Editor: Murtaza Shibli

contact@kashmiraffairs.org

Syed Ali Shah Geelani
Chairman, All Party Hurriyat Conference (APHC)

Amina Rawat


Born in 1929, Syed Ali Shah Geelani started his professional life as a government teacher and at near enough the same time, in 1950, he also commenced his struggle for the Kashmiri people’s right of self-determination. Being a renowned leader of the Islamic Movement in Kashmir, he has held various offices in the Jama’at-e-Islami and was actively associated with Muslim United Front. However, at the commencement of the armed resistance movement in 1989, he resigned his seat in the Legislative Assembly in support of the public for this movement and joined a new party; Tahreek-e-Hurriyat at which time he was imprisoned yet again. Syed Ali Shah Geelani is seen by many, both supporters and non-supporters, as one of the few Kashmiri leaders who have remained committed and consistent in his struggle.

What impact do you think the Kashmir conflict is having on its people today and why?
As far as the Kashmir conflict is concerned, it is a tragedy for the whole subcontinent including Pakistan and particularly for the people of Jammu & Kashmir (J&K). In 1947, when India was divided into two on the basis of the Two-nation theory, it was declared to the people of the Subcontinent that all those states that were not directly under British control were free to join India or Pakistan. But, unfortunately, the Indian National Congress and the British government made a conspiracy to grab the state. Maharaja Hari Singh and the leadership of J&K were also all interested in having power. This, together with the fact that Pakistan was newly created, and thus its government was not in a position to take bold steps for having Kashmir, were the factors for the situation which we are facing since 1947.

You mentioned Britain being part of a conspiracy. What was that?
They gave the Muslim majority district Gurdaspur in Punjab to India against all the agreements. This was a conspiracy mainly for grabbing J&K state, as this gave India a land corridor to J&K.

But why did they want J&K to be with India and not with Pakistan?
This is a historical fact that British rulers have sympathy with India and are not sympathetic with Muslims in general, and particularly for Islam. So they don’t miss any chance where they can damage Islam. Therefore, the partition was carried in favour of India.

What do you think is keeping the conflict going?
People are fighting since 1947 when India occupied us and later made a commitment for a plebiscite through United Nations. The UNSC also noted that J&K was not an integral part of India, neither of Pakistan, but a disputed territory and for a permanent solution the people of J&K should be given the right to self-determination.  So this is a genuine ongoing demand of the people of J&K.

So why is that India, till date, has not fulfilled this commitment?
India is suffering from the arrogance of power. India is thinking that both Pakistan and Kashmir are weak states; they have no power to seek freedom or detach Kashmir from the Indian clutches. India is satisfied that they are the military power with which they can occupy this land. And the world community lacks the morality to prevail upon India to fulfil its commitments with the Kashmiri people.

There is another factor. The people of Kashmir have offered endless sacrifices but the world is not supporting us. Whether you like it personally or not, but the reality is that wherever the Muslims are fighting for their basic right, the world powers are mere spectators of what the people are facing. In 1947, nearly half a million Muslims were massacred in the Jammu region. Similarly, during the last two decades more than 100,000 Muslims have been killed. 10,000 people have been arrested in broad daylight by the Indian army and now they are saying that they have not arrested them. And whenever our youths are being arrested by the Indian forces, they are subjected to worst kinds of torture.

You often mention the atrocities committed by the Indian troops, but what about the atrocities committed by militants? Can you comment on that?
You see the militants are not angels that they can not do any wrong, they are also human beings. But you compare; there are near about 1 million Indian forces and you can not claim that there are thousands of militants. As far as the Indian government’s figure is concerned, they are at this juncture saying that not more than 1,500 militants are there, 1,500 only.

Why do you think India is keeping so many troops here? Does 1,500 militants justify their presence?
They [India] do not consider only the 1,500 militants as against India, they consider that every Muslim is fighting India and are against the Indian occupation. This is their thinking.

What about in other regions such as Poonch where it seems they are more affected by the militants than the army?
The militants are not visible and there are so many agencies under the shadow of Indian forces. There are VDCs, Village Defence Committees, who are also given weapons from the Indian occupying forces and they are using those weapons against the Muslims. There was the ‘Ikhwani’ group who killed mercilessly thousands of innocent Muslims. So you can not with certainty say that when anybody is being killed, that this is the action of militants.

