KashmirAffairs
The Case Against Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, Feudalism and Political Mediocrity
Junaid Azim Mattu
March 13, 2009
A cursory look at the history of Kashmir's political struggle that started in 1932 on the premise of empowerment and liberty, exposes the atrophies and systemic deficiencies that have plagued our leadership platforms and robbed our suffering masses of hope, strength, justice and inspiration in the face of adversities, invisibility and socio-political apathy. Instead of being bestowed with submerging servants who threw themselves into the kiln because of their faithfulness and patriotism, destiny left us with heirs, priests, head-preachers and familial legacies. The burdens of our past have robbed us off the liberty to look ahead, the vision to envision and the courage to differ. Centuries of abject slavery and lack of a voice has left an indelible mark on our social and political landscape. Our own 'vanguards', 'Quaids' and 'Tarjumaans' have treated us as sheep in need of herding rather than a people waiting to be inspired and empowered with reins of their own lives and dreams. The "Karakulli and Gown Brigade" (KGB), as I caustically call our torchbearers of nobility, have inherited lifelong political contracts, which are completely disconnected from the pursuit of those goals that we seek to achieve. Where else in the world would serfs sit on their thrones of vassalage and sing hymns and psalms of 'self determination'? Isn’t that the copybook definition of hypocrisy? The least we can do is let them know, in clear terms, that we are not as stupid as we have been historically perceived and portrayed to be. We get it. We really do. And, more importantly, our patience has finally run out.
Ralph Nader, a man of incomparable resolve and passion for social justice, says, "The function of leadership is to produce more leaders, not more followers". Leaders, ladies and gentlemen, I believe are produced under rays of inspiration, passion and patriotism in a liberal environment of accountability, sincerity and humility. But, how do you make the Monarch accountable? How do you make him work for the faith you end up reposing in him? A Monarch, as sad as it might be, has no Annual Performance Reviews [APRs]. He has a seal of nobility, a beautiful gown and a shining, glistening long staff to lead us forth. He is the shepherd of the faithful. His people, as I asserted, are in need of being herded and led to grazing pastures. We, in Kashmir, have our Popes, Bishops, Castles and Catholic Churches too. We just call them 'Mirwaizs', 'Grand Muftis' and 'Jamia Masjids'. The nomenclature and the prohibition of wine seem to be the only discerning factors. Everything else is monozygotic. And yes, the Pope is elected to his throne. The Mirwaiz is born to his.
But even His Holiness The Pope, exhibits a basic minimum sense of discretion in surrounding himself with competence and intelligence, sincerity, inspiration and grace. He realizes that symbolism motivates and moves. Can you imagine Pope Benedict standing on the Papal Gallery in the Vatican with a Roman version of Bilal Lone flanking him, idyllically staring down our television screens, ridiculing our trysts with oppression and our prayers for respite, consistently managing to insult our intelligence and scratch our unhealed wounds with his blatantly lacking bag of intellect/credentials? After centuries of slavery, deprivation and suppression, don't we deserve something a tad better? How much more premium do we need to pay in blood to buy the right to competent, articulate, educated, strong and resolute leadership?
Being the devil’s advocate, I will without inhibition try to look at this story’s other side as well. You were seventeen when our feudalistic and exploitative socio-religious system proclaimed you as Kashmir’s next patriarch. The sacrifices of willing, patriotic and passionate men were risked on inexperienced, young shoulders. But, it’s not like we had a chance. How can we even think of having a political leader who doesn’t have a feudalistic religious title or backing? Now, that’s way too uppity and blasphemous. How dare I! Maybe I’m a Wahaabi or a Jamaati [By elimination] not to believe in the sacrosanct sanctity of the Mirwaiz institution, since the only decent thing to do would be to wipe tears off of my emaciated cheeks as a man claiming to be my Pope sings poignant sermons melodramatically with rhetorical brilliance every Friday in a mosque that ironically hosted our pledge to socialistic and egalitarian reform and justice decades ago.
My argument stands on the basic foundation that choosing people for responsible jobs like political heads of revolutions or representatives of exploited citizens of a subjugated territory by accident of birth is undemocratic: a modern "classless society" where everyone has equal opportunity is incompatible with a hereditary monarchy of sorts. As a symbol and spokesperson for the Kashmiri nation, why is an unexposed, rich, upper class, uniquely privileged blue-blooded gentleman a better choice than someone elected by popular majority or through the natural evolution of leadership, for example Maqbool Bhat, Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah [yes you got me, I’m a sycophantic traitor], Nelson Mandela, Omer Mukhtar or Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi?
One of the blatantly self-imposed counter arguments is that the service and sacrifices the Mirwaiz institution has rendered for the welfare and rights of Kashmiris make an argument like this one imprudent. Appreciative of such graciousness, we should then relieve the individual members of Kashmir’s religious royal family from the extreme pressure of public duty, a pressure that they have not chosen, and that has wrecked so many of their private lives. That is the least we could do as a grateful nation. The implied unwritten role for the Mirwaiz as the nation's spokesperson at time of triumph or trial is dangerously monochromatic. Leave aside whether anyone can or should attempt to speak for a heterogeneous nation any more, does the present elitist, unexposed and city-confined Mirwaiz speak convincingly for all of his people? Can we expect the next heir to do any better? For how long will we continue to elevate to the apex of our society someone selected not on the basis of talent or achievement, but because of genes? For all the hypocritical tributes that leaders of Hurriyat pay to meritocracy, for so long as we have a hereditary monarchy in the shape of the Mirwaizary Institution, Kashmir enthrones and glorifies the exact opposite.
What will come out of this never-ending and ulterior criticism hammered out in alleged bad-faith? Hopefully a debate; an introspection into the core dynamics of our failure to channelize two decades of mountainous sacrifices into a globally recognized political movement. Hopefully this sets forth a collective plea from a battered, accused and persecuted nation to its lords, serfs and dukes; a plea that enshrines the values of egalitarianism, justice and meritorious service. Hopefully this invites inquisitions into an archaic practice of pronouncing ‘representatives’ and human almightys based on family lineage, especially in places where political shortcomings, incompetence and lack of imaginative zeal translates into more suffering, more morbidity and more shattered dreams.
The time, oh powers that you are, has come to disband the fallacy of Hurriyat Conference and come forth from behind our smoke screens to face a people, a nation and an entire generation in need of answers, inspiration and opportunities cradled in liberty, dignity and self-determination. Kashmiris don’t need a band of priests, lords, Yodas and diamond dealers to discuss their fate behind locked doors and hand carved panes. Kashmiris need to be equal partners in the journey that charts their place in time and safeguards their moments in future. We don’t need a priest who preaches down to us without the slightest exposure to the cruelties and travesties we have risen against. We don’t pelt stones to exhibit our rogue mentalities but as a last resort of expressed resilience - the same resilience that made all of you relevant in the 'greater scheme of things.'