People's
Vision
Series: - One
:
31st July 2005
The
programme was held in the auditorium of College
of Education, Srinagar. For the first time in
Kashmir Omar Abdullah and Yasin Malik were face
to face and reasoned out their vision for
Kashmir.
Following is the transcript of whole of the
proceedings of the programme.
Moderator, Parvaiz Bukhari:
At the very onset, I would like
to request president Jammu and Kashmir Coalition
of Civil Society Mr. Parvez Imroz to come on the
stage and launch the very first interactive
session of “People’s Vision”.
Parvez Imroz:
At the very onset, we would like
to say about the Coalition of Civil Society. It
is not a political organisation as we have said
always. It is not even an NGO. It is a civil
society and if we see the role of the civil
society all over the world, because the way the
civil society all over the world has got an
important role, whether it is the Iraq war or
anywhere the peace is threatened. Then, by
saying that there are two super powers in the
world i.e. United States and the global civil
society. So, of course the CCS - Coalition of
Civil Society, has a political position. Our
position on Kashmir, is that, Kashmir, is a
disputed state, we are non-violent conflict
resolution. It is the people who have to decide
its fate.
The role of the civil society in
the non-conflict area is a medium between the
people and the state while as in the conflict
areas; it has to play a role of resistance.
Coalition of Civil Society is just to empower
the people’s initiative in Kashmir because if we
see in Kashmir, the space has been totally taken
by the politicians and the government or their
extensions. The CCS is not for power, it is not
a political organisation but its endeavour is to
empower people about the very important
decisions, which are affecting their lives and
also the lives of the generations. So in this
case that the CCS has started this programme of
People’s Vision, which I think is first time
happening in a conflict area, because if we see
all over the world there are different places
which are reeling under the conflict, where
there is no place for the civil society but this
People’s Vision programme is that where the CCS
has decided to bring the two conflicting
parties, to bring the politicians with diverse
views for knowing their Vision. To seek
transparency from the politicians and also
accountability from the politicians who claim to
speak on behalf of the people and also to know
their vision, mission and goal. Besides that
also to seek right to information because what
is happening in the name of people, they have
the right to know that. They want to know what
is transpiring in the dialogue process. They
want to know regarding the CBMs taken by the two
governments. So people have a reason to ask what
is going on – what dialogue process is going on
– what CBMs are been taken. And, the politicians
are speaking about some solutions. We see a
delegation of politicians from this place
visiting other part of Kashmir– there is no
transparency in that. So the people have a right
to know because it is not a question of
politicians alone only, it involves the future
of people. If it were a matter of politicians
than the issue would have been resolved long
back in 52 or in 1975. It is the people that who
have been part of the process and if only once
there is an accountability from the politicians
that is what has been our effort, our effort has
been to involve the vibrant civil society in
Kashmir, where there is no space and of course
we are trying to get a space, gain a space and
ask the questions.
So, in this case this programme
has been decided by the civil society and we are
very grateful to the presidents of the two
political organisations who have accepted the
invitations. We have Mr. Omar Abdullah from the
NC (National Conference), whose position of NC
is that J&K is an integral part of India and at
the other side we have the chief of the Jammu
and Kashmir Liberation Front whose position on
J&K is that it is not an integral part of India
and has to be an independent state.
Moderator,
Parvaiz Bukhari:
Before
we begin I would like to request the Chairman of
JKLF Mr. Yaseen Malik and President NC Mr. Omar
Abdullah to please come on the stage and take
their seats. I would also like to spell out here
that we also have a respected members of society
here who agreed to come as neutral independent
observers, who are sitting at the gathering
above and they are not going to ask any
questions and infact the programme has been
designed in such a way that the independent
observers will not be… their questions will not
be entertained and this will be a pure
interactive session between leaders of the two
conflicting parties (and youth). In todays case
the NC and the JKLF and the people here, which
are mostly composed of students.
I would like to just request the
Chairman JKLF Mr. Yaseen Malik to come over here
and spell out his vision statement.
Yaseen Malik: Chairman JKLF
Respected audience, young
friends, today I am happy that I am amongst
young students. For the last 10 years I tried
very hard to talk with the students, but
unfortunately the state never allowed us to have
a direct interaction with students.
Although I was allowed to speak
at JNU, Delhi University, St. Stephen’s College,
Bombay University and Calcutta University but in
Kashmir there were always barriers preventing
interactions with the students. Three months ago
when I went to the University for an Event
honouring the memory of Aasia Jeelani but within
5 minutes they had cordoned the entire
University in the fear that I was there to
speak. Why? Why is the state afraid of us having
a direct interaction with interaction with
students? When I tried to figure out why, I came
to the conclusion that whenever any nation faces
difficulties, whether their freedom was taken or
they faced some other issue –if anyone has
played a role it was the youth. That is why
Allama Iqbal dedicated all his writings to
youth. He described youth as the interpreter of
his dream.
According to psychologists,
those youth that fall between the ages of 18 and
30 are in the age of fire, age of passion,
selfless, and idealist. If you look at the
history of freedom movement in the subcontinent
whether it was Gandhi. Nehru or Jinnah sahib,
they all started while they were in this age
group. Allama Iqbal divided youth into 2
categories. One whom he compares to a falcon.
