Greater initiatives needd to resolve outstanding issues like Kashmir: Gen. Talat

Islamabad: 5 July 2009:

Talking on various issues and their possible solution, the renowned peace activist and the country director of Pagwash International, Lieutenant General retired Talat Masood says that rather pursuing the establishment-oriented policies the leadership of India and Pakistan will have to move beyond the composite dialogue and take greater initiatives to seek settlement of all out standing issues including Kashmir.

In an exclusive interview to Greater Kashmir's Nisar Ahmed Thokar, Masood said, “It would be a big achievement if we could really lay down a roadmap for Kashmir. If not for the solution we should at least draw a roadmap for the process and it is quite possible that over a period of time we can find a solution of Kashmir dispute”.

Pakistan finally took a very tough stand against the militants and operation is underway in Swat and other Tribal areas but there is a common perception that whatever is happening in Northern areas is an international conspiracy to destabilize Pakistan. What is your view point in this regard?

Well I don’t agree that it is an international conspiracy, for instance, if you really look at the conditions in Swat and the whole of Malakand division, it has been very much neglected because it used to be ruled by a prince for a pretty long time. Later when it was integrated into the settled areas of Pakistan, the respective governments failed to take care of the inhabitants of these areas. So the people of Swat have genuine grievances, in the sense that they didn’t have justice, they didn’t have proper security, and the employment opportunities were very meagre, in short governance was very poor, which finally led to a movement what they called as the movement for the enforcement of Sharia and Nazim-e-Adl. But ……but this demand has been there for quite some time, which as a matter of the fact is a reflection, that they wanted good governance and justice for the people. Unfortunately governments have failed to deliver; demands of the people were neglected that in fact gave rise to the militant forces in the area, which Sufi Muhammad had fully exploited. And obviously in addition to that situation in Afghanistan and its consequences in Tribal belt in which the Taliban became powerful also had an impact on Swat. A combination of all these factors basically led to importance and strengthening of militancy in Swat. So I think people should look it in this context rather saying it is a conspiracy. But obviously any country or any forces which may be hostile towards Pakistan would always benefit when Pakistan is on stake.

So for as the situation in Pakistan’s tribal belt is concerned, you know it is the result of neglect of 61 years. It is also consequence of our participation in Afghan Jihad. It is also the result of the way the US and other forces led Afghanistan through warlords after the end of Afghan-jihad. Afterwards the rise of Taliban and last but not the least the event of 9/11, all these factors together had an adverse effect on these areas.

Q: Do you think the ongoing military operation in these areas would yield desired results?

Military offensive is only a part of the overall policy of the government to establish writ in the area. It is not an end in itself but to install administrative setup in these areas. However, for a durable solution you need to win the hearts and minds of the people thereby installing an effective civilian administration in Tribal belt and swat valley.

Q: But political parties are not seen at the gross root level how is it possible to initiate political process there?

Well, I think political parties must learn the lesson that when they come into power, it does not simply mean to share power. It is all about providing good governance to the people. Unfortunately, good governance has been missing in the past and it is missing now. This mistake they can’t afford anymore, otherwise, the vacuum would be filled up by the militants.

Q: So you mean amalgamation of tribal areas is must?

Yes definitely, ultimately you would have to integrate these areas, politically, socially and economically because no country can afford to have such neglected areas.

Q: There are some indications that foreign agencies are fomenting violence in Pakistan. What do you say about it?

There have been reports in the media; sometimes even the government officials make a mention of that but---what is unfortunate as for as I see it that no single evidence has been produced against them which makes our case weak. If there is a foreign involvement, it is the duty of the government to bring it to the notice of the people and tell them who these elements responsible for aiding the militants are. So that they may know about the enemies of Pakistan.

The government has never given us any solid evidence that you know x, y z country or any group is responsible for fomenting violence in Pakistan. So I think these are very generalized and meaningless statements, which in fact reinforces the belief that intelligence agencies and others are probably not aware as what is happening. And if they are aware, they have not been able to produce evidence which could be so effective and should have been used as a tool to expose such elements at international level. I mean we could go to international community, the UN, united states of America and EU and tell them as how we are been persecuted.

Q: The US on one hand speaks high about Pakistan’s territorial sovereignty while on the other it carries drone attacks on Pakistani soil in which hundreds of innocent civilians including women and children have been killed? Do you think the sort of hegemonic approach would help to settle the problem?

This is very controversial problem between Pakistan and the US, which is creating a lot of friction between the two countries. The continued drone attacks have in fact political and moral dimension apart from the sovereignty aspect. But the question is when you have lost your own control over sovereignty, the internal sovereignty, over the territory then it is very easy for external powers to exploit it. So the reason is that unless we really regain our control over those areas, irrespective of how much we shout and how much we complain you will see that these drone attacks would continue.

Q: Pakistan has paid highest price in fighting war against terror, despite that it is facing severe criticism at international level, every now and then it‘s been asked to do more…. How do you see this hostile attitude?

Actually the voices of do more have now lessened since the military operation was undertaken in Northern areas on a very wide front. So there is a change in the attitude but I think we have to act according to our own interests…..and of course our interests also lie in curbing militancy and to fight against those militants who have been creating instability in Pakistan. However, we have to see that this military operation does not extend too much that would lead to collateral damage. You have to really see that the interests of the people for whom you are fighting are served in a better way.
Q: There is widely held perception in Pakistan that the US, in league with its allies, is playing a double game just to create anarchy in Pakistan to justify its intervention to take over the nuclear arsenals. What is your opinion?

