Debating Separatists

Basharat Shameem
An intense debate is going on these days in the valley in the press and other public circles following an “indirect call for arms” by the senior separatist leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani in an interview. While Mr. Geelani has rightly received a lot of brickbats for his assertions related to violence as an option for the Kashmiri youth, a discrete minority, comprising mostly of educated youth as upcoming scholars and researchers, took sides with him on the issue. For many in the valley and outside it, Mr. Geelani’s comments pertaining to violence may have come as a surprise especially when the separatists often vow by their non-violent aphorisms. The controversy of sorts created by Mr. Geelani’s comments was just pointless in the regard that his assertions were hardly anything new or path breaking. As we have seen, these have been repeated for more than two decades now, beginning from the 1990s itself. For instance, in an interview to Radio Pakistan in 1992, Mr. Geelani had not only justified the armed resistance in Kashmir, but had also attempted to put it into a pan-Islamic skeleton by calling upon the Muslims of all countries to join the ‘Jihad’ in Kashmir. However, there were some other important admissions articulated in his recent interview which escaped most of the people’s close scrutiny. These admissions are of real significance and application. As the quote goes, the actual words were “…it is not due to disunity among Hurriyat but due to weakness of Kashmiris that we are unable to take the Kashmir issue to its logical conclusion. When we ask people to boycott polls, people do not follow our programmes and come out to vote. Kashmiris are weak and do not follow programmes given by the Hurriyat in letter and spirit.”  Strangely, the sufferers and victims were turned into by Mr. Geelani. Instead of accepting his own failings and those of other separatists bluntly, Mr. Geelani nonchalantly labels Kashmiris as disloyal, but one is entitled to ask him, disloyal to whom? May be Ghalib helps us here through this famous Persian couplet:
baa bandae khud in hama sakhti nami kunandn khud ra ba zur bar tu magar bastah im ma ?
One doesn’t treat one’s slaves like this
And did we ever ask to be your slaves?
If one were to explore its subtext very keenly, what is most noteworthy about Mr. Geelani’s interview is an honest admission which points out to the separatist’s rapidly diminishing relevance in Kashmir’s political discourse. And, of course, as Mr. Geelani himself acknowledges, this irrelevance has been exacerbated by the huge participation of people in the internationally recognized free and fair elections in the state. While separatists including Mr. Geelani often talk about the people’s wishes and aspirations, how can he blame them for not following his dictates? Why cannot he accept and respect the people’s democratic aspirations expressed in their huge participation in the Lok Sabha, Assembly and Panachayat elections. If Mr. Geelani is blaming common Kashmiris for failing the so-called Hurriyat leadership, here is what a common Kashmiri would like to ask him and his associates about the so-called programmes/dictates which seem to be lost in the myriad of aimlessness, confusion and despair. Where are these dictates, coming in the form of frequent strikes, chalos, political flip-flops, and boycotts, taking us? Why are we encouraging our youth to take up guns and pelt stones on the security forces when these things are not going to render us anything good and plausible? What have separatists achieved in their struggle, based on the sacrifices of common Kashmiris, in the past two decades? Why not inculcate practical wisdom and a realistic approach when it comes to the political struggle instead of delving into the rigidness of illusory and unknown dreamy fantasies? Yes, Jammu and Kashmir is an enduringly vexed political issue which needs urgent solution, but what are the available options. Regional and geopolitical scenarios have undergone a paradigm shift since 1947; modern nation states don’t trade territories and redraw their borders in order to solve political disputes. And we all know, India and Pakistan are not going to do it either. Separatists need to awake to this reality if they are to have any say in the future deliberations, they would have to shun their traditional rigidity and be flexible in arriving at a viable solution based on the fundamental principles of democracy and the state’s distinctive plural identity. The discourse of azaadi is too intricate to be bargained and engaged on in any future forum of resolution. Within the separatist discourse, the narrative of azaadi is overwhelmed by a multiplicity of meanings which all stand in contrast to each other. For some, it means a dreamy Islamic Caliphate; for some, it means Pakistan, while for others, it means an independent Jammu and Kashmir. So who is going to fix its definitiveness before engaging on it?
Mr. Geelani undoubtedly enjoys huge reverence in many people’s hearts in the valley because of his unwavering convictions and a perspective, based on what he calls a “principled stand”. His oft-stated position is that he represents people’s just aspirations and a legitimate cause. These days he unequivocally condemns the ruling PDP-BJP for promoting the RSS agenda of communal polarization in the state. On this, as a citizen of the state, with utmost regards one reserves the right to ask him on which moral grounds he, along with other separatists and religious clerics, recently threatened the State Government and the Ahmadi community against organizing an innocuous peace conference in Srinagar. What explains this open Shiv Sena type bullying, when Mr. Geelani claims to be representing a just and plural cause. Did he ever think of the implications, such type of provocations are going to have on the social fabric of our society, especially when coming from the leader of his standing.
If Mr. Geelani’s admission in his recent interview is to be taken as a serious appraisal, then separatists need to introspect and see the writing on the wall. They should be thankful to the democracy of this country on that count because it is only the strength of democracy that will give them a chance to redeem themselves and thereby become relevant again. The time is ripe when they need to meditate and contemplate, and the land of Kashmir, if we are to believe Lord Buddha, is the best abode for it.
(The author is a lecturer in English DDE, University of Kashmir)
feedbackexcelsior@gmail.com

Follow our WhatsApp channel