Falcon is a kind of creature who flies
tirelessly from one sky to another.
Uqabi rooh jab bedaar hoti hai
jawanu main
Nazaar aati hai unko apni manzil
aasmaano main
Nahin tera Nashaiman kasre
sultani kay gumband par
Tuu shaheen hai basera kar
pahadun ki chatanu par
Shaheen kabi parwaaz say thak kar
nahin girtha
pur dam hai gar tuu tou nahin
khatrai uftaad
But there is another type of
youth that is ruined by bad company. The youth
between 18 and 30 will not turn bad on their
own, but company ruins it Regarding this Allama
Iqbal said,
Hou Na saki zaag main paida woh
buland parwazay
Kar gayee shaheen bachay ko
kharab suhbatay zaag
Afsoos sadafsoos ki shaheen na
bana too
Samjay na tairee aankh nay fitrat
kay isharat
When I try to look closely at
Kashmir history and see what the role of youth
has been. During the rule of the Maharaja there
was suppression. If a Kashmiri encountered a
soldier of the king he was expected to salute
him and praise the king. Muslims were taxed when
they crossed the bridges. During this era of
suppression, there was a student who was the 1st
Kashmiri Muslim with an M.Sc. degree.
When
he came to Maisuma he saw a Kashmiri being
beaten by a soldier for forgetting to salute him
and praise the king, that youth who had just
completed his M.Sc. from Aligarh Muslim
University was watching this scene. He slapped
the soldier that slap was a slap against
suppression, an act that no Kashmiris could have
imagined at that time the news spread through
Kashmir like wildfire. This youth became the
heartbeat of Kashmiris. His name was Sheikh
Mohammad Abdullah. People were willing to die in
his name. But as a psychologist writes when
anybody starts doing any work in this age group
his vigour and idealism reigns supreme. But with
the passage he gets psychologically exhausted.
As he gets exhausted, he frames others according
to his opinion. With the result he leaves the
path that he was pursuing and charts a new
course. At that time a psychologist writes to
this person and says that today you are leaving
as a 50or 60 years old, but that 18 year old
that you once were has been reborn and will take
over. If you look at the 50-60 year history of
Kashmir carefully every Kashmiri politician that
adopted Delhi’s line used the freedom movement
as their launching pad. Sheikh sahib,Bakhshee
sahib,Sadiq sahib,Mir Qasim,Mufti Sayeed,Ghulam
Rasool Kar, Everybody started with Kashmiri
freedom movement including Farooq Abdullah
sahib, who was a member of the JKLF. He gave a
new slogan to Kashmiris in 1974 after taking
oath from Maqbool Bhat Sahib. “YOUR NATION MY
NATION, KASHMIRI NATION, KASHMIRI NATION”. When
the movement began to ------ in 1988 another
youth came. If you look carefully, all these
youth were the product of the revolutionary
movement of the National Conference and from
there they emerged again. Whether it was Ishfaq
Sahib, Hameed Sahib or whether it was Nadeem
Khateeb. Nadeem parents had sent him to America
in order to make his future, where his income
was thirty lakhs. He was a commercial pilot.
Then came and nobody knew his grave was in the
mountains of Doda.
When youth emerged again in 1988
they brought the revolution. Just imagine when
Rajeev Gandhi came here in 1990 he declared that
Kashmir was lost. There was no path for India.
But unfortunately the same movement was harmed
by our own hands. Some Kashmir leaders went to
Delhi and told them to be patient, wait, kill
Kashmiris and the movement will die down. But
all those options were used which could be
effective in breaking the will power of a
layman. Government of India used every kind of
option.. Killing people, beating people,
humiliating people – but still the movement did
not die. Because…. I have been given the slip to
conclude my speech I have one request for the
youth present here. Today when India’s violent
weapon has failed they have resorted to a new
weapon – “CORRUPTION”. The weapon of corruption
is far more dangerous then the weapon of
suppression. When a nation is morally and
materially corrupted the people loose their
ability to reason. I just want to make a
request. The weapon of corruption has the
potential to destroy our nation and I implore
you to be cautious.
I would like to read a sentence
from the Prof. Mujeeb Sahib’s speech, which he
delivered to students at Aligarh Muslim
University.
“Become a friend of work. Ignore benefits and
drawbacks. Adopt the ways of a giver not the
ways of a taker. You may have seen many potholes
that are representative of the hollowness of
their condition and degradation of their
society. These potholes are filled by rainwater
and nearby drainage. There may be water in them
but how unappealing! People even use this water
but with much reluctance. It is as bad as having
to beg. There is also water in the springs that
comes from the mountains and goes on flowing.
How majestic are they? How much are they
respected? People are proud of these springs. If
we look at it as a merchant, ponds keep all
their goods in one place, while springs keep
flowing and distribute them. The decision is in
your hands. Whether you adopt the ways of the
spring or the pond. I don’t need to suggest that
those who adopt the ways of the giver don’t have
to bear a loss. But for those people, poets from
all over the world write rhythmic songs. They
can see a glimpse of their own beauty in the
eyes of others. Only he, who can shun the desire
for comfort from his heart, can adopt the ways
of the spring and distribute his resources.
