‘Who killed Lone? I won’t hazard a guess, but we can’t blame our own people for it’

Hurriyat Conference hawk Syed Ali Shah Geelani was in New Delhi recently — for treatment to a recurring bronchial problem. Talks with the Centre remain a distant possibility and Geelani still holds, September 11 or no September 11, that the violent insurgency in Kashmir will continue until the Centre gives in to their demand of self-determination. Geelani spoke to AASHA KHOSA.

How will the assassination of Abdul Gani Lone affect the separatist movement?

LONE’S departure has created a vacuum in our movement. He was a valued colleague who often expressed a mature opinion within the Hurriyat Conference. Nevertheless, the movement will carry on.

There’s speculation within the Valley that the vilification campaign against Lone after his meeting in Sharjah — allegedly spearheaded by hardliners like you — might have led to his killing.
THIS is baseless. I never spoke against Lone or, for that matter, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, after they met Sardar Abdul Qayoom and others in Sharjah. I only said that I had not been informed by them. Also, there was no debate within the Hurriyat on the merits and demerits of Lone’s participation in the Sharjah meet.

Is this not the time to introspect on your unflinching support to violence after Lone’s killing?

WE are not war-mongerers. I contested the Assembly elections in 1987, as did Lone saheb. I always tried to hammer the point that India owed it to the United Nations and people of Jammu and Kashmir to give us the right of self-determination. There is no question of us abandoning our stand mid-way.

Who was responsible for Lone’s death? His son initially accused you and the ISI before shifting the blame onto Farooq Abdullah.

SAJAD blamed the ISI in a fit of anger and he later retracted his allegation. There is no squabbling within the Hurriyat after Lone’s death. It’s very difficult to say who killed Lone. In fact, the police could have acted on the spot and captured the assassins, but they failed to do so.
Frankly, I won’t even hazard a guess as to which side benefitted from his killing. How can we blame our own people? An international inquiry should be held into his assassination.

Do you see any chance of dialogue on Kashmir with the Centre, with or without Islamabad?

IN my book Payam-e-Akhreen, I set preconditions for a dialogue on Kashmir: New Delhi should accept the disputed character of Kashmir’s territory; withdraw all forces from the state; release all detenues and permit us to indulge in political activities. Thereafter, India should implement the United Nations resolution.

You remain an unshakeable pro-Pakistani hawk. That’s way the Indian Government sees and Prof Abdul Gani Bhat as impediments to a dialogue.

NO. There is a provision for a dialogue between India, Pakistan and Kashmiris within the Hurriyat’s Constitution.

The world is pressuring Pakistan to stop cross-border terrorism which is bound to make the armed struggle more difficult.

THE world has to make a distinction between terrorism and a freedom struggle. What America and Britain say should not be taken as gospel. Hasn’t India supported the cause of Palestine and Bangladesh? Pakistan is supporting us but it isn’t giving us arms. Our boys get weapons training in Kashmir itself. And about arms, a determined movement will always find ways and means to procure them from the international market.

But in a landlocked territory like Kashmir, surely, arms can only come through Pakistan.
(Laughs in reply)