Political value of the ‘protest calendars’ issued by Hurriyat (G) might be an endless debate, given the kind of context and the unfortunate flow of events in Kashmir. But there are certain things that can be gleaned out from how people have responded to it, and how the people’s response has in turn determined this calendar. There are occasions when changes were made on the already publicized schedule of protests in the calendar. This makes an interesting study and can lift the veil on many a sensitivity and compulsion that guide politics and society in Kashmir. Though this too is a fact that long political mobilizations put a blanket on many important social and political changes that keep happening despite the large scale political mobilization, but there are certain points wherefrom a peek inside becomes possible. Remember the day when Geelani explicitly talked about education and the schedule of exams as a factor to be considered before framing the protest chart. Remember also how he had to retract on that. Both the urge and the countervailing force that followed it are portent indicators on how conflicting ideas over matters of public importance negotiate each other in Kashmir. At times it saddens but that is not the lone feeling, and the only way to assess it. There is another way of looking at it; it is pleasing and encourages thinking in a positive way. If in such extreme situation conflicting ideas can meet each other non-violently, though not in an adequately democratic manner, it gives a starting point. The idea that one needs to underline here is in the backdrop of the latest change done on the protest calendar. The change was a response to an appeal made by the All Parties Sikh Coordination Committee (APSCC). Since Diwali is a huge festival for Hindu community, they wanted a revision over the call of strike on that day. Geelani was prompt and clear in his response. The call was withdrawn and it was accompanied by a statement that if really worked on in other areas of politics and society can allay many apprehensions that accompany the political movement going on in Kashmir from over two decades. The statement of Geelani that reads:  “Islam teaches us to respect sentiments of other communities. We want to maintain that we are not fighting against India because it is a Hindu-majority country. Kashmiris are only demanding their right to self-determination promised by India. The Hindus and Sikhs are part and parcel of our society and we, from the core of our heart, respect their sentiments. We have decided to call off the strike in view of Diwali.”

This statement is completely in sync with the previous statements issued by, not just Geelani but other leaders from the separatist camp also, on the subject of religious tolerance and minority rights. The way Yatra, and the associated politics imposed by certain quarters from outside J&K was dealt with by the people of Kashmir and the separatist leadership is also an indicator on how the social fabric and political matrix of Kashmir allow others to live and express themselves fully. But unfortunately there are elements within and without State that, willingly or otherwise, project Kashmir as a rabid, extremist and completely intolerant people. To look into this problem and allow the growth of a politics that is inclusive is a challenge in front of all who care about human life and the condition where it can really flourish. If Geelani has been positively receptive at this time he needs to dig deeper and do corrections wherever needed. Fact of the matter is that there is much that does not augur well for us as a society that values plurality. Similarly those who belong to other communities are expected to come forward and tell their brethren outside the State that Kashmiri leadership and people as well do make a distinction between what constitutes a political problem and what falls in the realm of communal.  It can be a priceless gift on the occasion of Diwali from Kashmir to all.

Often it is quoted that in 1947 when India was witnessing communal bloodbath, Kashmir stood as an exception. There was no murderous unleashing of majority community over minority. Credit for this is given to the then leadership of Kashmir, especially Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah. Although the subjective placement of this phase of Kashmir’s political history is questionable, but it does reflect a certain feature of Kashmiri society, particularly Muslims.  Yet, it is always underlined with the sole purpose of extracting a meaning that fits a particular political narrative. The current political mobilization and the changes that have happened to Kashmir over these decades are projected as a perversion from the ‘glorious’ past. Just a look at how the current leadership and the majority community have been more than wise and tolerant in dealing with things that had the potential of inflicting enormous disaster, explains the error in such a reading.

The upshot of the matter is that the Kashmir as a collectivity is very tolerant and its leadership, which is being seen as a departure from this characteristic, is well informed on this. It is something that must become known to the world. However, the leadership should also attend to the apprehensions expressed by others not with any political motive but because certain things are being talked about in ways that feed those apprehensions. Syed Ali Geelani, as a respected and mature political leader is better poised to look into that aspect of his politics.

{ Feedback at mrvaid@greaterkashmir.com} 

Lastupdate on : Wed, 3 Nov 2010 21:30:00 Makkah time
Lastupdate on : Wed, 3 Nov 2010 18:30:00 GMT
Lastupdate on : Thu, 4 Nov 2010 00:00:00 IST