I don’t agree with this theory there are many who do but I am one of those who doesn’t agree with this, because their interest is not so much in taking over our nuclear assets…their primary interest is like our interest should be that is the country might not slip into anarchy and chaos. And if that happens, god forbid, there is always a danger because we are nuclear power so the best approach is not to bother about what others think, what is important for us is to do what is good for us that is------- if you want to take full advantage of nuclear capability, which is obviously one in the form of deterrence that is military utility of nuclear capability to have strategic parity with India. But its’ real utility and value is political in the sense it gives the country a political leverage----that political leverage is useful if other elements of national power are balanced. If your economy is in distress, political situation is unstable and law and order situation is bad and if there is rise in extremis then your nuclear capability becomes liability instead of an asset.
Q: General ® Pervaiz Musharraf has been blamed for creating mess by adopting pro-American policy regarding war on terror. Do you think Musharraf had any other alternative available at that time?
Well I think we could have probably worked out terms and conditions of the agreement with the US somewhat to the advantage of Pakistan, which………he didn’t. Actually Musharraf had a serious legitimacy problem. And when you have legitimacy problem you are very weak internally. People had some misperceptions that an army person is very strong but my own view is that when army rules a country it is very weak from inside as they lack support of the masses.
Coming to Indo-Pak ties, do you think the prevailing hate syndrome and India’s antagonistic attitude towards Pakistan has further complicated the security situation in this region?
Obviously you see since Mumbai incident Indian attitude has been very hostile, although they have some genuine reasons for that one can understand that the incident created a trauma but it does not mean they should have made whole of Pakistan a hostage, I mean which they are doing…….., however, they know it fully well that it is for their own interest in the long run to have a stable and prosperous Pakistan instead of pressurizing and destabilizing it. So I would have thought the Congress after having won again with more comfortable majority would have more confidence to initiate a dialogue rather trying to gain political leverage out of it thereby asking Pakistan to do dismantle what they say as “terrorist infrastructure”. Pakistan has been cooperating so for as the Mumbai incident is concerned but India will also have to provide us more evidence, and if they can’t, it is likely that the courts may drop case against them, which may be counter-productive.
Q: Both the nations have yet again decided to resume dialogue process, as a peace activist, how do you see this development?
So for India has only said in a limited sense that they will revive the peace process and that too is related to terrorism. It would have been for better to have a full-fledged dialogue in a broader perspective. Revival of composite dialogue, I think, they must go beyond that if they genuinely want to move forward in Pakistan-India relations. What is more important that both the countries should look forward and find out solution of Sircreek, Siachen and try to remove misunderstandings about the water issue that has arisen in the recent years. And should create an environment wherein they can move forward on Kashmir as well. And of course they should improve trade and economic linkages but this is possible provided that the statesmanship on both sides understand that the policy they pursuing are people oriented. At the moment policies pursued by India and also by Pakistan are more establishment-oriented.
So you mean this attitude has to change?
Yes, definitely it has to change, unless the attitude changes, I think one should not expect much progress apart from that you will see a slight movement at government level. For a substantial progress you will have to take much bolder and greater initiatives. Just talking on terrorism and marginalizing other issue is not going to yield desired results.
Q: Composite dialogue was basically initiated to explore ways and means to settle all out standing issues including the core issue of Kashmir but so for no progress has been made on this front even India is not ready to budge an inch over Kashmir. So what is there for Pakistan to gain out of peace talks?
Well Pakistan has an interest in having good relations with India irrespective of Kashmir, I mean Kashmir is an extremely important issue but it does not mean that if it is not resolved we should have very bad relations with India because that creates other problems for Pakistan. Pakistan at this time wants peace at its borders and wants to focus on its internal problem. So it is both strategically and tactical perspective important for Pakistan to have a reasonable level of understanding and peace with India. However, we should continue to pursue on Kashmir but it does mean we should not try to have good relations with India.
Q: You are regularly interacting with Indian intellectuals and think tanks do you see any change in their mindset?
Well I am disappointed that after Mumbai attacks there has been a drastic change in their thinking and they seem to be very disillusioned with Pakistan. May be there had been a serious setback as a result they lost confidence but it will take some time and I think time would be a healer before we expect they would start moving towards some form of normalization.
: Kashmiri leaders have expressed dissatisfaction over the outcome of peace talks, saying that there was a dire need to set time frame to resolve long-simmering dispute of Kashmir. What is your opinion in this regard?
I think Hurriyat is quite justified and someway perturbed because India wants to have solution of Kashmir on its own terms completely. So for as the flexibility is concerned, Indians are not even prepared to budge an inch, their intransigence so strong that they would like to settle Kashmir totally on their own terms and conditions as they realize that Pakistan is in a weak position internally and externally. To the contrary Indians have an advantage of adopting a policy that converges with the policy of the US, the European Union, China and Russia. So that is also a big boast to India to keep Kashmir problem suppressed. So I think we have to understand and wait in the sense and look for an opportune moment to pursue our view point.
Q: What is the way forward to settle the dispute?
Well I have a feeling that if trade, cultural and other linkages continue at a very faster pace between the two sides of Kashmir and also economic linkages continue between India and Pakistan it is quite possible that two countries would realize that they have stakes in each other and they might work towards finding a solution of Kashmir problem. Having a hostile approach towards each other and being very intransigent and inflexible and trying to build up the military aspects, I think we would not achieve much.
: General ® Musharraf also suggested a 4-point formula to resolve Kashmir dispute. How do you see that?
I think Musharraf came up unilaterally with that formula as a result he lost a lot without gaining any thing out of it. You know he gave concessions without even India responding to them. So I think we need to start in a way in next dialogue asking India exactly what does it want and then try to develop some framework as how to solve Kashmir issue. So for as 4-point formula is concerned it is not necessary that we use that as a benchmark, it had certain aspects of it which were detrimental for Pakistani side. May be it was a bold initiative but I think Musharraf gave in too much without achieving anything. He gave an impress as though he wanted to solve the issue without solving the problems of Kashmiri people.
Q: In past, India and Pakistan have been holding talks randomly; virtually there has been no road-map as how to move forward on various issues systematically. Do you think there is a need to have an appropriate and well thought-out policy to bring about a solution of all issues particularly the issue of Kashmir?
Yes absolutely, it would be a big achievement if we could really lay down a roadmap for Kashmir. If not for the solution we should at least draw a roadmap for the process and it is quite possible that over a period of time we can find a solution of Kashmir dispute.
Q: Pagwash International has been playing a vital role in promoting peace and harmony across the globe, would you give us some insight about the efforts that the organization has been making to bring the people of India and Pakistan close to each other. And what sort of role it can play to resolve Kashmir dispute?
Well Pagwash essentially a nuclear oriented organization that has been striving for a nuclear free world but at the same time it realizes the fact that nuclear problem is also because the conflicts continue in the various parts of the world. Had there been no conflicts there would have no need to achieve nuclear capabilities for various countries. In recognition of its efforts in seeking a nuclear-free world the organization was awarded a Nobel Prize in 1997. And Pagwash continues and pursues those efforts and policies, so for as your question is concerned Pagwash International held so many discourses wherein people from different shades and opinions were brought together to share their view point. You know it arranged several meetings in which NGOs, former diplomats, military officials and think tank people from both India and Pakistan were invited that has really helped to develop better understanding.
As you know Pagwash was the only institution that brought Kashmiri leadership of entire hue, which means the political spectrum on both sides together first in Nepal and then in other places and even in Pakistan. So I think our contribution in bringing two sides close to each other and suggesting lot of confidence building measures both for Kashmir, nuclear and other things has been quite reasonable.
Q: How productive these discourses have been?
I think they have been quite fruitful in the sense that it helped a lot to iffuse the tensions besides providing good ideas to the respective governments. In fact Pagwash doesn’t have a solution to any conflict; all that it wants is to create a platform and the framework to facilitate dialogue between the various sides which are not talking particularly when governments are not talking Pagwash plays an important role.
Do you have any plan to arrange such conferences on Kashmiri soil I mean Srinagar or Muzaffarabad?
Although not in immediate future but surely we will do that as we think the process even if it doesn’t continue at the government should never stop because people to people contacts are the best contacts and the way forward in South Asia.

Kashmir is the core issue between India and Pakistan:Hameed Gul

Nisar Ahmed Thakur
11 June 2009

“Kashmiris must not draw a line on the UN resolutions as this is the only tag on which they can hang their fate on” says General retired Hameed Gul, the former Director General of Pakistan’s intelligence agency the ISI.

Former Director General ISI, General Hameed Gul talks to Nisar Ahmed Thakur about Pakistan crisis, Muslim world, American policy, Kashmir dispute and all in an exclusive interview for Greater Kashmir.

Swat has turned into a battle field nowadays; would you give us some historic insight about the area?

Well, it has a long history; the area had enjoyed special status. For more than 120 years the people in Swat and Malakand division experienced Sharia laws and even it continued until 1969 when Swat valley was formally amalgamated with the settled areas of Pakistan.

The people were happy with this legal system. The area was quite peaceful; there have been no crises at all. There were no demands like some bigoted Mullahs are demanding right now. Swaties basically wanted enforcement of Sharia in the area, which is a legitimate demand, but this demand was then exploited by the governments. When Benazir Bhutto was Prime Minister of Pakistan in 1994, she too signed a deal regarding the implementation of Sharia Law in the area. The same thing was repeated by Nawaz Sharief in 1999. But unfortunately the promises were broken. The governments continuously failed to hold on their commitments they made with the people of this region.

And now the ANP, which is a secular party, struck a peace deal regarding the enforcement of Nizam-e-Adle, but yet again the deal was aborted under American pressure. Because Americans don’t want it to happen, they perceive it (Sharia) to be an alternative socio-economic model for the world. You know there is no viable socio-economic model existing in the world, to the contrary there is free-market economy based on capitalism that brought economic meltdown and every body is now saying that the capitalism is dying down. Anyways, whatever it is, they actually don’t want to see an alternative system to emerge in the world. Because it is successful anywhere in the world, even at miniscule level, they fear that it would demolish their system by which they are dominating the whole world.

If the peoples’ demand is genuine then who are these elements the Pakistani forces are fighting against? Are they Taliban?

No, they are not Taliban, they are mercenaries, playing in the hands of foreign agencies; they are funded, trained and equipped by these agencies. In the guise of Talibans, these mercenaries have let loose rein of terror in the area.

The genuine Talibans are actually fighting against American and NATO forces in Afghanistan.

As for as the people of Swat are concerned I told you earlier that they wanted the legal system, that is not actually the problem. During Mughal rule the whole of India enjoyed that legal system. It is only after the Anglo-Saxon law, introduced by British; we got the present judicial system where right is wrong and wrong is right.

So the peoples’ demand was natural. But the Indians sitting across the Durand-Line on the other side in Afghanistan wanted to destabilize Pakistan. Taking advantage of the situation, Indians played the same game that it had played in erstwhile East Pakistan. You know they first incited people and made them migrate and then used it as an excuse and attacked Pakistan. And this is the replay of the same game being played out now.

Not only India, Israel is fully involved in this game, although they are not concerned about Sharia, they basically want to denuclearize Pakistan. Both Indians and Israelites are afraid of the nuclear power of Pakistan.

What about the military operation that is ongoing on in Malakand division?

To my liking too much fire power is being used that caused great amount of dislocation of the common masses. Although operation is going on successfully but there are fears that the mercenaries wherever they come from may probably come back once the operation in the area is called off. So I think it is very important that political system must run in parallel. Eventually it is the civil administration not the army that has to take the control of the area and maintain writ of the government.

Obviously operation was carried out to push away the mercenaries who let loose rein of terror in the Malakand division, that is all right, but political system must take over.

So you mean Military offensive was necessary to hunt down the anti-state elements? What steps do you suggest the government take to deal with this problem?

In my opinion, we should have explored other options to deal with the situation. I think we were rather in hurry under American pressure. Now that the operation is going on in the area, I don’t want to pick holes in it. Anyways it had to be done, but methodology has to be worked out to thrash out a permanent solution of the problem.

