|
Former
gun-trotter preaches peace from behind the bars
Jehad
in Kashmir. Is it a holy war? Hasim
Quereshi debates the morals of the so called leaders
of violent struggle in the Valley in an interview with
Arun Sharma.
Srinagar, June 3: Thirty years after having sown the seeds
of armed resistance by hijacking an Indian Airlines plane
to Lahore in 1971, Hashim Qureshi -- a close associate of
late JKLF founder Maqbool Bhat -- today feels that non-violence
is the only way that can lead Jammu and Kashmir to ``freedom''.
|
It
is Kashmir alone where those who announced the gun to
be the decisive factor in the struggle, never touched
the gun. Even their sons and daughters did not touch
it.
|
``If
we are not able to soften international opinion in our favour
through the use of gun and violence, then we must give up
the path of violence and adopt non-violent path of Intifada
like the Palestinians,'' he said. Lodged in the Joint Interrogation
Centre in the Valley, he is facing trial in the court of District
Sessions Judge, Srinagar, under the provisions of the Enemy
Agents Ordinance.
He has
a justification also for change in his perception. ``Along
with the movement, we must also take into account the environs.
We shall have to protect the Dal and other lakes, our streams
and waterways, our rivers, forests and mountains that contribute
to the economy and prosperity of our land,'' he says.
He said
a political party has to take every step thorough deliberation
and meticulous planning. ``Minimum sacrifices have to be demanded
from the people and maximum benefits have to be brought to
them,'' he said, adding that this is what sagacity and good
leadership demand.
Sitting
inside the JIC, he has got nearly one lakh pamphlets distributed
all over the state to apprise masses of the negative impact
of ongoing violent movement in the Valley.
The
distribution of pamphlets is still on and a number of professors,
intellectuals and even former militant commanders have responded
by visiting Qureshi in the JIC. Some separatist leaders also
visited him recently and had an hour-long meeting.
``The
nation has made a big sacrifice of nearly eighty thousand
valuable human lives. The chief of the United Nations Organisation
finally said that India and Pakistan should resolve the Kashmir
issue through mutual dialogue and that they cannot interfere.
The (then) President of the most powerful country in the world,
Bill Clinton, arrives in Pakistan in a dramatic manner after
changing three aeroplanes, and demands from Pakistan that
violence be eschewed and sanctity of the Line of Control (LoC)
be recognized,'' he says.
Emphasising
the need for resorting to non-violent means to achieve ``freedom'',
he says, ``When this is the situation and the whole world
declares a struggle undertaken on religious card as terrorism,
then the leadership and political parties should sit up and
ponder over the situation. They should ruminate how they can
pull out from this situation with honour and dignity. They
cannot let things drift away and sit like an unconcerned person
and watch the shaping of the disaster without remorse."
In justification
of his opinion, he says the best leadership adopts different
tactics from time to time to lead the nation to the destination.
"It is important for the leadership that it treats the
struggle of its nation like a good and experienced physician,
who would like to cure fever first by administering some pills.
But if the fever does not subside, he may prescribe some injections.
He goes on changing the cure unless fever begins to subside,"
he added.
Taking
a dig at all those supporting the ongoing violent movement
in Kashmir, he said, ``If the leadership believes in the politics
of gun, then it must, first of all, take it in its own hands.
It must give the gun in the hands of its sons and daughters.
Those boasting of jehad must keep before them the example
of Holy Prophet, who physically participated in various wars
like Badr, Ohod, Khandaq etc,'' he said.
``However,
it is Kashmir alone where those who announced the gun to be
the decisive factor in the struggle, never touched the gun.
Even their sons and daughters did not touch it. Instead they
provided them with government jobs and lucrative assignments
or got them training as doctors, engineers and business concerns,''
he added.
When
a so called leader, with not definite policy and planning
abandons the youth to the throes of death and destruction
only to serve his own ego and his status, he is no leader.
The workers do not take him as a father-figure. The question
is why is it so? he asked, saying the progeny of political
leaders with no ideology, at the most becomes the heir to
the leader's property.
Also
taking a dig on pro-Pak separatist leaders, he said should
the community be made independent or confederated with another
country depends on the political and economic interests of
the people. "A nation has not to be made a hostage to
another country and its agencies for self aggrandizement."
Apprising
people as to how higher is the moral standard of those involved
in armed struggle, he said Mao had ordered that no soldier
of the Red Army would ask anything from the freedom fighting
populace without paying its cost. He had also ordered that
no soldier would either ask for shelter with any civilian
household or act against the adversary in towns and cities
so as to avoid civilian casualties, he said, adding acts like
bomb blasts in congested localities, kidnapping, massacres,
arson have no place at all in the armed movement.
Qureshi
also criticized all those boycotting the elections, saying
if the political party and its leadership want to continue
a struggle for freedom and political rights, it must discuss
whether the people have that much of patience and economic
stability necessary to keep the struggle going on for a long
time?
"If
during the struggle for freedom, demands are met one by one,
should these be accepted? Is it right to allow occupational
agents to be in place in controlling the local government
by boycotting the elections? he asked.
"However,
what is being done inadvertently or otherwise is that the
enemies of freedom are provided an opportunity of capturing
the government and its institutions. This contributes towards
the failure of the movement," Qureshi added.
|