Sunday Interview: We won’t object to good governance, but don’t sell it as ‘a vote for India’

Kashmir’s chief Muslim cleric and leader of his faction of separatist Hurriyat Conference alliance Mirwaiz Umar Farooq speaks to Yusuf Jameel while being under “house arrest” at his Srinagar residence.

Majority of voters have rejected the poll boycott call from separatist leadership. Don’t you think you are pursuing a misplaced strategy or have failed to convince the people on the logic behind your diktat?
There is no denying of the fact that in the current elections people have voted in huge numbers. I think there are a couple of very specific reasons for it. One is; you are having these elections after a major flood tragedy struck J&K. It was a catastrophic situation for the people where not only the government but every other institution of the state collapsed. There was absolutely no one around to help people.

There is realisation at the people’s level and also in the resistance leadership that you need some sort of governance and an administration on the ground to address the basic needs of the people. As far as the Hurriyat Conference is concerned, we are not against elections. We don’t oppose any democratic process as such. We oppose elections because the Government of India (GoI) has projected these as a substitute and an alternative to a political settlement of Kashmir which it absolutely is not.

Syed Salahuddin, the chief of United Jihad Council, recently suggested the separatist leadership should revisit their decision and deliberate on whether elections held to elect J&K Assembly or representatives for Indian Parliament is an issue. Do you think this could be the face saving?
I don’t think there is any face-saving scenario there. We don’t have to prove every time where we do stand. Or keep denying the notion that leadership or the resistance itself is losing its relevance and people are happy with the status quo. The highest number of voter turnout in the history of J&K was recorded during the 1987 elections. Just after those elections you saw militancy started. In 2008 elections, overall voting percentage was around 67 per cent and soon you were in the middle of the (2009-10) unrest. For us, elections are a non-issue.

Our resistance movement is based on certain historical facts. One of these is the United Nations resolutions on Kashmir which categorically state that no election whether for Assembly or Parliament is going to have any impact on the disputed nature of the state. Having said that I do agree time has probably come to sit down and devise a proper mechanism on how to deal with this situation.

How soon will you make up your mind?
It is to be done. But let us wait and see how the GoI projects the latest elections.

Elections to elect local government are also held on the other side of the Line of Control and you don’t oppose?
When we say Kashmir is disputed we talk about that part of the state too. That also is a part of dispute; hence its people are also part of bigger struggle and part of the bigger picture. We need to involve all the regions and people of entire J&K in a new strategy to be adopted pretty soon.

It is being said Pervez Musharraf had also advised the separatist leadership to join election fray way back in 2002. If true, why didn’t you agree to it then?
It is not true. What Pakistan was looking for at that time was Mr Musharraf’s four-point formula wherein he talked about open borders, demilitarisation, trade, people-to-people contact, self-governance and joint mechanism. It could have been a good start to move further but, unfortunately, it did not get the kind of response from the GoI it should have. Eventually, Mr Musharraf had had his own set of problems.

If you are able to delink polls from what you say is struggle for freedom will the Hurriyat also participate in elections?
It is to be seen. We haven’t deliberated on this issue as yet. You need a broader consensus on this issue. But one thing is very clear, elections are a very small issue and the Hurriyat is not going to be a part of any governance. The mandate it has from the people is only about the resolution of the issue of Kashmir.
You will not try to create hurdles either?

If there is a better mechanism where in people can have accountable government to address their day to day problems we will have no objections but only if GoI doesn’t sell it as a vote for India. Unless that context changes and that reality changes, Hurriyat is not going to endorse any such mechanism, much less become a part of it.

If the BJP is voted to power in J&K on its own or as part of an alliance with a regional party would you then regret your decision of staying away from elections?
No doubt the induction of BJP in politics of elections in Kashmir has also given a very new dimension to the whole exercise. That is the reason why, at many places, large number of people came out to vote. They also felt there is need to keep the BJP away. The BJP and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh have hidden agenda on Kashmir.

The RSS has very openly talked about Indianisation of Kashmir which obviously means making it part of their Hindutva agenda. Yet the fact remains whether it has been the Congress, National Conference or, for that matter, even the People’s Democratic Party, they have always looked towards New Delhi. Their decisions have been influenced by people sitting in the corridors of power in Delhi be it Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act or Afzal Guru. If the BJP comes into power in J&K what worse can they let the people of Kashmir to see as they have been through so much of pain, agony and sufferings over the past 25 years?

You have been repeatedly saying the Hurriyat is ready to talk to the GoI towards seeking an amicable solution to Kashmir issue but the new dispensation in New Delhi doesn’t seem to be interested. Where do we go from here?
Undoubtedly, the BJP is out with a very hard-line policy not only vis-à-vis Kashmir but also Pakistan. Talks have been stalled and the Hurriyat has been made a scapegoat in that. We know they are trying to push the Hurriyat to the wall. They are trying to wreck its leadership. They are trying to isolate Pakistan. It seems to be their policy right now. But you can’t deny the fact that Kashmir freedom movement has graduated to a level where it is not necessary we should be seen every day having a hartal or out on the streets throwing stones. It has now been so much internalised and is at a stage where educated lot is out in open supporting the cause be it on the Internet, bloggers, writers, social media. People are talking openly about their aspirations and their identity. I don’t think that is going to go away. The more GoI tries to push the youth and the leadership towards the wall probably the higher response is going to be there.

We were talking about breaking the ice…
There are many factors that we have not seen any movement forward but as far as Hurriyat is concerned we are committed to the fact that we will take this peaceful movement forward and in that context if there are opportunities to engage with both India and Pakistan we definitely will seize them.

What went wrong? Why couldn’t the talks that were being held between the Hurriyat and New Delhi be taken to logical conclusion?
Just after we saw the Vajpayee initiative launched, the BJP lost the elections and then Congress came into power. Unfortunately, the Congress could not take that process forward. They had had many opportunities to engage and to talk. The last meeting we had had with Prime Minister was way back in 2007 at which we gave some suggestions and proposals to the GoI. But seven to eight years have gone by and nothing has moved.

Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has reiterated that before the talks between Islamabad and New Delhi his country would continue with its practice of consulting the Kashmiri resistance leadership. But India has refused to be part of any dialogue process that sticks to such precedent. How can the impasse be ended?
New Delhi has taken a totally unreasonable and undiplomatic position. You have to understand that India and Pakistan have been talking on Kashmir issue and on how to find an amicable solution to it. How can that solution evade the people of Kashmir? The Hurriyat has always welcomed the idea of their engaging the others as well be it militant leadership or, for that matter, the pro-Indian leadership. Mehbooba Mufti and Omar Abdullah also went to Pakistan to meet the leadership there. So it is not that the Hurriyat wants Pakistanis and the Indians should talk to only us. We believe they have to involve the leaderships on both sides of the ceasefire line. But it is very unfortunate that the GoI made Pakistanis meeting us an issue at that juncture.

Do you see any way out?
The Hurriyat has always tried to contribute towards peace and reconciliation process. We don’t want to be seen as spoilers. We want to be there as contributors. But the new policy being pursued by the BJP government in Delhi has to be changed. As far as Hurriyat is concerned, it is not a point of prestige for us. It is not necessary that we should every time talk to the Pakistanis before they talk to Indians. Let everybody talk to everyone. If the Pakistanis talk to us after they meet the Indians it does not make difference.

And you are ready to do your bit as you said you would not insist on meeting the visiting Pakistani leaders before they meet their Indian counterparts but can also meet them later?
As long as we also are there as part of the process and consulted on relevant issues it doesn’t matter who talks with whom first.