The question still remains there as how to establish writ of the government. You have to give the people of swat what they have been demanding since long that will certainly enable you to establish writ in the area. So both things have to be done. Otherwise, the Sharia Law will be an excuse, which the mercenaries will again exploit and use it as a pretext.

To fix the problem permanently there is dire need to have proper infrastructure, for example Federal Sharia court must establish a bench in Malakand Division, which I have demanded before and secondly there should by adjudication as what is Sharia and what is not.

President Zardari recently said that military operation would be launched also in tribal areas of Pakistan. What is your take on this?

That would be a disaster, because it would not only create a mess but would also render more people homeless. We have already millions of internally displaced person. Secondly, the tribal people are different from that of Swat, they are fighters and they will resist in case operation was launched. I would say the operation will not serve our interests rather it suits Americans as they want to see Pakistani troops engaged in fighting against their own people.

Pakistan is under great turmoil, in your opinion what steps should be taken to steer the country out of the prevailing chaos?

First I think democracy must find answer to that, secondly the crises we are facing right now are due to the pro-American policies, which were adopted by the previous governments. Particularly during the Musharaff’s rule, the country has plunged into deep crises. He was responsible for causing anger in the Tribal belts, which resulted in the suicide bombings and various acts of terrorism inside Pakistan. He attacked Jamia Hafsa, killed Akbar Bughti, abrogated the constitution and launched operations in South Waziristan. So all these things together, created a mess and the nation is paying the price for those follies. So if president Musharraf is taken to the court and punished for his wrongs, he committed during his 11-year rule, fifty percent of problems will go away, because the anger in the hearts and minds of people will gradually subside, the peoples’ wrath will go away. If he is punished many things would settle down automatically.

Secondly American and NATO forces’ presence in Afghanistan is also a cause of tension in the region. They should leave the region immediately. You know to reduce the resistance in Afghanistan they turned the tide towards Pakistan. They have been successful in bringing Pakistan under immense pressure. The main objective was to bring Pakistan’s nuclear capability into doubt, block the Sharia, and destabilize Pakistan by making Pak army to attack our own people.

Western world is very much scared of Islamization and Talibanization, terming Talibans as threat to world peace. What is your point of view in this regard?

Islamization, they are very much worried about that, but so for as the Talibanization in Pakistan is concerned, first of all they are not Taliban as a matter of the fact they are mercenaries who are hell-bent on destabilizing Pakistan. Secondly Americans believe that Talibanization brings a bad name to Islam and Sharia. So they are happy about it.

Taliban and Talibanization, this is not applicable in Pakistan. The real Talibans are actually fighting against foreign troops in Afghanistan and they have nothing to do with Pakistan.

No doubt, Talibans in Afghanistan indulged in certain excess, but they did many good things also, no body seems to talk about that. They deweopnized the society and rid Afghanistan of the poppy cultivation brought peace and centrality to the war-torn country. They gave women, the right to inheritances, lot of good things they did but it is very unfortunate that no talks about it.

They are concerned about the safety of nuclear arsenals of Pakistan casting doubts that it might fall into the hands of Islamic militants. What do you say about it?

This is absolutely ridiculous and nonsense approach. Hizbullah is sitting just 16 miles away from the Israelis nuclear weapons. Just 16 miles away this is not the matter of concern for them. Are they not insecure? They just find lame excuses to build pressure on Pakistan. It is in fact a conspiracy to deprive our nation from its nuclear assets.

So for as, our nuclear arsenals are concerned they are safe, well-protected and well-guarded. No one can dare to cast an evil eye on it. If they try to get too smart in an attempt to snatch it from us by force, let me assure you that many things will blow up in smoke in this region.

Pakistan’s intelligence agency has been under sever criticism for a quite long time as Washington believes that ISI have links with Islamic militants operating in the tribal areas. What do you say about it?

This is quite astonishing that sometime they criticize the Armed forces of Pakistan, sometime the ISI. Now that the army is fighting its own people they are happy about it. Tomorrow when army will call off the operation, they will again start criticizing Pak army. They are evil, all their utterances and approach are ill-willed. They have put the whole world in jeopardy by destroying the peace of entire world, particularly the peace of this region. In quest of so-called weapons of mass destructions they ruthlessly killed hundreds of thousands of people in Iraq and turned Afghanistan into a barren land.

You have been the DG of the ISI. During service, you worked with United States to funnel weapons and aid to Afghan freedom fighters in their struggle against Soviet occupation. What went wrong that the people with whom you worked so closely for more than 10 years now describe you as a part of the problem?

Well, whenever you speak for your own nation, they will certainly discredit you and would never spare you. Actually after the fall of USSR, the Americans thought that we will continue to serve them, which is absolutely gibberish. We were not mercenaries; we served our own nation and struggled for our own cause. We are an independent nation. I am a free individual, a patriot and above all a Muslim. And if they start killing Muslims I will raise my voice. I don’t have any means to resist but I do resist with my tongue.

As a matter of the fact, what the Americans do, they are tarnishing the image of their own nation. The policies they are pursuing are again destructive for their own people. Their policies are in fact directed and steered by Israelis and by the Indians now. Both of them are mysterious and aggressors by nature. Israel is an artificial state, they have aggressed against Palestinian people and they continue to make them suffer. Indians are also aggressors; they have first of all attacked Pakistan a thrice and occupied Jammu and Kashmir unlawfully, killing half a million people there.

Americans made New York attack as basis to wage a war against terror as a result it attacked Afghanistan and then virtually occupied Iraq. Do you think Bin Laden was really the mastermind behind this attack?

I am on record and have said it many times that the terrorist attack on New York was designed and implemented by Jewish and American neo-cones just to use it as pretext to coax up the world. But they failed in their designs. Under the pretext of war against terror they destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan. Besides confining china, their main objective was to capture oil fields and take hold of the natural resources in this region. In Iraq they tried a lot to divide Iraqi people to give a wider protective shield to Israel.

President Musharraf made Pakistan a front line state against war on terror. You strongly criticized his policies; do you think Pakistan had any other option available at that time?

Yes, we should have set our own priorities without bowing to the American dictates. We should have conveyed them that we will cut our relations with Taliban. We will try to stop our people from going into Afghanistan but you will not demand from us to give air bases. But see what happened. The attack was carried out in New York, not a single person was arrested there why?

To the contrary we arrested more than 700 people and handed them over to America. When America attacked Afghanistan lot of people went to Iran, have they handed over a single person? No. all of the three families of Osma left via Iran not via Pakistan but have they captured any one of them? What they have done to Iran? Where does Pakistan stand today? So actually our policies have boomeranged on us. “Musharraf is a tyrant an intellectual joker”; he indulged in gross excess against our own people.

He has gone now but the stories of his corruption still hound the people. I know what his financial assets were. Now he has got a palatial house in Islamabad. He is touring the world and has got a million pound flat in London. Where he got this money from?

Musharraf said it was our own war even the present government seems to have toeing the same line. What is your view point in this regard?

If you look at the initial address President Musharraf delivered the nation on September 19 wherein he said the US was very angry and we had no choice but to support the “so-called war against terror”. Later he changed the language saying it is also in our interest, it is in the interest of both the nations. At the later stage he claimed that war on terror was entirely in our own interest. What does that mean? It clearly indicates that the decision was taken in pressure and has nothing to do with the interests of the people.

It is simply the metamorphosis that has taken place in the minds of rulers. They did not stand up to Americans. Present government has also come into power through a deal. The NRO-democracy is result of the deal, and it is because of this deal they are confined and bound. Actually it is just the greed, fear and lust for power that makes the rulers to bend to American diktats.

You also hold Musharraf responsible for damaging Kashmir cause for offering alternative solutions. In your opinion what is the solution of Kashmir issue?

I think at the moment UN resolutions are the only viable solution. This is an agreed formula, accepted and acknowledged by the leadership of India, Pakistan and the world community.

So for as Musharraf’s Kashmir policy is concerned I don’t agree with his point of view that actually leads to the division of Kashmir. No division is acceptable. Why should we divide a nation that has given unprecedented sacrifices for their legitimate right, the right to self determination? They are not a flock of cattle that any one can divide them. No not at all, they have a glorious history; they have their own culture, tradition and their own values.

As for as the solution of Kashmir tangle is concerned, personally, I want Kashmiris’ will to prevail and there will is not with India. According to partition plan if they want to join Pakistan, well there is no problem, they have every right to choose their political fate. They can decide what they like…. But let say they move away from it even if they join Pakistan they must join Pakistan conditionally because our rulers have failed to govern the country according to the wishes of our own people and in line with the vision of our founding father.

