Editorial
|
|
|
| | Geelani versus Mufti | | Indo-Pak amity is an essential pre-requisite for breaking logjam over Kashmir | | At a time when the atmosphere on the subcontinent was beginning to show signs of long-awaited improvement with eventual positive impact on the course of the Kashmir dispute Syed Ali Shah Geelani has been striking a discordant note. To be fair to the Hurriyat (G) leader, he is not doing so for the first time as his political profile is defined by his consistent opposition to the bilateral approach. His argument has been that the recognition of the existence of a dispute over the accession of Jammu and Kashmir should be the starting point of any initiative. What, however, Geelani overlooks is the fact that this type of straitjacket approach has not yielded an inch of progress towards resolution of the dispute for the past over six decades. And its disastrous consequences across the subcontinent are too well known to be mentioned again. Looking from Geelani’s home ground—Kashmir—the stalemate, for whatever reason, has meant miseries and more miseries for the people. Secondly, considering the larger picture, as it were, time has proved that the state of relationship between India and Pakistan is a significant material factor in this case.
So long as India and Pakistan remain locked in confrontational mode it is not only that the prospect of resolution of the Kashmir dispute is set back but that it also entails untold miseries for the people of this state in general and those of the Kashmir Valley in particular. Its toll has been too heavy to endure, if one were to just look at the happenings over the past ten to twenty years. Objectively, therefore, paving the way for better understanding between India and Pakistan takes precedence over every other consideration. Movement along this particular course need not necessarily involve any ‘compromise’ over the basic issue, as Geelani fears. On the other hand, its positive fallout is becoming more and more evident.
Only recently, Line of Control (LoC) was thrown open, first for travel and then for trade also. It has been received with a great sense of relief by the civil society although there are quite a few unnecessary irritants in its operation. Any such step was inconceivable till just a decade or so ago. Also, the cross-LoC travel and trade are conducted on unconventional basis that are substantially different from those adopted to conduct international affairs. This departure by itself is an unsaid recognition of the existence of the dispute. More importantly, its humanitarian value is obvious in the relief with which the long divided families have found a way to meet one another and, equally significantly, the traders across the LoC have benefitted with the opening up of second outlet from J&K. Moves are afoot to expand its ambit and provide for movement of social and professional groups.
It is because of the goodwill generated in the process that India and Pakistan have at last agreed to enlarge areas of mutual engagement with emphasis on expanding trade and commerce and promoting people-to-people contact. There is no doubt that the supposed priority of the Kashmir dispute has also been affected as it has been clubbed with other related issues. The basic fact of the existence of the dispute, however, remains unaffected by re-arrangement of bilateral agenda. Kashmir dispute is not off the agenda.
Geelani’s reaction to PDP patron Mufti Mohammad Sayeed’s exhortation that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh should make his long expected visit to Pakistan sounds out of tune, to say the least. Geelani overlooks the fact that no progress is possible on resolving the Kashmir problem unless and until India and Pakistan succeed in improving bilateral atmosphere and creating mutual trust and confidence. Kashmir has been paying a heavy price for mistrust between India and Pakistan and the dispute over the future of the state has fallen into deep freeze because of animosity between them. So Indo-Pak amity has become a necessary pre-requisite for breaking the logjam over Kashmir. It is neither statesmanship nor prudence to think otherwise.
The only logical course is to let the bilateral atmosphere consolidate positively, defreeze the static approach and work out a road map for amicable resolution of the dispute to the ultimate satisfaction of the people of J&K as well as of India and Pakistan. History has left no other sensible course to pursue. In no way does it amount to surrendering the basic right of the people to determine the future of their homeland. This particular option had not been attempted so far but it seems to offer promising prospect of movement forward in comparison to any other option. |
|
|
|
|
Comment on this Story |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|