expansion, of the Vajpayee government’s overall strategy to ensure peace and normalcy in the State.
“Advani further states that their strategy had two dimensions-external in relation to Pakistan, and internal in relation to the State. BJP leader further states that their government had achieved significant progress on both fronts. For the first time, a joint statement was issued by Pakistan after Vajpayee-Musharraf met in SAARC that it (Pakistan) will not allow its territory for terrorist activities,” Malik said, quoting Advani’s book: “The free and fair 2002 elections sent a clear message that militancy had no more popular support in Kashmir.”
He further quotes Advani saying the moderate leaders of Hurriyat “genuinely desired to see end to violence and bloodshed in Kashmir and they have now realized the need for participation in the dialogue process.”
“I must mention here that there was a significant difference in my approach of talks with Hurriyat leaders, and that of Brijesh Mishra, the then National Security Advisor (NSA) and Principal Secretary to Prime Minister. And, A S Dulat, the former chief of RAW who was serving as an advisor in PMO on JK Affairs and who was in regular contact with leaders in Kashmir, had given some Hurriyat leaders an impression that the government was prepared to look at solution to the Kashmir issue outside the ambit of Indian constitution.”
Quoting Advani’s book, Malik said the BJP leader has mentioned that he was very upset at this and, in his very first meeting with Hurriyat delegation he made it clear that there was no question of government entertaining any proposal outside the ambit of Indian constitution.”
“Advani has stated that the first round of talks that lasted for two-and-a-half hours was free and frank and, surprisingly quite fruitful too. He has repeated the word fruitful because Hurriyat leaders had agreed at the conclusion of meeting that all forms of violence that have plagued Kashmir for over five decades should end, and that the roar of the guns should be replaced with the sound of politics. I began the dialogue by first giving the comprehensive historical overview of JK situation,” Malik said.
Malik said then came the UPA government, and also the new proposals came in and a dialogue was initiated with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh “I also met him though separately in 2006-2007. But solution was found nowhere. And we lost years in dialogue without achieving anything. In 2010 agitation, the All Party Delegation arrived here once again. They met Geelani, Mirwaiz and me separately. But the BJP’s two leaders, Arun Jaitley and Sushma Swaraj, refused to meet pro-freedom leaders,” he said. “Another big joke is that school teachers and journalists were made interlocutors and they made a self-styled solution which is stuck in New Delhi. In between BJP formed a Kashmir committee, headed by Rajnath Singh, who didn’t bother to meet single pro-freedom leaders.”
He said the past five years are a witness that pro-freedom leaders were manhandled during seminars in various parts of India. “Geelani, Mirwaiz and me were manhandled in different seminars. In Ajmer, my family was also attacked by the right-wing forces. When we (JKLF) went to Delhi last year with the list of 150 people slapped with life imprisonment, I was beaten and sent back. BJP made Afzal Guru as a national agenda after which he was hanged. I have reached to a conclusion whether it is BJP, Congress, or any other political party in India, they have a same stand on Kashmir: beat them, corrupt them, kill them and talk to them just for a time pass,” Malik said. “Whenever there is a crisis in Kashmir, they use Indian civil society as fire-fighters to cool down the tempers. When the situation returns to normal, they don’t bother to come. With the result the Kashmiri people have lost the hope in dialogue institution which is very dangerous. So whosoever will come in power in India, unless and until India will not change its policy, no substantial change will take place in Kashmir. Since 1947, all dialogues, be that with the Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah, United Hurriyat Conference, Hurriyat (M), JKLF or with the Hizbul Mujahideen, the dialogue institution failed to deliver in Kashmir; so people of Kashmir have a reason and logic to doubt the credentials of New Delhi vis-à-vis the dialogue process.”
Asked how he sees Modi card being played by the BJP, Malik said the party’s PM candidate has two buses, one is RSS aimed at entering into a war with Pakistan, use excessive force in Kashmir to suppress the genuine dissent and second is Vajpayee’s bus of Insaniyat that never delivered, but only expressed. “Rest the time is the best judge,” the JKLF chief said.