So Kashmiris must enjoy an autonomous status, whereby Pakistan can have only the responsibility to deal with the issues related to defense, foreign affairs, currency and nothing else. In my opinion that will be a good position for Kashmiris to take. Luckily the constitution of Pakistan says that future status of Kashmir will be decided only after the merger. So there is a provision in the constitution of Pakistan, whereby, Kashmiris can diktat their terms to Pakistan.

Secondly Kashmir is surrounded by four nuclear powers; therefore, it is very important that it should not become a play field between them. Even then if Kashmiris decide that they have to go independent, it is their right. But under the present circumstances, it is imperative that they must not draw a line on the UN resolutions as this is the only tag on which they can hang their fate on.

Are you satisfied with present government’s policy on Kashmir?

No, presently I am not satisfied with Kashmir policy as it is being dictated by America. They want division of Kashmir. Americans want to use Kashmir as forward base against China which is very terrible. We will not want it to happen.

Do you agree with president Zardari’s idea of leaving Kashmir settlement to next generation?

Mr. Zardari has no right to issue such statements. All the statements coming out from him have no credibility. The settlement of Kashmir issue is must and it can not be just ignored or delayed. No way, you can not simply put it into abeyance. This is a core issue. To have good bilateral relations resolution of Kashmir is the key.

Coming to Indo-Pak relationship, what do you think is the way forward?

Way forward is to settle the lingering dispute of Kashmir. Except Kashmir we have no problem, we can have good relations, we can live together peacefully, and India can have transit route to central Asia. But for that matter Kashmir issue has to be settled without that peace can not prevail in South Asia. If they think they will be able to cow down Pakistan, it is wrong. They must behave like a democratic state; democracy does not only mean the voting exercise on a particular day. It is more than that it is about respecting the will of the people.

What about composite dialogue process?

What composite dialogue? It is astonishing to see compromising politicians and dictators harping on composite dialogue process. Unfortunately they have failed to understand the dynamics the very essence of dialogue. It is just a cheating, delaying tactics. India is not sincere about the dialogue. Dialogue needs sincerity. If you have ill-intention, if you lack sincerity, tell me as how the process of dialogue can proceed. So India must accept ground reality and come forward with seriousness and settle Kashmir issue once and for all.

So you mean sincerity can only lead to the settlement all outstanding disputes?

Absolutely, otherwise it is a futile exercise, in the name of composite dialogue process you got to see good faces of some Indian actress, what else you achieved so for. The way it is going on will never solve the problems.

Any message you want to convey to the people of Kashmir?

There are two messages one for the leadership and other for the valiant people of Kashmir who have stood up and fought with courage and valor for their legitimate right.

One, the unity is key to success, but unity should be on the basis of principles. There are two things which can be made as a basis to forge unity at leadership level A). No division of Kashmir. B). Right of self-determination as envisaged in the UN resolutions.

These two things I think can provide a strong basis to establish complete unanimity within the leadership so they must get united and evolve a broad based consensus on these two basic principles. Kashmiris are very intelligent but in many cases they are self-willed. So what I mean to say is that the leadership at the moment should burry their differences get united to lead the movement with wisdom and collective approach.

Two, so for as the Kashmiri people are concerned, particularly the youth of Kashmir, they must not think that their sacrifices would go in vain. In my opinion Kashmiris are witnessing the last round of imperialistic power. And the day is very near when they will achieve their cherished goal for which they rendered great sacrifices. (Inshallah).

Taking part in elections directly or indirectly amounts to treason: UJC Chief

Any body who supports election process directly or indirectly amounts to treason and would be deemed as a traitor of the red hot blood of half a million Kashmir martyrs”, The chairman of United Jihad Council, and supreme head of Hizb-ul-Mujahideen, Syed Sallhudin said this during an exclusive interview with greater Kashmir.

Talking about the various dimensions of the ongoing liberation struggle the Hizb chief maintained that gun would remain relevant unless Kashmiri people achieve their inalienable right the right to self-determination guaranteed to them by international community and besides the leadership of India and Pakistan.

How do you see the parliamentary elections being held in Jammu and Kashmir? In your opinion what are the merits and demerits of these election vis-à-vis the final settlement of Kashmir dispute?

SS: Well, we the constituents and the heads of freedom fighting organizations of Jammu and Kashmir have made it clear, time and again, that elections are in no way substitute to Kashmiris’ right to self-determination. Secondly these elections have proved a futile exercise so for as the resolution of the core issue of Kashmir is concerned.

To the contrary it has been misused by India to hoodwink the world community at international level, giving the false notion that people of occupied Jammu and Kashmir have reposed trust on so-called democratic system of India, which is absolutely baseless and unrealistic.

The people of occupied Kashmir including the political leadership have always deemed these elections as fraud and as an Indian tactics to misled international community thereby daubing Kashmir conflict as an issue relating to the internal security that needs to be resolved through democratic process and mutual dialogue. And at the same time India has been using these elections a tool to cover the unprecedented human rights violations perpetrated by its troops in the occupied territory.

So, we have appealed the people not to support or participate in this bogus exercise. Any body who supports this process directly or indirectly amounts to treason and would be deemed as a traitor of the red hot blood of half a million Kashmir martyrs.

We have also appealed the Hurriyat leaders to come out from their drawing rooms and launch a comprehensive poll boycott campaign just to educate the masses about the fatal consequences of militarily controlled electioneering process, which can prove detrimental to the sacred cause of freedom.

UJC has yet again asked people to boycott polls, but during the recent Assembly elections people rejected the call and voted in huge numbers, which the critics by and large termed as peoples’ verdict against separatists. What do you say about it? Who is at fault, masses or the separatist leadership?

SS: I disagree with this impression or conclusion, diagonally. Regarding the turn over, our view point is quite different than what it has been articulated. The figure being quoted that there has been around 66% voting turn out during the recent so-called assembly elections, is absolutely wrong. In main cities and towns like Srinagar, Islamabad, Baramulla, Pulwama, Shopian and other major towns there has been a successful poll boycott campaign, though the forces present there with the help local pro-Indian elements tried a lot to cast fictitious vote—but ---- the people demonstrated overwhelmingly and refused to cast vote. It is example of urban areas. In rural areas, where there is massive troop’s concentration, people were harassed and threatened by the troops; the residents in these areas were warned of dire consequences and were categorically told that they will not be tolerated in case they did not come out for the vote.

In far-flung areas particularly the areas adjacent to borders and cantonment areas, army personnel by themselves filled the ballot boxes. The army personnel, in civil clothing, made long queues out side polling booths and later unleashed video footage terming them as Kashmiris.

However, I do admit that there are some areas where people did cast votes, but they made it clear that their vote was not against the freedom movement or against the separatist leadership, rather they made it crystal clear that they voted because they were lacking the basic amenities for last two decades.

At the same time mainstream political parties during the election campaign repeatedly narrated that they too stand for the ultimate resolution of Kashmir dispute. During the public meetings, they also admitted the fact that these elections have no bearing on the future dispensation of Kashmir.

Don’t you think the mainstream political parties used it as triumph card to woo the voters?

SS: Yes definitely for their pretty interests they took advantage of the situation and exploited the aspirations of innocent people.

While talking of poll-boycott, there is difference of opinion even Hurriyat is divided on this issue saying that this is a non-issue. How do you justify the boycott call and what is your logic as why should the people in Kashmir stay away from electioneering?

SS: Well, if you remember just after the recent assembly elections, the Indian state-craft both political and military leadership issued statements, wherein they stated that the separatists in Kashmir and Pak should learn the lesson that they can not deceive people in future. They also claimed that Kashmiris have come to know that there interests are well secured and related with the democratic system of India.

And secondly, Indians capitalized this election turnout at international level by parroting the same words that Kashmiris have yet again reposed their trust on democratic system of India. That is why we have always been against these sham elections which have nothing to do with Kashmir and Kashmiris but to strengthen India hand in the state.

Let me tell you one thing, elections in the disputed state have always been exploited by India. They have been exploiting in past, exploiting at present and will exploit it in future.

And about the much talked about democratic system of India let me tell you, the elections held in presence of over 700,000 military and paramilitary troops have no legal justification whatsoever. Imposing undeclared curfew, fortifying the constituencies and the polling booths by deploying massive troops, in such a hostile situation no democratic process can take place. What is democracy? Democracy means freedom of expression, if you allow mainstream political parties to come and run their campaign, why don’t you allow the separatists to use exercise this right.

Rather it is an imposed selection. Elections mean exercise of franchise, whereby, the people exercise democratic right in a free, fair and friendly atmosphere, which is totally lacking in the state of Jammu and Kashmir.

The people who want to play Kashmiris’ case in Indian parliament must bear in mind that this is the same institution where a resolution regarding the draconian laws, like POTA, TADA and AFSPA, was agreed unanimously that give protection and immense powers to the armed forces of India to carry out genocide in Kashmir.