What about those from Pakistan? Many have been sent here for Jihad on the misperception that here Muslims can not even go to the mosque.
It is also true that Muslims are not allowed to go to the mosque for evening prayers. I’ll give you an example; there was a village is district Kupwara, Zurhama, where local people were in a mosque waiting for Esha [evening prayer], and the local army went into the mosque with their boots and asked who ordered them to wait for Esha? They said that it was their religion Islam, the Shariah law. The army said the law is “we people” [the army] and that they must not obey any guidance from Almighty Allah and they were mercilessly beaten. The next day there were demonstrations against this heinous act and they were fired upon by the occupying forces killing two youths.

Do you think that this is in the minority of cases, but in the majority of cases people are allowed religious freedom here?
I believe so, but never the less these cases are happening, particularly in the rural areas and near the forests where there are camps of Indian Army.

Do you think militancy has achieved anything positive for the Kashmiri people considering all the death and destruction over the past 17 years?
You see whenever any nation is fighting for their cause, their freedom; the people who are under slavery think that freedom is more precious than their life. So they are sacrificing their life and blood for a just and noble cause.

That applies to the freedom fighters or the militants, what about the local Kashmiri people who are not involved in this cause, who just want to live a peaceful life but have been affected?
These people who you call militants, where have they come from? You are not considering that the local people are fighting against the occupation. Those [militants] who have come from abroad; Pakistan, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Sudan, and even from Britain; it is not the government who are sending them. They are being informed, via the media and relations in Pakistan, that there is the highest level of suppression in J&K, particularly in those areas where there are the Muslim majority. They are having sympathy with the Muslims on the basis of their faith and are coming on their own.

Do you think militancy is still justifiable after 17 years and 100,000 deaths?
Militancy at every juncture is justified when they are facing against a forcible occupation. This is human nature, and you can not catch human nature on the basis of force. They will fight as far as they have their capacity and struggle to fight.

How long do you think people should continue with this movement?
The whole nation, J&K, is of 13 million people and I assure you with full confidence that the majority of the people of J&K are for freedom from the clutches of the Indian occupation and imperialism. Therefore, this freedom struggle will continue.

What about the people of Ladakh, they have quite different opinions from the people of Kashmir?
The people of Ladakh are demanding that they should become a union of the Indian central government. But the Kargil people, who are the Muslim majority in the region, are also Kashmiri people supporting the freedom movement.

And the people of Gilgit-Baltistan? Many of them do not see themselves as part of Kashmir but see themselves as mixed up in this conflict.
Gilgit-Baltistan in 1947 was directly under the British control, and not under the Dogra’s control, so in 1947 they decided to become a part of Pakistan. So when we say that J&K is a disputed territory, there was no Gilgit-Baltistan in those areas which were not under British control in 1947 and since they decided their fate to be with Pakistan, they are part of Pakistan.

So they are not part of Kashmir?
No, not at all.

Two weeks ago in an article, for the first time, you mentioned that Kashmiri Pandits were driven out by the militants and that they should come back.
No, not at all, I was misquoted. That was a Hindu journalist, and they are naturally prejudiced and misleading people. I told them that the main factor of why Pandits migrated from this area was that they were under fear. And these people are weak in the sense that they are not fighting against the tyranny or anything which is not having any morality or humanity. At that time the governor, Mr Jangmohan, told them to go out of this valley and that within months he would crush this movement after which they could return. So under this impression they migrated. At that juncture, if any Hindu was killed, it was not for being a Hindu but for the purpose that there was some conspiracy with the occupying forces. And on this basis so many Muslims were also killed by the militants. They [militants] considered this a crime and against the freedom movement, so they killed them.

Just to clarify, it is because of this conspiracy that they [Kashmiri Pandits] left, not because of the militants.
Even in the Muslim community some persons were killed for having connections with the occupying forces. It was not against the Hindu religion.

In this turmoil of 17 years of violence, what psychological impact do you think it has had on people including yourself?
This is also a human weakness that this situation is prevailing; everybody’s body, mind and heart is affected. In every respect people have suffered.

You convey that people should have their right of self determination, but you are also talk about accession to Pakistan, these are two different wishes.
When we say that the [United Nations] resolutions should be implemented and that the 13 million people of J&K should be given the chance to decide their future, you must try to understand that there are only two options, India and Pakistan, there is no third option.

Why not?
I am telling you the reality, as far as the resolutions are concerned there is no right for the people to also decide for independence. In those resolutions there are only two options; India or Pakistan. Because in 1947 there was not any impulsion that J&K should become an independent state. It was later that this thought developed.

But do you not think that people should be given this third choice as so many people want it?
As far as the resolutions are concerned this cannot be incorporated, but if by a dialogue process all the three parties concerned; India, Pakistan and the real leadership of J&K, with consensus decide that the whole of J&K, not just any particular part of it, should be given independence, then it should be.

