The central government has taken a step to restart the dialogue process for a solution on Kashmir, by appointing Dineshwar Sharma, the former IB director, as a special interlocutor. After an aggressive campaign to kill militants in the Valley and crackdown on separatists’ funding, the government now wants Sharma to initiate a sustained interaction and dialogue to “understand the legitimate aspirations of people in J&K”.
Can the appointment of an interlocutor by the government really help change the situation on the ground in Kashmir? We bring sharp perspectives.
Kashmiris want self-respect and accommodation. Why would we want to deny that?
A.S. Dulat
Ex RAW chief and author of “Kashmir: The Vajpayee years”
I welcome the appointment of a special interlocutor. Better late than never. I firmly believe that there is no other way but to talk to each other. I would like to credit the government by saying that Prime Minister Narendra Modi had said in his Red Fort speech “Na goli se, na gaali se” and he has followed through on that. Home Minister Rajnath Singh went to Kashmir and said that the government is prepared to talk to all the stakeholders.
The interlocutor, Dineshwar Sharma, is the best available IB officer, he has served in Kashmir, he has both empathy and patience, which is required for this job in Kashmir. Without these two things, you cannot move forward in Kashmir.
I am optimistic because of the choice of this officer. If he has the mandate to talk to everybody, then he will produce positive results, provided they respond. Mirwaiz Umar Farooq has said so many times he is prepared to talk. Yes, Sharma is not a politician, he is an intelligence officer. But that’s how it always starts. Whether you are from the IB, or a politician, or a policeman. In Kashmir, it all boils down to what kind of a person you are. And Sharma is a straight, down-to-earth, sincere person.
What are we trying to achieve in Kashmir? It is the goal of mainstreaming Kashmir. When you look back, Kashmir has gone through UN referendum, 1953, 1975, self-determination, azadi. Now Kashmiris want self-respect and accommodation. Why would we want to deny that? The Kashmiri separatists should not have any reservation. They must grab this opportunity.
Everybody says the separatists are handled by Pakistan. But they lean toward Pakistan when Indians stop taking notice of them. Pakistan is the fallback position when talks stop.
We need to talk to Pakistan also. We are dodging that.
It signals good intention but it is evidently not well-thought through
Wajahat Habibullah
Former chairman of the National Commission for Minorities
The central government’s announcement of a new interlocutor for Kashmir is an offer with pre-conditions.
I hope it works this time, even when it is a random announcement. The government has clearly made some change in policy which should be made public. It signals good intentions, but it is evidently not well-thought through. From unconditional talks to ‘legitimate aspirations’, the government’s change in policy is evident. On the other hand, the ‘Agenda of Alliance’ between the Peoples Democratic Party and the Bharatiya Janata Party included talks with all stakeholders. Besides, the choice of the person for interlocutor is also not convincing.
We have lost an entire generation, and this is a worry. There is nothing happening in the present-day government. Even when there are intentions in the PDP leadership to do something, the outreach has been poor.
Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti is a sensible person, but she has political compulsions. Her party is scared to go in front of the people because of the anger and trust deficit among the masses. When it was time for the civil administration to handle the situation, security forces and pellet guns faced youngsters holding stones in their hands. The challenge is to build trust and to hold on to hope, without which, it is impossible to win the hearts of the people of Kashmir.
So far, many other groups concerned have visited Kashmir. Our initiative with the former Union Finance Minister Yashwant Sinha was also to show that we care for the people of Valley. There has been limited success in the objective as there is an absence of trust. Rebuilding that trust is important.
There is little any interlocutor can do to engage the Kashmiri populace until New Delhi undoes each of its past mistakes
Aman M. Hingorani
Advocate-on-Record & Mediator, Supreme Court, and author of “Unravelling the Kashmir Knot”.