This is the same institution which adopted a unanimous resolution in 1994 saying that every government is duty bound to strengthen the bond between state and the center making sure that Jammu and Kashmir of 1947 including AJK is the integral part of India.

This resolution is still hanging like a sword. Any person, who says that he will go to the parliament to plead Kashmiris’ case, is impossible. How he can play the role in the parliament that has facilitated genocide of Kashmiris youth and strengthen India’s occupation in the state. This is nothing but a sheer mockery.

So these are some important issues that every Kashmiri should take into consideration.

Are you satisfied regarding the efforts being made at political front by the segregated groups of APHC?

SS: We are not satisfied really. We have recently appealed and appealed repeatedly that this is time to educate the masses about the fatal consequences of elections which are going to take place in J&K. We believe that this is high time that leadership should come out and tell the people that this election has nothing to do with their problems, difficulties, anxieties and aspirations rather this whole drama is being staged to strengthen India’s illegal occupation and to suppress the ongoing struggle for right to self-determination.

You see, Syed Ali Gilani who is heading his own group is under house arrest for last several weeks has appealed the people to boycott polls, regarding the other group led by Mirwaiz Sahib, they are still discussing what to do….they are caught up in an ambiguous situation. There is division of opinion whether to launch anti-poll campaign or not.

We appeal them to get united and come out with a consensus and go to the public and educate them about the fraud elections, which is aimed at outwit the separatists’ move that has been on high a pitch for so many months since Amarnath land row.

For UJC and even for ordinary people in Kashmir, disarray within the Hurriyat cadres has been a matter of grave concern. Will you play any role in this regard so as to bring them close to each other? What steps do you suggest should be taken to establish credibility of separatist circles?

SS: UJC believes that unless and until there is coordinated and united command of the entire movement on both fronts politically and militarily, this struggle will not embrace success. This is impossible...so we stand for united Hurriyat, we advocate for unity among all the freedom loving forces, the sooner it takes place, better is it for the whole movement.

We have tried out level best, so far, and trying at present as it is our conviction that all the freedom loving forces who are serious and sincere towards Kashmiris’ noble cause must purify their rank and file from all those elements whose credibility is not trustworthy. There are black sheeps in the separatist circles; people know them better than Sallhudin knows.

Secondly, the credibility of separatist circles, can be established on the basis of their contribution, sacrifices, their past commitment and present role for the holly cause. Then all the sincere elements should come forward positively, making Self-determination as basis to forge broad based unity to achieve the long cherished goal promised to Kashmiris by the international community.

This is the bottom line whereby all the forces can get united as there is no other viable option available at present.

In view of the political changes sweeping across the globe do you think gun is still relevant?

SS: Unfortunately people forget the reality while talking of Kashmiris resistance movement. When unarmed, democratic, political, and peaceful, diplomatic and constitutional struggle of Kashmiris, right from 1947 till 1989, ultimately failed and it is due to this failure, India’s intransigence and unrealistic approach, which forced Kashmiri youth to take recourse to gun, otherwise, Kashmiris are a peaceful nation and peace-loving by nature.

So is the case with present scenario, the United Nations has failed to fulfill the moral obligations regarding the settlement of Kashmir issue. If the big demagogues of the world fail to deliver justice, if India and Pakistan both fail to get the commitments with Kashmiri people honored, respected or implemented, what remains the alternative?

Alternative is the GUN, which is relevant and would remain relevant unless Kashmiris get the right to self-determination guaranteed to them by international community and the leadership of India and Pakistan.

The gun will also remain relevant unless the last trooper of Indian army is present on the soil of Kashmir and it has to be there till the unlawful Indian occupation comes to an end.

Secondly it is dogma of imperialistic forces, who say that gun is irrelevant, this is their own philosophy under the garb of which they suppress resistance movements. It has no logic at all. Take the example of Kashmir, 700,000 troops are there, under the cover of draconian laws they have been unleashing rein of terror and carrying out genocide of youth in the occupied territory. They are involved in massacres, killing, and molestation of women. This systematic genocide has been going on for last several years. Do you think or anybody can think under these unavoidable circumstances people will remain silent? No this is impossible; people in this world of mankind can in no way keep mum.

How do you justify that Kashmiris’ resistance movement is indigenous?

SS: It is cent percent indigenous; this is Indian propaganda that mercenaries are coming from across the ceasefire line, sponsored, financed, trained and equipped by the ISI. This is absolutely baseless and unfounded allegations, which India has been leveling against Pakistan every now and then.

As a matter of the fact, in Kashmir, Hizb-ul-Mujahideen constitutes 90 percent of force with hundred percent indigenous cadres. And other brotherly organizations are also Kashmiris; they are as good Kashmiri as Syed Sallahudin is.

What do you say about purported reports of Taliban presence in Kashmir?

SS: This is sheer propaganda of Indian intelligence agencies; actually under the garb of this propaganda India has been since long trying to launch a diplomatic move to gain sympathies of the Western World, NATO and other allied powers by saying that the forces fighting in Kabul are present in Kashmir.

But India has miserably failed and international community has not got misled by this disinformation. Taliban has no role in Kashmir and the purported reports about Taliban presence in Kashmir are absolutely baseless.

Kashmir the only problem between India and Pakistan

Nisar Ahmed Thakur

Born into a Niazi family of Pashtoon background on November 25 1952, Imran Ahmed Khan Niazi grew up at Zaman Park in the outskirts of Lahore where his mother's family had migrated from East Punjab in 1947. The legendary cricketer received his early education from Aitcheson College Lahore. It was basically the Zaman Park and Aitcheson College where he spent early 18 years of his life. After completing A-levels, Khan obtained undergraduate degree in economics from Oxford University London.

He was just 18 years old when he was selected for Pakistan team and made his debut against England in 1971. Khan has been a great all-rounder who as a terrific fighter earned name and fame in the cricket world. Some times referred as international play-boy, the charismatic Khan won hearts and minds of cricket fans all around the world thereby playing superb and indeed unforgettable innings. Under his dynamic leadership Pakistan cricket team emerged as one of the most strong and finest ever cricket teams of the world. He has the honour to win the world cup in 1992. As a skipper, his tenure is believed to be the golden period of Pakistani cricket history. He was conferred with Hilal-i-Imtiaz in 1993 by the Pakistani government. In April 2007, Imran Khan was voted as the greatest all-rounder the world has ever seen. He is also known as one of the most prominent players of the 20th century.

After retiring from cricket, Imran Khan laid foundation of state of the art Cancer Hospital & Research Centre in Lahore wherein poor people are being treated free of cost. Imran Khan is also a special representative of UNICEF and Chancellor of Bradford University. In 1995 he married Jemima Khan, the daughter of the late British billionaire Sir James Goldsmith. But unfortunately, their love-affair did not last for too long and it was 2004 when their sudden divorce took all by surprise. He has two sons named Suleiman Khan and Qasim Khan.

In 1997, the cricketer turned politician stepped into the political arena with a view to change the traditional political culture in Pakistan. Imran Khan launched his own political party, Pakistan Tahreek-e-Insaf (The movement for Justice) to bring change in Pakistan, a change in terms of peace, prosperity and socio-political justice in the country. For the first time, he contested general elections in 2002 from Mianwali and thus became Member of the National Assembly.

Khan has a dream, a dream to make his country a welfare state. A state where there is rule of law, openness and fair play. In an exclusive interview with Greater Kashmir Pakistan's national hero spoke on host of issues facing the nation.

Q: You have been a terrific fighter and indeed a successful skipper having honour to win the world cup in 1992. Would you tell us as how and when you joined Pakistan Cricket Team?

IK: In 1970 I went to play cricket in England, in the meantime I was selected for the National team. So during my tour to England in 1971 I made my debut just at the age of eighteen.

Q: You played superb innings but in your opinion what are your biggest achievements in the field of cricket?

IK: So for as my achievements in the field of cricket are concerned, I think drawing series against West Indies in 1988 was one of my great achievements, simply because West Indies was one of the all time greatest teams. So in first test mach, beating West Indies on home ground and then drawing the series for the first time after so many years I consider it was one of my biggest achievements and of course then the World Cup in 1992.

However, beating India in 1987 was not even a minor feat, remember, it was the time when every team used to have their own umpires, so in such a situation, it was impossible for India to win in Pakistan and Pakistan to win in India.

Q: After retirement from cricket, you initiated a multi-billion project of building a cancer hospital in Lahore. What was the spirit behind and how did you manage to put-up such a huge assignment?

IK: In 1985, my mother died of cancer. It was the time when there was no cancer hospital in Pakistan. That is why I wanted to build a cancer hospital, it was way back in 1988-89 that I started this project and began fund raising and really I am still raising funds, so it was basically fund raising and you know I mobilized most of Pakistanis within the country and abroad to accomplish this giant project.

Q: You are highly engaged in social welfare, tell us about other projects that you have launched in Pakistan?