Moderator,
Parvaiz Bukhari:
Thank
you very much Mr. Yaseen Malik Sahib, I must
apologise that I could not make it amply clear
right at the beginning that the entire
proceedings will happen in English, particularly
for the benefit of those here who don’t
understand Urdu.
I resume my apologies again that
since language used to launch the programme was
English, it was understood that the proceedings
will happen in English. Before requesting Mr.
Omar Abdullah president National Conference, to
come and spell out his Vision for the people I
now feel duty bound to seek permission from
Mohammad Yaseen Malik, if rest of the
proceedings could be or the vision should be
done in English.
I now invite Mr. Omar Abdullah
to come and spell out his vision for the people.
Omar
Abdullah: President National Conference.
Chairman JKLF Mohammad Yaseen
Malik Sahib, the moderator for this morning’s
interactive session, members of the Coalition of
Civil Society, ladies and gentlemen.
At the outset, I think it is only
fair that a little slip lying here that says
apologise for security check ups should come
from me and not from any body else. Because
quite clearly the security is because of my
presence. If I were not present here you would
not have been frisked, so I apologise for that.
It is an unfortunate sign of the
times that the times we live in. That we cannot
interact amongst ourselves, we cannot share our
vision statements, we cannot spend two hours of
a morning together without a barrage of security
checks, jammers and all sorts of other
paraphernalia’s. But I live in the hope that
this is a temporary phase that will pass and let
us hope that it is good sooner than later.
Now, we are here to discuss and
debate our visions for a respective future of
Jammu and Kashmir. Where we see it. How we see
it. How we propose to achieve it. In this, the
J&K National Conference is at its, is in the
biggest disadvantage, because quite honestly we
are the only party that has come forward with a
clear vision statements and therefore we are the
only party that set ourselves up to be shot
down. You like our vision statement or you don’t
like but it is there in front of you. We say
that barring India and Pakistan again a sort
some of miracle to a better solution, the only
way forward for Jammu and Kashmir is to have the
maximum level of autonomy restored to both sides
and to allow the people of Jammu and Kashmir to
travel freely across what is called the Line of
Control, what they chose to call it that time.
It is another matter.
If somebody can convince the
leadership on both sides to come forward with a
better solution that people of Jammu and Kashmir
find more acceptable, the J&K National
Conference will not come in the way but infact
work to ensure that is the solution that works
its way here. Now we can’t be clear in that but
our problem is that we have to counter
mainstream political parties and others who
perhaps are a lot more ambiguous than we are.
Let us take the mainstream political parties to
start with, there is nobody from PDP (People
Democratic Party)here, but I dare to say if we
are going to ask them what is your vision for or
a solution to Jammu and Kashmir, it will start
with “Iss main mera yeh hai”. And
go nowhere from there. Fine, we advocate
dialogue as much as the next person but dialogue
in what lines, what is the dialogue to achieve.
When Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh speaking on
behalf of the government of India said that
territorial boundaries cannot be redrawn. Fine.
That is his compulsion. When General Musharaf
says that the solution to Jammu and Kashmir must
keep in mind India’s secular fabric, what is he
saying? Have we sat back to think what a
dramatic shift has taken place in Pakistan’s
official thinking, when the President of
Pakistan recognises India’s secular credentials
not Pakistan’s compulsions, not of people of
Jammu and Kashmir’s compulsion. When the
President of Pakistan says, that the solution to
Jammu and Kashmir will involve maximum
self-governance to the two parts, what is he
advocating? Somebody said if a rose by any other
name will smell just as sweet, so I ask where
does our autonomy end and where does General
Parvaiz Musharaf’s maximum self-governance
start? Where does our solution lie along the
decisions of 1947 end and where does Dr.
