In a rare show of unity, the three main characters of Kashmir’s resistance against India – Syed Ali Geelani, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq and Yasin Malik—addressed a public gathering at Narbal together, where they had gone to express condolences with the family of 16-year-old boy. Suhail Ahmad Sofi was killed in police firing on April 18.
Those who saw the three leaders share the stage after seven years were not sure whether it was a gesture of unity. They say Geelani hesitated in shaking hands with Mirwaiz, and was more comfortable in talking to Yasin Malik.
There are many theories on how this show was made possible. It could not have been a mere coincidence. Many believe that the people who had gathered in the town forced the leaders to put up a united force, raising slogans of Ittehad (Unity). However, those who know Kashmir inside-out believe there must be a Pakistani persuasion that got them together.
The separatist camp of politics has seen many ups and downs in Kashmir since 1992 when the leaders who owned the armed struggle appeared on the scene. They came together under the umbrella of All Parties Hurriyat Conference (APHC), a conglomerate of over 20 political and social organisations. Separatist politics have had their share of differences, compulsions, ego problems and infighting. That is why they had to choose Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, the youngest one in the lot, as the founder chairman, giving no weightage to the experience of the likes of Syed Ali Geelani, Abdul Gani Lone and Moulvi Abbas Ansari.
Geelani hesitated in shaking hands with Mirwaiz
But who made Hurriyat and why? This question has also not been answered by the various theories, from those saying it was formed by the United States, to those saying it was the need of the hour.
Regardless, for nearly 10 years the united Hurriyat played an important role is shaping the discourse on Kashmir not only within the state but also at the international level. It was in September 2003 that serious differences emerged in the APHC, following People’s Conference leader Sajjad Lone’s decision to field proxy candidates in the 2002 assembly elections.
Until then, the People’s Conference was part of Hurriyat, but after its leader Abdul Gani Lone was assassinated, the needle of suspicion pointed towards Pakistan. Consequently, Sajjad’s brother Bilal Lone parted ways with him and remained along with his faction of the People’s Conference in the APHC led by Mirwaiz Umar Farooq. That was the beginning of the end of the unity.
Geelani began to lead his own faction of APHC, and both sides claimed to be the real Hurriyat.
Today, Hurriyat Conference has three factions, and a disgruntled group recently parted ways with the one led by Mirwaiz.
Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, Ali Geelani and Yasin Malik share a stage in Narbal on April 20
The third faction, led by Shabir Shah and Nayeem Khan, had left the Mirwaiz group last year. But there has lately been a renewed effort to unite them all. The group led by Zaffar Akbar Bhat is vying to join Geelani’s faction, thus further marginalizing the Mirwaiz faction. Shabir Shah, who has always called for unity, has tasked himself with this initiative yet again.
Apparently, the basic goal and strategy of all Hurriyat players is the same – to seek the resolution of the Kashmir issue and not joining the power structure – but their approach is different.
Mirwaiz and Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front chief Yasin Malik have previously engaged in dialogue with New Delhi, but the anti-dialogue constituency has become stronger after there was no headway in that process. Except for Geelani, all the leaders fell in line with Pervez Musharraf’s four point formula. But things fell apart after Musharraf’s fall and the Mumbai attack. The cynicism and hopelessness that emerged as a consequence of the dialogue process made Geelani stronger and relevant among the youth of Kashmir. Since Geelani had opposed the dialogue process on the premise that it won’t bear any result, his stand was vindicated.
There is no denying the fact that all the Hurriyat factions have worked and are working in tune with the Kashmir policy of Pakistan. Islamabad enjoys influence over them and if they convinced them to show unity at the Narbal condolence meeting, that should not come as a surprise. Apart from representing the political sentiments of Kashmiris, the APHC can also act as a buffer in negotiations if Islamabad wants to reach out to New Delhi. New Delhi’s exaggerated reaction to Hurriyat leaders meeting the Pakistani High Commissioner Abdul Basit too was bereft of logic.
If it unites again, the APHC can even play a productive role in bridging the divide between New Delhi and Islamabad, which could consequently be used to help resolve the Kashmir issue. But the only issue that needs to be resolved is of unity.
The factions of APHC will have to show that they could sometimes think independent of one actor or the other. In the past few years, the sentiment of alienation has increased, and there is a need for a leadership to channelize that. Hurriyat leaders need to move beyond the situation where they become relevant only in case of a killing at the hands of police or paramilitary forces.
Shujaat Bukhari is a veteran journalist based in Srinagar, and the editor-in-chief of Rising Kashmir