IK: Well, we started a Technical College in Mianwali, which is quite remote and indeed a backward part of Pakistan. This is because I am chancellor of Bradford University and the Bradford University in England is helping me in this project. Although we started the college but next year onwards we are planning to upgrade this college to University. My ambition is to make it one of the best universities in Pakistan, in fact not just a university but I want to convert this college into a knowledge city. We are still in progress; I am acquiring land to give this project a final touch.

Q: Coming to politics; Mr. Khan would you like to tell us what was the source of inspiration or a motivating factor that prompted you to join politics?

IK: I think realization that a country can not move forward unless it has good political governance and in Pakistan either we had military dictators or we had a very poor civilian governments which are going nowhere. So I thought rather complaining and criticizing them I should myself take the plunge, go into the field so as to lead from the front. I never call it to be easy. Since then it has been continues struggle, the struggle, which I will carry on and on until I win the battle.

Q: What is the vision and political philosophy of Tahreek Insaf and who has influenced you the most, I mean who is your ideal?

IK: My philosophy is to bring rule of law in Pakistan and to make it a welfare state. This is really the philosophy and vision of Tahreek Insaf (The movement for Justice). And to ensure rule of law in the country you need an independent justice system.

Q: And your role model?

IK: As a politician I consider Qaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah as a model whereas my model role model would be Mahteer Muhammad and Nelson Mandela in the sense that these were the leaders who achieved their goals after a lot of perseverance.

Q: Politics in Pakistan is usually the game of elites. Are you satisfied with the present political system in the country? Do you see any flaws in the democratic system?

IK: Pakistan is unfortunately not elites of political Mafias; these are people who in fact benefited from politics………the people, you know, who gained a lot from politics so in that sense, it is a very exclusive club and these political mafias who used country politics for their own self interest, amassing huge wealth, abusing power that really is why, what you see, people having lost their faith, because politicians failed and military dictators find easy to come in……..

So in Pakistan what we need is basically a change here, the change by that we mean is that we need a political class that does not come from this political Mafia or some times referred as feudal lords and so on…..who had dominated the Pakistani politics. We need young people; fresh faces who take politics as a mission to serve the masses. So this is a sort of change that we desperately need here to achieve the great potential of the country.

The only flaw in the system is ………..that if you don't have rule of law, simply holding elections really don't make any difference, elections alone don't bring you democracy in the country. To have to have a genuine democracy you need an independent justice system. If you look around, I mean in third world countries, you see same thing is going on, you have elections every where but unfortunately no democracy at all. So just holding elections does not mean you have democracy in the country for that what you need is the independent judiciary and of course an independent election commission. You know when I talk about an independent and impartial election commission it is the independent judiciary that protects independent election commission.

Q: You are a staunch supporter of independent justice system, how do you see the lawyer's movement for independent judiciary?

IK: Since Pakistan movement I believe that the movement for independent judiciary is the most important movement. If we succeed in reinstating the sacked judge Iftikhar Chudhary who took a bold initiative against military dictator, would certainly be the beginning of change in Pakistan. The change, which I talk about would usher an era peace, prosperity and justice in Pakistan.

Q: Former president General retired Pervez Musharraf is said to have offered you the highest slot in his government. You rejected the offer why?

IK: Well, Musharraf in his own interview has said that "I would have been prime minister had I stayed with him" but you know it was so obvious that he was not ready to reform the country. He just wanted to grab power, so the only reason I supported him earlier was that I thought he was a reformist but the moment I realized that he was just like anyone else, I moved away from him and even I opposed him in public.

Q: You boycotted the general elections last year; don't you think that you might have been in a better position to plead your case in the parliament?

IK: Not at all, these elections were a big conspiracy against Pakistan. In fact these elections were forced on Pakistan by Bush Administration; they wanted to prop up Musharraf so that he could support US policies, which is basically meant to use our own army to bomb our own people in tribal areas. So to prop up Musharraf, they wanted a liberal alliance; they needed Pakistan Peoples Party to give a civilian face to dictatorship and this domination was pushed through by the Bush administration.

Following the November 3 Emergency, every party decided to boycott polls even the PPP chairperson Benazir Bhutto decided to boycott but remember what happened, we had Negroponte and Richard Boucher immediately rush Pakistan to annul the decision. So the reason we boycotted elections was that you can not have free and fair elections while 60% of your judges are being suspended.

Secondly the election commission was appointed by Musharraf, and the media was muzzled, you know the politicians were under arrest and within a short span of time we were supposed to have elections…...

I mean this was the situation, I think every party should have boycotted the elections, waited until the judiciary should have been reinstated and then we should have fought elections.

Q: The elections were supposed to be fair enough what do you say about it?

IK: Yes, on the polling day there was not so much rigging that is accepted but there has been pre-poll rigging as emergency was not lifted completely and whole government machinery was helping the Q-league (Pro-Musharraf Party). Secondly how could you expect fair elections when 60% judges are sacked and media is muzzled, you know most popular Current Affair programmes were taken off the air.

Q: Now that president Musharraf has gone. Do you see any change in the system and are you satisfied the way country is being governed?

IK: Nothing has changed instead of Musharraf we have Asif Ali Zardari, who is enjoying the power. He has all the powers the Musharraf had. We have parliamentary democracy but president, which is in fact a ceremonial position, has become the chief executive. We have a dummy parliament same as in the time of Musharraf and we have same judges appointed by him, the same election commission so nothing has really changed. With regard to governance it has gone down even further because rather than getting a cabinet of qualified people in Pakistan Mr. Zardari has got his conies to run the show.

Q: Pakistan is facing some daunting challenges both at national as well as international level. In your opinion what steps should be taken to take the country out of this chaos and confusion?

IK: Well the first big challenge for us is that our own army is fighting our own people in Tribal areas and it must stop immediately. I think army is not the solution as situation has gone from bad to worse by sending army in these areas. The solution is to hold dialogue with all groups, indeed it is a slow process, but there is completely a mess and we should never ever use our own army against our own people. So there is a dire need to change this strategy completely, but I think there won't be peace until NATO forces leave Afghanistan. But at least we should withdraw our forces from tribal areas and instead of using Army, Frontier core and frontier constabulary should be used to maintain law and order situation in these areas.

Secondly, there is economic crisis. The only way to solve this issue is that we need a credible government in the country. Unfortunately the present government has no credibility whatsoever. The problem we have is that our expenditures are more than the revenue being generated. The reason we don't have revenue is because the rich people in the country don't pay taxes, the powerful people don't pay taxes. So first of all we have to have a credible government where prime minister, ministers, cabinet and the parliament members pay taxes themselves. And then remove all tax holidays for the rich, the real estate people don't pay tax, the stock exchange where people make billions don't pay taxes. Agriculture income is tax-free then we have money whitening schemes. So to raise revenues we have to change the whole system, cut down our expenditures. I mean this is basic economics for this you need a strong and honest leadership.

To boost up the economy, we need foreign investment. We need overseas Pakistanis to come and invest but they don't come here because there is so much corruption in the country, therefore we need to fix our governing system. But unfortunately, without having a powerful independent judiciary system you can not fix the problems. So these are the steps we must take to deal with the issue confronting the nation.

Q: Who is responsible for all this…….?

IK: You see there has been a steady deterioration over the years, Pakistan has gradually gone down due to the mixture of military dictators and corrupt politicians all have combined to make us into what we are right now. To correct this we need a powerful and independent judiciary, which is now the movement, being led by Chudhary Iftikhar and secondly we need free and fair elections so that we have genuine representatives in the government.

Q: Coming to Indo-Pak relationship, following the Mumbai incident both the nations are yet again at loggerheads in your opinion what steps should be taken to avoid tension between the two arch rivals?

IK: Terrorism is a common threat in India and Pakistan. To deal with this problem there should be a joint commission of our intelligence agencies, they should get together, share intelligence so as to get rid of this menace.

But the basic question is….why do we have terrorism in our countries? It is due the lack of justice. You know terrorism is something that can be fought with moral authority not with guns and bombs. The first thing you have to do is to get to the root causes of this problem. You have to see as why people blow themselves up and know why people do suicide attacks. I am afraid if you fail to get to the root causes, you may not be able to tackle this issue.

There are political reasons behind this--------------so unless you sort-out the political problems we will always have tension.

Q: What about Kashmir issue and how do you see the Kashmiris' struggle for right to self-determination?

Kashmir is the key issue, you know between India and Pakistan, bigger impediment in our relation is Kashmir problem. I am afraid there is too much resistance in India to deal with this problem; you know just palming off and on, saying it were the terrorists from Pakistan is not a solution to the problem. First you have to acknowledge the fact that there is problem in Kashmir; you see there were millions of people in Kashmir who turned out on streets, protesting peacefully for Azadi, you know the demonstrations were seen all around the world, I mean that is a real issue that needs to be settled amicably.