Manmohan Singh’s statement that borders cannot
be redrawn and General Parvez Musharaf’s
assertion that India’s secular compulsion or
fabric will have to be kept in mind when a
solution is drawn. Is it that we recognised the
ground realities much before anybody else or is
it that we have been mistaken and somehow a
better solution will emerge out of the 16 years
of death and destruction, I don’t know. but what
I have been saying and which has got me fair
amount of criticism over the last few weeks is
that we need to be clear with the people – We
need to tell the people that where are we coming
from and what we stand for. We need to be able
to convince. I mean, let us take the concept of
Azaadi, what do we mean, when we advocate
Azaadi. Freedom for both regions of Jammu and
Kashmir, freedom only for the part of Jammu and
Kashmir that is with India, freedom only for the
Kashmir valley, or freedom only for North
Kashmir, Central Kashmir and south Kashmir. What
are we advocating? Do we believe that if ever
for a moment India were willing to give Jammu
and Kashmir its freedom, will Pakistan give
Jammu and Kashmir its freedom? One small Dam in
Jammu called Baghliar and look what a fuss
Pakistan has created over the dam that is a run
of the river project. Can you imagine a free
Jammu and Kashmir where we control our own
rivers, where we can dam them, as we like, where
we can block water, as we like, where we can
stop water as we like and Pakistan not being
upset and afraid and then we expect that they
will fight for our freedom? Our freedom
threatens them, that is what we don’t
understand, they have used our desire for a
better solution to their own ends and today
after 9/11 when the ground situation has changed
their line has changed and it is a fact. Their
line has not changed because I am saying, it has
changed, their line has changed because all of
you have listened to the radio, watched
television and read the newspapers. And
therefore we need to come together and decide
how best we can get something out of these last
16 years of death and destruction. I had
honestly hoped when this delegation travelled
across, that in some way that they would
convince those on the other side to bring down
the level of violence. I understand that the
unilateral ceasefire would be impossible to ask
for but I even now earnestly appeal to them to
make an appeal to the other side. There are ways
to fight even an armed conflict. The Irish
Republican Army IRA did it for 30 years but
ensured that there won’t be any civilians before
exploding devices. Today we have a strange
situation when devices are put outside schools
and no warning is given. By all means if Jammu
and Kashmir can be made free, make it. We will
not come in your way. In 1990 when it appeared
that Jammu and Kashmir perhaps was heading that
way, we closed up, we left, and we did not
fight. Yaseen Malik Sahib and the other
separatist leadership, we didn’t……… Some went to
Jammu, some went to Delhi and some left the
country and waited for the new solution to
emerge to the problem in Jammu and Kashmir but
he is right, the movement was corrupted. It was
corrupted from within and it was corrupted from
outside. It is a fact that the leadership in
1990, 91, 92, …. That was able to draw hundreds
of thousands of people on the single slogan of
Char-e-Sharief Chalo, the last vehicle
had not even left Srinagar and the beginning of
the convoy has reached Char-e-Sharief. That was
the level of popularity that those leaders
enjoyed in that day. Today on the slogan of
Char-e-Sharief Chalo, you would have to do
it on a Friday, that too want people to come out
of the mosque, why? Because the leadership has
been corrupted and the people here feel that
there is going to be sell out. On what lines the
solution will emerge, we want to know. I don’t
want to know as the president of Jammu and
Kashmir National Conference, I want to know as a
resident of here. OK on the one side I have
autonomy, what do I get from the other side? If
I am told that we would work towards the united
states of Kashmir, what is United States of
Kashmir? If I am told joint sovereignty, what is
joint sovereignty? If I am told Azaadi, what is
Azaadi? I have always said that as an individual
if somebody can convince me that there is a
better solution to autonomy, a more practical
solution to autonomy, a more realistic solution
to autonomy, I would be the first person to go
back to my party and ask them to consider it.
But I cannot convince people on hollow slogans,
I need something substantial, I need a vision, I
need a document. I need a map and I think that
is where we, all of us, as the leadership, as we
call ourselves, of the state, that is where we
have failed you. We have kept our own
constituencies alive; we have sought to keep our
own areas warm. I have sort to get myself
elected to the parliament every once in a while.
Somebody has sought some other constituency but
as a leadership we have failed to come forward
with a collective vision of what Jammu and
Kashmir should look like at the end of this
problem, when a solution finally is made
available to us.
Nobody is our friend; please
believe me: we don’t have friends in New Delhi
and we don’t have friends in Islamabad. It is
only when collectively we are able to come
forward with some sort of a practical vision
that we will be able to convince people. It has
always been the aim of the leadership in New
Delhi to divide the people of Jammu and Kashmir.
Hamesha Chahatay thay ki har mohallay say
ek leader khada ho jaye. Every town
should produce its own leader. There should
never be another Sheikh Abdullah; behind which
almost the entire population of Kashmir will
follow and to a large extent they have
succeeded. Today, I, fight Mehbooba, Mehbooba
fights somebody else. I will criticize Yaseen
Malik Sahib and Yaseen Malik Sahib will
criticize somebody else. And we are so busy
fighting amongst ourselves that New Delhi and
Islamabad will do damn what they like and we
will not know what is happening and that is why
I am extremely grateful to the Coalition of
Civil Society that they have given an
opportunity like this because we would never
have the chance to interact. It would be
difficult for him, almost impossible for me. He
would be called a traitor and I would be called
a separatist, anti-national and in today’s
scenario that would, I don’t know what it would
do to him, but I would be out. Which is why I,
you know the problem is we are so busy fighting
amongst ourselves.
I went to Toronto in December
last year, and I got to speak like this to a
group of Kashmiris from both sides. There were
also members from the Kashmiri Pandit community
and in that I said that I have a great degree of
regard for Yaseen Malik Sahib and his signature
campaign because I do not see what he is asking
for in his signature campaign that I as a
Kashmiri can oppose. He is not asking people to
sign for autonomy, he is not asking people to
sign for Azaadi, he is not asking for people to
sign to be a part of Pakistan, all he is saying
is that when the final settlement to the problem
in Kashmir is done, please include the people of
Jammu and Kashmir. Now, that is logical. I only
curse myself. I didn’t……before him. Otherwise I
would have started it before he did. Now he did
it, I can’t do it; otherwise it will look like I
am following him. But I only have to say this
and when I finished my speech some of the
separatist leadership comes to me and said what
have you done? Why have you done this? Why are
you glorifying him? You should have criticized
his signature campaign. Now you are making him a
bigger leader and you are making yourself look
smaller. How I make myself look small when I
agree with what he is doing? Now if this is the
state of our separatist leadership, what are we
going to do? If we cannot bring our separatist
leadership under one umbrella, how on earth do
you expect him and me to share a common platform
and that is why forums like this must be used? I
will be honest with you, my initial reaction to
the invitation was to say, nahi mujhay
maff karo. I will not come,
khamakha phass jaon ga. There will be
hooting, there will be whistling, there will be
all sorts of things and I am very hot blooded.