What do you think is the core factor that has led people to abandon both India and Pakistan and want independence, especially in the Kashmir Valley?
There are some voices in favour of independence but the majority of people of J&K are not for independence because it is not in favour of India or Pakistan. And China as a great force will never like J&K as an independent state as it will become under the influence of foreign powers. So they are the hurdles for independence, otherwise this can happen. In my presence Musharraf told Yasin Malik clearly that he is not in favour of independence.

But perhaps India would find it more acceptable if this area was independent rather than acceding to Pakistan.
India is playing a game, they are very deceiving people; they are aware that there is sympathy of the majority of the people of J&K with Pakistan. They want to curb these feelings of theirs and so they say to them that instead of going for Pakistan you raise slogans of independence and we will support you. In this way they [India] think they can compel and persuade people to accept internal autonomy with India.

You don’t think there are some genuine reasons why people would want independence; you think it’s just a game played by India?
You see whenever we compare India over slavery, the first choice of we people is Pakistan.

And when you say “we people”, who is the “we people”?
We people means the majority of people in J&K.

But the majority of people in Jammu and Ladakh don’t seem to think this.
You see when they are not ready to be with us, how can they consider that we will be with them? We are under occupation for 60 years. They should also consider that they are forcing us to be with them under occupation, and for how long will this occupation continue? At this stage there will be revolt because it is unnatural.

What are your views on the current peace process, for example, the five working groups, the CBMs, people to people interaction?
These are futile exercises. 130 dialogues have taken place in these 60 years but nothing has come out. There is still no solution for this dispute.

What are the specific steps you can suggest for a way forward?
In 2004 a European Union delegation came, they met me also, and they said that a peaceful solution of J&K is via implementation of the UN resolutions; a very democratic, viable, peaceful and acceptable solution. And the second thing they said is that they have seen the most concentration of the Indian forces at a global level and that Kashmir has been made a ‘beautiful prison’.

Do you think it is reality that these solutions will be implemented?
Why not? The only obstacle is India’s attitude. This is a moral obligation of world powers and particularly the UN to compel India to implement these resolutions. If the world community powers are not giving any attention to this human problem, they are criminals.

How do you see the future of Jammu and Kashmir?
I will assure you that inshallah [God willing] we will become free from the clutches of the Indian occupation. Definitely, as definite as I am talking with you.

Many people, educated and non-educated, blame leaders, and particularly Kashmiri leaders in keeping this conflict going due to their vested interests.
I have publicly announced this so many times that Kashmiri people; particularly Muslims have been deceived by leadership and at the top level by the late Sheik Mohammad Abdullah.

What about local leaders today?
Today is also the same situation. Somebody is having relations with India and Pakistan at the same time. India is giving them passports to visit the whole world and Pakistan is giving them money and coverage in radio, TV and in the print media. There are so many obstacles influences, but one must stick to the stand, and this is the character which we need.

Some people blame Kashmiri leaders, and some have pointed to you also.
Yeah, why not, I am also a human being [laughing], I am not an angel. But I want those people to come forward and point out what weakness there are as far as my role is concerned.

Do you personally see any major mistakes you might have made or of any weaknesses you may have?
I am satisfied as far as my role is concerned because I am answerable before the Almighty Allah.

Some people question that first of all you contested the assembly elections and then later on you said that you do not accept the Indian constitution.
Yes, that was a compulsion; when National Conference, Congress and other parties fight elections, they raise slogans of socialism, secular democracy and the accession of India, and these slogans are anti-Islam. We people are for Islam, so whenever these principles and ideological systems are being forced to the Muslims, we must fight against these anti-Islamic theories. That was the main objective for which we were fighting the elections. But when we see that the people are in general against the Indian occupation, we think that it is out moral obligation and have whole-hearted sympathy with the cause, and so we resigned from the assembly. We came out with the people because of the cause not for benefits. To fulfil this duty, it is of no importance that we have taken the oath of the Indian constitution.

So it was for a cause that you were compelled to do that.
Definitely, an ideological cause. When we say people should vote for Pakistan; that is also based on an ideology because Pakistan has passed a resolution that it will be an Islamic democracy. So when we will be given the choice between India and Pakistan, we will choose Pakistan. This does not mean that we hate Indian people or Indian Hindus, no not at all. India is having a secular system which in practice in the last 60 years, have not shown any secular role as far as the people are concerned.

There was the recent Sachar report, what are your views on it?
Yes, this [report] is a very clear indication of an undeniable blame against India for the discrimination of Muslims.

Do you have any final comments?
The final comment is that you people should have sympathy with those being suppressed by the brutal force; the majority of the people of J&K are fighting for a just and noble cause and every human being should support them.


Srinagar, 12/12/06