So for as Kashmiris' struggle for right to self-determination is concerned, yes, it is a legitimate one. There struggle is not just new it has been going on since 1931.

Q: So you see Kashmir as bigger impediment in the relations between the two nations?

IK: Of course, this is the only problem. What else problem does India and Pakistan have, it is just Kashmir problem that has been hampering relations between the two nations. Had this problem been sorted out the subcontinent would have moved forward. I mean we would have achieved a lot from mutual co-operation.

It is very unfortunate that despite the pledges given to the people of Kashmir by Indian leadership that they would be given the right to choose their political destiny as envisaged in the United Nations resolutions. Even in a radio broadcast the Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru made this assurance that India was committed of letting the people of Kashmir to determine their fate. Even though, you see, the issue of Kashmir is still hanging on and on. It has not been resolved, although elections have taken place but it does not mean that issue has been settled.

Q: What is your opinion about these elections?

I believe that occupation forces can not hold free and fair election, so in presence of over half a million troops in Kashmir one can not even think of a free and fair election process.

Q: What is the way forward and what steps do you suggest to make headway?

IK: Rather dealing militarily I think political settlement is the only way forward to deal with this issue. There is a dire need to have concerted efforts, be it sluggish but if there is a road map at least we will be able to move forward. I am completely against Army going to civilian areas so onus has to be on the Indian government, if you have so many troops there is always tension in Kashmir but at the same time Pakistan too should ensure that no one crosses the border from this side. Therefore the government of India will have to take some measures with regard to the troops' withdrawal so as to pave a way for peaceful solution of the vexed issue.

Q: What about peace talks? Do you agree with president Zardari's thought of leaving Kashmir settlement to next generation?

IK: Well peace process has taken real bashing following the Mumbai incident. I think whosoever is responsible should be brought to justice. But you know these attacks have shown how fragile the peace process was.

And at the same time the Mumbai attacks have made it absolutely clear that if you don't resolve the core issue you will always have problems. Any one can dislodge the whole process; therefore it is very essential that the real issue must be addressed.

So for as the statement of Mr Zardari is concerned, I don't think he is very qualified to make such statements, he has even called Kashmiri freedom fighters as terrorists and you know Pakistani people took that statement very badly. Secondly, Asif Ali Zardari does not understand the intricacies of Kashmir problem and the relationship between India and Pakistan.

Settlement of Kashmir dispute must to ensure good relations

"For a durable peace and prosperity in the entire region settlement of all disputes particularly the resolution of Kashmir dispute is imperative…" Qazi Hussain Ahmed

Nisar Ahmed Thakur

Islamabad: Hailing from North Western Frontier Province (NWFP), Qazi Hussain Ahmed was born into a religious family of Qazi Muhammad Abdul Rab at Ziarat Kaka Sahib, Nowshahra in 1938. After receiving his early education from his ancestors Qazi Matriculated from Islamia Collegiate School, obtained BSc degree from Islamia College and MSc Degree in Geography from University of Peshawar in 1962.

After completing his studies Qazi adopted teaching profession and served as a lecturer in Jehanzaib College Swat for three years. In 1965 he left the job to become a fulltime worker of Tehreek-e-Islami. Working diligently for the party, Qazi sought membership of the party in 1971. From 1971 onwards he served as City president Peshawar, Provincial Secretary General and the provincial chief of Jamat-e-Islami NWFP.

In 1978 he was raised to the office of Secretary General Jamat-e-Islami Pakistan. In 1987, the central executive committee elected Qazi Hussain Ahmed as Ameer-e-Jammat. Getting re-elected thrice as chief of the JI Pakistan he has been continuously heading the party for last more than 22 years.

Qazi Hussain Ahmad who also heads MMA, an alliance of more than half a dozen religious parties was first elected as member of the Senate of Pakistan in 1986; In an exclusive interview with greater Kashmir Qazi spoke on various issues related to Jammat and the country politics at large.

Q: Since, 1987 you have been heading JI consecutively, as a chief patron what steps did you take to strengthen your party?

When I assumed the office as Amer-e-Jammat, we started mass-mobilizing campaign all across Pakistan with a view to introduce Tehreek-e-Islami amongst the common masses besides extending the message of peace and love. This peaceful journey in which people right from Khaibar to Karachi participated in millions and it was the time when communal-violence was at peak in Southern province, particularly in Karachi, however, our caravan travelled across the city from one area to other peacefully and thanks to almighty the people received our message open heartedly. Later on we launched another mass-mobilizing campaign in Sindh and the basic purpose of this campaign was to bring an end to the prevailing hate syndrome caused due to the communal violence.

In 1997, we launched country-wide membership drive in which more than 4 million people sought membership of the party. So this was something extraordinary, you know Jammat was considered as a party of elites but due to the mass mobilizing campaigns, Tehreek-e-Islami became known to every Pakistani even those who live in far flung areas.

Q: What are the reasons that Jammat could not emerge as mainstream parliamentary party?

There are so many reasons that JI could not emerge as a mainstream parliamentary party in Pakistan. The main reason is that the country has always been under the clutches of feudalism and dictatorship as well as the bureaucracy. Once this siege comes to end and a real transition of power to the masses takes place, I am sure Jammat as the most organised political force will emerge as a vibrant political party in the country.

Q: Cynics say that Jammat has deviated from its basic ideology and the principles set by its founding father, Abul Aala Moudoodi what do you about it?

As such Moulana Moudoodi by himself has not given any specific guidelines to run the party, whatever he did is ……..he preached what the prophet Muhammad (PBUH) taught us in the light of Quran and Sunnah. And no Muslim whosoever can betray the principles set by the great prophet. We are strictly bound to the basic ideology. However, our Dawat is not towards a particular person or a party rather we call people towards Allah, the almighty and those who listen to our call, we organise them, train and educate them according to the tenants of Islam and the teachings of holly prophet (PBUH). Then we utilize this organised group to reform the society in consonance with the teachings of Islam. So this is our strategy by which we want to bring change in the system so as to make Pakistan an Islamic state.

And there is no question of betrayal, deviation or whatever you say. Moulana Moudoodi (AR) on various occasions has said that to achieve the ultimate objectives of Tehreek-e-Islami we need support of people and you know it is not possible unless you seek support of the common masses.

Q: Jammat believes in democracy but it has been accused of supporting dictatorial regimes in the country, how do you justify?

As I earlier told you that there is a club comprising of feudal lords, bureaucrats, and capitalists who had taken hostage the whole country. Those who criticise us are in fact the people belonging to same class. You know Jammat has always been the target as we struggled for the poor and deprived people of the country; we fought for democracy, justice and rule of law in the country. We are a party having dedicated, honest and corruption-less leadership, our leaders have never enjoyed perks and privileges and nor we accepted any sort of concessions whatsoever. People know it well…….what Jammat has achieved during the years of struggle……, our struggle has always been against dishonesty, irregularities and corrupt leadership.

Q: Your ultimate motive is to setup Islamic system of governance in the country do you believe that under the prevailing political system you would be able to achieve your motto?

We do have a constitution and other institutions like the Council of Islamic ideology whereby it has been clearly illustrated that the legislation in the country would be done in line with Quran and Sunnah. This council basically makes recommendations to Parliament and Provincial Assemblies to bring laws to conform to Quran and Sunnah. Abiding by the constitution if administrative, legal and institutional reforms are being made under the supervision of this council I am sure we would be able to transform Pakistan into a viable Islamic state.
Q: During Mushrraf's rule, MMA of which JI has been an important entity contested elections under Legal Frame Work Ordinance (LFO) and later empowered the president by supporting 17th amendment. What do you say about it?

This is not only MMA (Muthida Majlis-e-Amal), the elections under LFO were contested by every party. However, we strongly opposed the LFO. In this context a special delegation of MMA met the former president Pervez Musharraf. Led by Moulana Shah Ahmed Noorani (late), the delegation formally presented a memorandum to Pervez Musharraf and asked him to resign from the post. After having a detailed meeting we tried a lot to convince him that rather issuing fresh ordinance, elections should be held in the country without altering the constitution. We said him that by doing so, he would be remembered in the history for ever.

Finally, when he decided to held elections under LFO every party thought that confrontation would lead nowhere, therefore having no alternative we too thought that using this as a ladder we will be able to continue our struggle politically. After the elections when we reached the parliament we lodged a strong protest against the promulgation of the ordinance and made it clear that we will not take oath under the LFO.