At the first sign of any trouble, that is the
door; I will be out of it. But them I realised
that forums like this have their use, they give
us an opportunity to understand each other, for
you to try and understand where I am coming from
and me to try and understand what your beliefs
are. I may not be able to convince you, you may
not be able to convince me but at least we are
talking to each other. And I think that is the
beginning because no solution will come and no
solution will work until we talk to each other.
It has to be amongst ourselves first only than
can we convince the promises in Islamabad and
the powers in Delhi of what we want and what we
believe is achievable and that is why forums
like this I hope they can take you. I hope they
take place at a time when I consider myself in
the audience. I am keen to listen to what other
participants in future discussions have to say.
As I said, if a better solution can emerge from
this 16 years of violence than the one I have
advocated………. So please make it and we will be
the first ones to welcome you with garlands. But
at least make your vision clear so we understand
where you have come from.
Thank you.
Moderator, Parvez Bukhari:
Thank you Mr. Omar Abdullah
Now the real interaction between
you and the leaders representing conflicting
points of views about what they think of the
people they claim to represent. I have already
received question from all of you and what we
will really do is, I will call upon the
individuals who have sent their questions
separately so that they can ask their questions
directly to the leaders to whom they address. I
am sure now the very basic purpose of you
interaction with the people with very diverse
and conflicting point of view claim to be
representative will ask their questions directly
to them.
The first question has come from
Mr. Javaid Ahmad he has a question to Mr. Omar
Abdullah
Javed
Ahmed:
Q1:
The world has changed completely so far as the
trends particularly political trends are
concerned, where you find the ideology of your
flag, NC flag in the age of technology.
Q2.
How far you are determined to the state autonomy
if highly than why do the NC became the ally of
BJP led NDA as it’s obvious of Article 370 is
one of their slogans, why NC its changes its
colour, 1st Plebiscite Front than
joining BJP and now again autonomy what next.
Omar
Abdullah:
Two very different questions.
Our ideology with regard to technology is
slightly different question to answer because we
have been talking politics than, I will start
getting to economics. As far as autonomy and
technology are concerned I don’t think there is
any co-relation there. As far as technology for
the future of the state is concern obviously we
wanted to see technology used to reduce the
levels of unemployment to give you as youngsters
new avenues of employment that are so far denied
to you and that is why I both as a minister in
the centre as well as when our state government
was here, we tried to formulate a policy both
for information technology and bio-technology. I
was instrumental in having a software technology
park set up here for precisely the reason that
the sorts of companies like Infosys, WIPRO and
others that are mushrooming, flourishing in
other parts of country. I don’t believe all of
us are Azim Premjis and all of us are Narayan
Murthys but may be an entrepreneur that can come
and use this technology and infrastructure to
set something out. Obviously for the future
also, we will seek to highlight the need for
technology to be brought to J&K so that the
youngsters of today can use it but that is a
different issue and we leave that aside for now.
On the far more tricky question that you asked
as to where the NC stands and why we had moved
things around. We didn’t join the BJP, we join
the NDA. There is a slight difference if you
care to stretch things a bit. The NDA had an
agenda different from the BJP’s agenda. Article
370, common civil code, the constriction of
Babri Masjid didn’t feature in the agenda of NDA,
which made it possible for us to work with them.
We were also under this mistaken impression that
being an ally in the centre rather than at
loggerheads with the centre we will get more
support from them in terms of finance, in terms
of development, in terms of other things which
people want aside from the overall solution,
political solution to the Kashmir issue. People
want electricity, they want health care, they
want roads, they want bridges, and they want all
sorts of other things which cost money. We
believe that we would get that money if we were
an ally. We were mistaken but you learn from
your mistakes and hopefully it is a mistake that
we won’t repeat again. What next for the NC we
are in opposition for the time being. What
happens in November, I don’t know, what will
happen after that again I don’t know? For the
time being we are very happy for the role we are
playing opposition party and will continue to do
that.
Question to Yaseen Malik
Farhat
Mantoo:
When you spoke for 30 minutes on
history, on psychology and everything I want as
a common Kashmiri to hear from you the vision
statement of JKLF for Kashmir.
Yaseeen
Malik:
As far as the JKLF vision is
concerned I don’t think JKLF has a new vision.
As you know before the birth of Pakistan and the
independence of India Kashmir was a sovereign
independent country. Our vision is that we want
to restore that sovereign status to the J&K and
as far as the economy is concerned I believe
that I have told when I was in the USA .I was in
Howard University and I said that Kashmiri
people have talent. As far as South Asia
is concerned it is the brightest talent in the
south Asia. These Kashmiri people can help
global community in constructive ways but when
our sovereignty was snatched we have become
orphans, as Omar was talking about Baglihar Dam
project people use to laugh on us when we said
in 1990 that Kashmiri people have the resources.
