Author: Dr. Syed Mohammad Inayatullah Andrabi

As more and more men and women with healthy minds start looking through the thick clouds of history to find out the pristine teachings of Islam as brought by the Noble Prophet, Mohammed Rasul-u-llah(SAAW), the blurred but a very real distinction, rather contradiction, between Arab imperialism inspired by Arab nationalism/tribalism and the political agenda of Islam also starts showing up. The purpose, great and lofty as it was, behind Imam Hussain’s expedition becomes easier to grasp. What happened at Karbala is already universally mourned by Muslims, and the number of mourners will keep growing, but no amount of tears can wash off the bloodstained fields of Karbala. However, the unique and historic moments of that Muharram have a lot to teach, but are we ready to learn? Let us briefly talk about one such great lesson:

Mr Sajjad Ghani Lone of Peoples Conference has now decided to migrate from Freedom politics to Puppet politics by announcing to participate in the Indian held elections. He was absolutely right when he said “I’m too little to deliver a blow to separatism”. In these lines, I am not going to comment on Mr Lone’s decision as such, but would like to make a point of wider relevance, relevant to Mr Omar Abdullah as well, with reference to this decision.

I have read with great shock the Friday Khutbah, Maulana Sowkat Ahmed Shah, President of Jamiat-e-Ahlihadess delivered at Gowkadal mosque Srinagar on 27/03/09. The Maulana quoted a hadith (saying) of the most beloved Prophet Mohammad(SAAW) to emphasize his point that stone pelting is prohibited in Islam, and hence the Muslim protesters in Kashmir should not throw stones on Indian armed forces which effectively includes the Indian Army, CRPF, BSF and the puppet Kashmir police. In this brief write up I intend to raise some points of fundamental nature with wider significance, obviously with reference to the cited hadith, but not focussing on the hadith as such. This is what our long standing friend, Professor(Dr) Massa’ari, a prominent Saudi dissident now living in exile in London will do after I finish my own part.

The National Conference president Mr Omar Abdullah in his first election meeting at Budgam on 22nd October has made an important political statement de-linking the election process from the resolution of Kashmir dispute. He said: “The elections will not have any effect on Kashmir issue. And whether people participate in elections or not, it will not affect resolution of Kashmir issue…” He further emphasized that the Kashmir dispute and the daily problems of Kashmiris were two different issues and they should not be clubbed together.

There have been unparalleled public demonstrations in the valley of Kashmir recently, and in terms of numbers at least, these demos might have surpassed those of 1990. The message that is absolutely loud and clear from this mass uprising is that India has miserably failed in killing the peoples’ sentiment for freedom despite the fact that after its armed invasion and occupation of the land of Kashmir in 1947 it has ruled the state on the basis of brute force either without or with a facade of democracy. Apparently the situation presents a very encouraging scenario, but on a slightly deeper reflection some worrying concerns emerge, and all does not seem to be well.

The question of moral legitimacy is the most crucial question in any human effort, particularly the one which involves a whole people. Among other ingredients, an important ingredient in bringing about the liberation of Kashmir from India, is the movement inside Kashmir challenging India’s occupation. At the end of the day, it is the ground situation in Kashmir that has pivotal importance. As regards its immediate objectives, this movement must ensure:

The renewed struggle by Kashmiris against occupation by India has left no ambiguity over the issue of Kashmir. The facts are crystal clear. Every one knows that there is a dispute over Kashmir between India and Pakistan, that the UN Security Council passed a resolution in 1949 outlining a solution by a ‘plebiscite’ that was accepted by India as well as Pakistan. Under the Resolution, both countries agreed to: 1) cease fire, 2) and hold a plebiscite to allow the people of Jammu and Kashmir to decide which country – India or Pakistan – they wanted to join. The fighting by the two armies did cease but the nightmare for the people began. They could not go across the cease-fire line; they could not meet their relatives or go to the Punjab and the Frontier Province of Pakistan as they had done for a hundred years to escape the harsh winters and in search of livelihood.

Geelani sahib must positively respond to Pakistan government’s invitation to travel to that country. However, he should take a Delhi-Lahore flight using an international route, and not board the Srinagar Muzafarabad bus for travel. There are reasons for both these suggestions. The reasons why Geelani sahib must go to Pakistan are:

Time and place determine the value of a thing. A carpet, for example, placed in a showroom at London or New York is a much more valued item than the same in a showroom at Srinagar. Not only place, time also makes difference: the same carpet if put on sale in peak season would fetch much more than it would in an off-peak season. That, however, is the realm of inanimate things whose value and worth lies in the eyes of beholder, one would not normally say the same thing about animate beings, much less about humans. Human beings have an intrinsic value and dignity, independent of external appreciation. However, that does not mean time and place do not have any relevance here; they are very much relevant, in a different way though, and yet again, in a much more crucial way.