New Delhi has unceremoniously buried a few inconvenient facts that have led to the sad state of affairs in Kashmir. It was New Delhi that regarded the unconditional accession by the state to India in 1947 as being ‘purely provisional’. It was New Delhi that internationalised the Kashmir issue in 1948 and conferred ‘disputed territory’ status on J&K. It was New Delhi that then disowned the part of the state that was occupied by Pakistan and China, as also its people. It was New Delhi that emasculated the autonomy guaranteed by Article 370 of its own Constitution to the state. It was New Delhi that has sought to govern the part of the state with India through draconian penal laws like AFSPA.
There is little any interlocutor can do to engage the Kashmiri populace until New Delhi undoes each of its past mistakes. To start with, New Delhi must assert its claim on the entire state – the Kashmir issue is not only cross-border terrorism or the turbulence in the Valley, which constitutes just about 9% of the state. The Kashmir issue includes the vacation of the parts of J&K occupied by Pakistan and China. My book gives a roadmap of how New Delhi can depoliticise the Kashmir issue and get rid of the ‘disputed territory’ tag on J&K, so necessary to alter the current international and national political discourse on Kashmir and piece together a realistic solution to the Kashmir issue.
Till then, the appointment of an interlocutor is a futile exercise. Whatever may be the conversation between the interlocutor and the Kashmiri people, it will be in a language neither understands.
The appointment of an interlocutor seems to be a shift in BJP’s Kashmir policy
Hakim Yasir Abbas
Assistant Professor, School of Law, Kashmir University
“Interlocutor” is not a novel word in Jammu and Kashmir politics. It is an integral part of our day-to-day vocabulary. We have seen a lot of them, we have heard a lot of them and we have seen all of them vanish. A lot of them have come and gone, each leaving a varied set of impressions on the people and politics of Jammu and Kashmir.
However, what all of them have in common is the post-recommendation ‘cold attitude’ of the respective governments that appointed them. All the interlocutor reports have met the same fate. They are dead and buried. And this has developed an attitude of scepticism among the people every time the government decides to appoint a new interlocutor.
However, what is different in the present case is that the appointment seems to be a shift in the BJP’s Kashmir policy. Since it came to power, the BJP government took a rather aggressive approach to J&K politics. A lot of us in Kashmir saw it as a paradigm shift in the attitude of the central government, and something which did not have “dialogue” in it.
All that the Kashmiris can do is “hope”. And this hope is primarily linked to the usual set of questions we ask every time we hear the words “interlocutor”: Who does the BJP government perceive as “stakeholders” in this dialogue? What would be the recommendations of this group of interlocutors? What would happen if these recommendations are in conflict with the recommendations of the previous group of interlocutors? What would the government do if the recommendations are not in tune with the government’s original policy? Would the government do anything in case the interlocutors ask them to bring a change in their attitude towards Kashmir?
Indian government must ponder over why the Hurriyat does not take it seriously anymore
Bashir Sidiq
Former general secretary of the Kashmir High Court Bar Association
The government of India is presenting “old wine in a new bottle” by sending yet another interlocutor to the Valley. This is an old exercise, happening since the 1990s. What has changed? Absolutely nothing! Where are the reports compiled by the interlocutors of the UPA government? People of Kashmir do not take such initiatives seriously anymore.
What will an interlocutor do when the problem is already out and clear? Everyone knows that Kashmir needs a political solution and this can be achieved only at the prime ministerial level. He has to involve Pakistan and get the resistance leadership on board. Instead of coming up with something concrete, Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh has used the term ‘legitimate aspirations’, which means they do not intend to speak unconditionally.
There is no clarity in what they mean by ‘stakeholders’ in Kashmir. India must define it. It is a futile exercise for them to come and talk to the local mainstream parties and some NGOs, who have absolutely no problem with India. They fight elections and represent India here. Dialogue is required with those who have issues that need resolution.
India cannot afford to ignore Pakistan or Hurriyat as important parties in a meaningful dialogue. The Indian government must also ponder over why the Hurriyat does not take it seriously anymore. It is because the previous experiences for them have been nothing more than photo sessions. India has only made announcements of starting a dialogue to contain the security situation and began talks just for the heck of it.
The seriousness of Singh’s announcement vanished by evening as another BJP leader said there would be no talks with the separatists. It is a mockery because the statements of the PDP and the BJP are always contradictory.