There were questions raised, one single question
that is it possible that J&K can survive
economically, even Dr. Farooq Abdullah he came
to see me in prison in 1993 in Delhi this was
the question he asked, how we can survive
economically, I said we have water resources.
This is patrol, he started of even laughing. As
every Kashmiri was ,and to day it has been
proved and people have started writing books
that if Kashmiri water resources can be utilized
Kashmir’s yearly income will be much more that
Saudi economy. It will be more than 5 billion
dollars. Right from 1947 till now we have become
beggars either to the doors of Delhi or
Islamabad. If you are clear we need to
consolidate our voice than we must affiliate
ourselves to the people of the J&K than we
cannot go to the doors of Delhi or Islamabad. We
must believe in it. It should not be a hollow
slogan. That is what Kashmiri leaders are doing
right from 1947, they are telling one thing in
Srinagar, another in Delhi and another in
Islamabad i.e. reasons we all Kashmiri leaders
can discredit in front of the international
community. When they are in power they are
speaking in one thing when they are `in
opposition they are saying another. Mufti Syed
who was a Home Minister he send Jagmohan to kill
us, and when he was in opposition his daughter
started praising the militants. today when they
are in power you see just forty hours back she
speaks here in a park she said children have
been killed in Kupwara, gun is justified,
tomorrow her another statement he started
accusing Parvez Musharraf to stop militants to
enter into Kashmir. If they go out with these
kinds of images, 6 images `in 24 hours I will
tell you honestly, the first problem with
Kashmiri leaders is the credibility we are
suffering from credibility crises. we must
restore our credibility first.
Question for Omar Abdullah
Mehraj-ud-Din
Dar:
I want to recall in 1990 when
the parliament passed a resolution that Kashmir
is the integral part of India and read your
statement in some daily, some weeks earlier you
were advising Miss Mehbooba Mufti that I have
been deceived 4 times by India government
regarding the autonomy now in that perspective
as being the president of NC. Do you still
adhere that Kashmir is still integral part of
that India because you were ones the External
Affairs Minster of the State.
Omar
Abdullah:
My stand is very clear and here
is my stand. I made my stand clear in opening
remarks my stand has not changed and that is the
least. I was not advising Miss Mehbooba Mufti I
was advising the separatist leadership for that
I see them very keen to seek an invitation from
New Delhi for dialogue and I told them look be
careful. Go to Delhi with a clear-cut agenda.
Let the people know what you are asking for. by
all means go and talk to Delhi but don’t expect
too much. Because if Delhi is not willing to
talk to me openly on autonomy they are certainly
not talking to you on azadi. I am not in a
position to advise Mehbooba that what she should
and should not do. As for as parliamentary
resolution is concerned, resolutions come and
resolutions go. Tomorrow if the solution
requires parliament to pass a new resolution it
will be passed.
Moderator,
Parvez Bukhari:
But Mr. Umar Abdullah, if we can
ask you a supplementary, here you have spelled
out your vision statement. Do you stand by that
parliamentary resolution still.
Omar Abdullah:
I told you clearly that Jammu
Kashmir status unless India and Pakistan agree
will not change. The line of control needs to be
made softer and maximum autonomy needs to be
granted to both sides. I couldn’t make my vision
clearer than that.
Question for Omar Abdullah
Aftab
Iqbal:
My question goes to Mr. Omar
Abdullah & my question is that one can see from
last so many days that there is news in the
newspapers on human rights violations in
Kashmir. As a member of parliament what is the
role you are playing against these human rights
violations in Kashmir. And what are you going to
do in future.
Omar Abdullah:
We would continue to highlight
them as we have been doing in the past …continue
doing and we will do it in future. But the
problem which will always be a problem that
Jammu and Kashmir faces in the parliament as we
all know we have only six members in the
parliament from Kashmir. And you know that might
is right and therefore while Laloo Prasad Yadew
can hold up the parliament with his 30 members
and Malayam singh Yadew can hold the parliament
with his 40 members, there Mehbooba and I and
few others can do nothing but a bit of a noise.
but I believe if we are saying what is right it
will be heard.
Aftab
Iqbal:
Sir
people are facing what you are not. I buy
newspapers from a Lal Chowk hawker .he is in
police custody from last 2 months. I don’t know
why. I know him from my child hood. He is a poor
guy. Police is asking 4 lakh rupees from him to
release.
Omar
Abdullah
Which is why we are number two
in the country in corruption. What can I say
further.
Question
for Yaseen Malik
Shagufa
Firdous Kirmani:
My question is for both Yaseen
Malik and Omar Abdullah. Actually a couplet
beholds my question and says:
Jo
Zara bhi neend aayee kabhi ahlay karvaan ko,
Wohi bangaye lutayray, jo banay
hua tha hadi
Don’t you think your attitude
towards us has been like that, right from the
times of Mr. Shiekh Mohammad Abdullah till today
and right from the moment JKLF triggered
insurgency, aborted it and took a U-turn? What
is the logic how do you find your stand very
sincere dedicated and what you call justified?
Yaseen
Malik:
As far as JKLF is concerned,
JKLF has not taken any U-turn on their stand.
You must be clear about it. But what was the
stand of JKLF when it took birth in 1966; it is
the stand of JKLF. As far as armed struggle is
concerned there is no doubt and there should be
no doubt for any person yes JKLF is the author
of armed struggle in Kashmir and if today
international communities wants to discuss the
Kashmir, it is because of those sacrifices. It
is because of that struggle which has been
started by the JKLF and when Shaheed Azam
Mohammad Maqbool Bhat was hanged in Tihar Jail.
This movement was nowhere. Now when we go for a
ceasefire, if the ceasefire in your opinion is
U- turn then it is unfortunate. We did
unilateral ceasefire; today Kashmiri people have
an argument before the international community.
Omar was talking about that there should be
cease-fire. Can I ask him a question, that when
I declared ceasefire what happened to me, my 600
colleagues have been killed after ceasefire.
There have been six life attacks on me. I was
arrested more than 200 times. So Kashmiri people
have an argument that there is no space for
non-violence struggle in Kashmir. I have said to
international community that Gandhian
non-violence movement sustained in
sub-continent, there was a support from the
British Empire. There were two schools of
thoughts present in Indian movement; one school
of thought was represented by Bhagat Singh,
Rajguru, Ashfaqullah, Chandra Shekher Azad.
Another school of thought was represented by
Ghandian non-violent movement. Ghandhi was never
harassed and his colleagues were never sent to
any interrogation centre. Their family members
were never humiliated. Whenever they were
arrested, it was with proper respect and honour.
So we proved our point that Kashmiri people have
no history of violence. Violence has been
thrusted on Kashmiri people. There was no space
for non-violence in Jammu Kashmir.
Moderator,
Parvez Bukhari:
The
armed struggle took place mainly in the region
of Kashmir but in the political discourse it’s
always J&K. Do you think it is necessary, does
JKLF says it is necessary to take along the
areas like Jammu which have publicly supported
the status quo, and identifying what you are
fighting against?
Yaseen
Malik:
As far as Jammu is concerned, I
have visited Jammu but unfortunately when Omar
said that Parvez Musharraf accommodated the
concern of Indian state, the secular state of
India, there should be no communal division of
Kashmir, because there will be definitely crises
in Indian states. There can be a blood bath. But
can I ask a question to Indian state, when I
tried to reach the people in Jammu. I was
arrested and denied permission to talk to the
Jammu people. Last week I send an application to
the DC that I want to hold a public meeting in
Doda, Kishtwar and Baderwah. It is even in Jammu
newspaper that even Hindus, Sikhs, minorities
were present in Doda public meeting. more than
10,000 people were there. Next day same DC send
me a letter that now you cannot hold a public
meeting in kishtwar and Baderwah. From last
seven years I made several attempts to reach
Poonch and Rajouri, but I was arrested several
times. The question that I want to ask the
Indian state is that if
you
are preaching that secular status of J & K
should not be hurt, but who is preaching
communal politics in J&K. In Jammu the RSS
movement was patronized by the Indian state and
in 1947 when the whole sub continent was in
blood bath, Kashmir was the only place where no
minority person was even touched and it was
acknowledged by the father of nation of India M
K Gandhi, who said if ever I see the ray of hope
of humanity, I will see it in the soil of
Kashmir. Though in the same state in 1947
thousands and thousands of Muslims were
massacred by the Hindu chauvinists. So in 47
also, when thousands and thousands of Muslims
were massacred in Jammu, Kashmiri people didn’t
accept that influence at that time. So Kashmiri
people don’t need to show the secular
credentials. We have proved ourselves. because
Kashmiriyat is not a political institution.
Kashmiriyat is a spiritual institution, which
has been given to us by Sheikh Noor-ud-Wali and
Lal Ded. Political institution has only
destroyed this institution.
Question to Omar Abdullah:
Hilal
Ahmad:
Mr.
Abdullah, your party has been, I want to ask you
a question on moral plain. On a moral plain how
do you envision the future of Kashmiris with a
nation? You always blamed India for destroying
political and hence economic and other fabrics
of our society and on a political plain or even
a practical plain. Do you think hundred thousand
lives were worth dispensation, which were
snatched away by your constitutional fraud that
is autonomy?
Omar
Abdullah:
I haven’t understood your
question.
Hilal
Ahmad:
You have been repeatedly saying
that India is playing political games here. So
how do you envision future of Kashmir with that
nation? Would you guarantee Kashmiris that in an
autonomous dispensation their political future
will be safe? Because it was snatched away from
them at least 50 years before and there is
nothing new that will be safe.
Omar
Abdullah:
Obviously whatever dispensation
arises out of a solution to the Kashmir issue
will meet the necessary international guarantees
but I can no more guarantee you that autonomy
will remain intact than those who advocate
Azaadi can guarantee you that people will remain
Azaad. The moment we get Azaadi what we have to
stop either the militaries of India or Pakistan
or the military of China from invading us and
making a territory of you again of us again.
China invaded Tibet; all the world outcries
haven’t been able to face the Tibetan people.
What is to stop china from invading J&K
tomorrow? World will make a noise but it will
still be a Chinese territory. I can only
guarantee you only my autonomy as much as they
can guarantee you your Azaadi.
Moderator,
Parvez Bukhari:
But Mr. Abdullah as long as your
power of establishment which has a parliamentary
resolution is placed how can you justify these
arguments or substantiate them?
Omar
Abdullah:
What we are advocating does not
go against the parliamentary resolution. Our
solution is within the four walls of the
constitution we have made it that very clear. If
a solution outside the four walls of
constitution is made available to us nothing
like it, unless the government of India or the
government of Pakistan agree on the final
dispensation of Jammu and Kashmir, no matter how
much we debate on the issue nothing is going to
happen. It hasn’t happen in sixteen years and it
is not going to happen in next sixteen years.
Let us talk about armed struggle; we are no
greater in armed uprising than Irish Republican
army was. For how much did it last? 30 years.
They have put down their weapons, what has
changed in Ireland? Has the map changed? Has the
structure of Ireland changed? They were a much
better fighting force than any armed force but
nothing has changed the same. Unless India and
Pakistan agree to change the dispensation of J
and K, it is not going to change. No matter how
much we may want it to. We can cry as much as we
like for Aazaadi. There is a sentiment for it
but we have to recognize the ground realities.
Question
to Yaseen Malik
Salfi
Muzaffar:
Sir, I wanted to know you have
launched freedom struggle for Kashmir since
1988. Is all the community of J and K agreeing
your proposal at that time? If not what is your
programme to convince them?
Yaseen
Malik:
As for as our programme is
concerned and whether the people in different
regions accept this programme or not. Honestly
speaking in Jammu, there was a division and we
are trying our level best. We have started
communication channels with Jammu people and
response is very positive. Second important
thing is I want to make some
interventions-……solutions….. I was in USA, 3
people Prof Stefen Cohen, Director of Brinklyns
institute, and assistant secretary of state in
Clinton’s time Mr. Indeforth. They met me and
asked me a question. Question was.. Do you
understand the Indian and Pakistani compulsions
in Kashmir? I said I do understand Indian and
Pakistani compulsions in Kashmir. They said, can
you explain? I said both India and Pakistan have
a national security interest problems in
Kashmir. Second important thing that I have
visited both India and Pakistan. I found both
Indian and Pakistani citizens are romantically
involved in Kashmir and this has become a
national ego for both India and Pakistan. I said
even the Kashmiri people need to accommodate the
national security interest and national ego of
both India and Pakistan. In return both India
and Pakistan need to respect and accept the
national aspirations of the people of J and K.
he told me can you say it openly, I said no. He
said, why? I said, India is not budging a single
inch from its stand that Kashmir is an integral
part of India and you are telling me that you
should give this comment. This is confusion.
Somebody is telling autonomy. When 1996
fraudulent elections took place, then there is
one person in Delhi, an anchor from India Today
and Aaj Tak, Prabhu Chawla. His comment was
(that) we have defeated those people who were
asking Azaadi. After three years Farooq Abdullah
got autonomy bill in the assembly and at that
time, I was in Delhi hospital admitted for
surgery and I was watching the TV in my hospital
room. The same day they introduced the bill, the
same Prabhu Chawla came on the TV, he said who
is Farooq Abdullah we made him the Chief
Minister. It is the Indian army who cast the
votes for him and today how can he bring an
autonomy bill in the assembly. My question is
why we are playing wittingly or unwittingly. Why
we are giving concessions. I said we will give
flexibility at the negotiating table. None of
the Kashmiris until now is engaged in the
dialogue process. Tell me one Kashmiri, who can
tell me “I was knowing this bus will go”, Mufti
Sayed to win the voters, he installed boards.
Until now the engagement of Kashmiri people in
this dialogue process is through media. There I
said to the President of Pakistan that Kashmiri
people are feeling as a nation humiliated, when
they are listening and watching what will be
their future through, radio, TV and newspapers.
Now people have given sacrifices. Because of
these sacrifices there is a pressure on both
India and Pakistan to resolve this issue. So
whatever will be the solution it will be because
of the sacrifices, which have been given from
last 15 years. So now, why we are going, when
even we have not been invited and we are going
to the negotiating table with a discount sale.
Moderator, Parvez Bukhari:
Mr. Malik, since you are talking
about autonomy, there is a question from Farooq
Ahmed…
Yaseen Malik:
As far as the question of
autonomy is concerned, if you remember my Prime
Minister of autonomy was arrested by a policeman
in Gulmarg in 1953. Just listen my Prime
Minister of autonomy was arrested by a policeman
in Gulmarg in 1953. Now do I want the same
autonomy when my again Prime Minister will
arrested by a policeman. Then again we will
start a movement and my youth will die for the
movement. No. This time we want permanent
solution, no temporary solution.
Question
to Omar Abdullah:
Yasin
Malik (Baramulla):
If
you are really interested that Kashmir issue
should be solved peacefully once for all, then
why don’t you join the hands of the separatist
umbrella?
Omar
Abdullah:
Well ok.
Number of things need to be
talked about because the number of times Yaseen
Malik Sahib has directed a comment in my
direction and I haven’t been able to respond. He
talked about how 600 of his colleagues died,
because they had picked up the gun and put it
down and how many times the assassination