So for as the 17th amendment is concerned, we did it with good intention, as Musharraf promised to doff off his uniform before 31 December 2004. But he deceived the parliament and the whole nation. With the help of his cronies he managed to pass a bogus resolution from the parliament allowing him to hold two positions as army chief and a civilian president. Even, Musharraf declared emergency in the state just to grab power. We had supported the 17th amendment with a view that Musharraf will quit and then we will do away with this amendment through parliament. But later he deceived us….and today, the people, who came to power through a deal, lay blame on us, but why don't they dispose off the 17th amendment now. Why do they not move a resolution in the parliament?

Q: What about MMA (Muthida Majlis-e-Amal)?

This alliance has greatly helped to curb the sectarian violence in the country besides creating a congenial atmosphere based on trust and reconciliation. And we wanted to keep this alliance in tact as it was in the best interest of the country.

Q: You boycotted assembly elections. Was it a wise decision on your part and don't you think you would have plead your case in a better way in the parliament?

In view of the present political situation we think that our decision was quite right. Had Nawaz Sharief boycotted the elections the situation would have been quite different at the moment. Unfortunately he betrayed us, first he decided not to participate in the elections and later back-tracked from his commitments as a result you see he too is in dilemma now.

Q: The elections were supposed to be fair enough what do you say about it?

No not at all. Particularly in Karachi and Hyderabad areas there have not been what it is being portrayed as fair electoral process as MQM members bagged millions of votes, how did this all happen. People were harassed at the polling stations; you know live videos were aired by private TV networks showing men carrying weapon. Even European Union commission has in its report highlighted as how the poll rigging took place.

Q: Now that the civilian government has assumed the charge do you see any change in the policies?

There is no change; however, faces have definitely changed. In terms of policy there is absolutely no change whatsoever. We have same policies as it were during the Musharraf government; innocent people are ruthlessly being killed in tribal areas and Swat valley. As a result we have millions of internally displaced people today suffering terribly.

Q: Pakistan has been plunged into a number of crises in recent years; lawlessness, peace and security are some of the grave challenges. Who is responsible for all this….and how to tackle these issues?

Due to Mushrraf's unpopular and pro-American policies the country has been plunged into deep crisis. Law and order situation is worse; our army is fighting against our own people. This was in fact a deep-rooted conspiracy of America to create a void between army and the masses. Whatever is going on in the tribal areas….. It produces a sharp reaction throughout the country that benefits none other than India. Under the patronage of NATO forces, India has setup its consulates near Pak-Afghan border. India has no justification of opening of consulates near the frontiers? There are no Indian nationals living in these border areas. This is in fact a conspiracy against Pakistan.

Law and order situation is the main reason of economic meltdown in the country. I am sure once the law and order situation is restored in the country, all the problems will be settled. It is due to the prevailing law and order situation that Pakistani investors are not ready to make investment in the country.

Q: Coming to Indo-Pak relationship: 60 years down the lane we see hostility continues to plague the relationship between the two nations what is the point of view Jamat-e-Islami in this regard?

We are not averse to friendly relations between India and Pakistan, what we say is that for a durable peace and prosperity in the entire region settlement of all disputes particularly the resolution of Kashmir dispute is imperative.

As long as the unresolved dispute of Kashmir is there, I don't think there would be any improvement in the relations between the two nations. So the two countries have to resolve this dispute in accordance with the wishes and aspirations of Kashmiri people.

There is no second opinion, even during my interaction with Indian intellectuals; I said that if we respect the Kashmiris' aspirations, they would become a peace-bridge between India and Pakistan. If the people of other princely states were given this right to choose their political destiny in accordance with the partition plan why the people of Kashmir are deprived of this right? So India must accept this reality. This is the root cause of tension between the two countries. If this hostility comes to end I believe this would usher a new era of peace, prosperity and stability in the region.

Q: What do you mean by Right to self-determination, is it just limited to India and Pakistan or more than this?

According to partition plan, about 540 princely states were given the right to either accede Pakistan or to India dominion. Had they been given third option there would have been more 500 independent states in the subcontinent. So this is not feasible even India will not accept it.

Q: You have strongly opposed Mushrraf's 4-point formula, why?

We believe that plebiscite under the auspicious of Unite Nations is the most feasible solution of Kashmir dispute. You know Musharraf has shown great flexibility in this regard, which created a mess and people did not like it at all.

Q: What about dialogue process?

We do believe in a dialogue but there has to be a meaningful and result-oriented dialogue. To have a time-bound and result-oriented dialogue, first of all, India should accept Kashmir as a disputed territory. Otherwise, dialogue for the sake of dialogue means wastage of time.

Q: What is your evaluation with regard to war against terror?

UN has so for failed to define this hypothetic idea of "War on Terror", the member countries are confused as how to explain it and there is absolutely no idea as against whom this war is being waged in which millions of innocent people have so far been killed mercilessly throughout the world.

Muslims have been the prime target so for and I believe this is a conspiracy to undermine Muslims across the globe and we all must join hands together, evolve a mechanism to thwart this nefarious design and expose the real culprits who played havoc in the name of so-called war on terror.

APHC a relevant political forum that can never be marginalized: Prof. Bhat

Nisar Ahmed Thakur
Islamabad, Jan 18 2009:

Where red hot blood of youth, ashes of residential houses, more painfully the lost honour ----- be represented by a forum like APHC in Kashmir, no change however big in situation can marginalize such forums or render them irrelevant

, the senior liberation leader and the former chairman of All Parties Hurriyat Conference, Professor Abdul Ghani Bhat said this during an exclusive interview with greater Kashmir on Saturday.

Talking about the changes sweeping across with reference to the situation right now in Kashmir, the former chairman of the APHC said, "Kashmiris are caught up in a dangerously conflicting situation. But look at their political valour, they are facing it manfully. This is like dancing in the mouth of a lion, with such a style not letting to be swallowed by the beast, however, while crying in the process, the cries should be heard and while smiling, the smile should be understood. To smile with derision is never pleasing. The smile with derision conveys what it does---------anger, alienation and turmoil."

Therefore, while analyzing the given situation let thinkers in India and Pakistan not falter and not make wrong predictions without taking into consideration the collective Psychological behaviour of the people of Kashmir.

Q: How do you see the developments taking place in the region with reference to Kashmir?

Prof. Bhat: In view of the turbulent history of the subcontinent one should admit this harsh reality that Kashmir is an internationally recognised dispute that pushed India and Pakistan to wars. Kashmir is a dispute that bedevils relations between the two countries. Kashmir as a consequence of nuclear weaponization of India and Pakistan has assumed monstrous dimensions; it is a nuclear flash point. If we choose to ensure peace in the entire South Asia region we will have to address Kashmir, therefore any development in Kashmir, around Kashmir or about Kashmir will have to be viewed in a perspective, a perspective which is rooted in political history of the subcontinent.

Q: Despite the APHC's call for boycott people in Kashmir participated in the recent Assembly elections. What do you say about it is it that the people have lost their faith in APHC?

Prof. Bhat: When I discuss Kashmir with reference to elections I take a position which is that no electoral process whatsoever has any direct or indirect bearing on the future dispensation of the dispute on Jammu and Kashmir. The UN Security Council in this regard adopted a resolution declaring that no electoral process in Kashmir will in any case affect the nature of the dispute as well as the future dispensation.

So for as the electoral process is concerned you see anywhere in the world elections are always held with a view to set up an administration to govern the people in order to provide them orderly life. This usually lasts for 5 years and then you repeat the exercise so as to give the people a chance to elect the representatives of their own choice.

Whereas to determine future of a region or people, if and when it is disputed, you don't hold elections, you hold a plebiscite and a plebiscite is organized once the entire life of a nation, unlike the electoral process you don't need to repeat the exercise after every five years. Therefore, you have to draw a line between elections and a referendum. So let it be clear that plebiscite is organized in a region wherein the peoples' aspirations are required to be ascertained.

Hurriyat in Kashmir stands for a plebiscite not for the elections. Therefore when you discuss Kashmir as a dispute with reference to the electoral process, well I am not upset about any election process, I am not upset by any type of results, I am not upset by any style of the voting by the people be it be brisk or be it just sluggish. I don't bother my head about it.

Electoral process any where in the world has to be viewed with reference to the grievances and the problems of the people. So the governments or local administrations are installed to solve the problems facing the people in any country. However, no government can claim to be the final arbiter of the future of a state, no not at all; the final arbiters are the people. Well in Kashmir the administration is not the final arbiter with reference to future dispensation, it is the people of Kashmir who are the architects of their destiny.

Even the voters in Jammu and Kashmir have made it abundantly clear that they vote neither for India nor Pakistan, they vote neither for anybody nor against anybody rather they voted for the problems. They voted just to ensure that their problems and grievances are addressed. So therefore while discussing Kashmir let us not mix-up the future dispensation with electoral process.

Hurriyat had taken a position earlier on that elections constitute no issue for us and I explain for obvious reasons as for as the future dispensation is concerned election is not the answer and it has never been the answer. India and Pakistan fought wars in spite of elections; no elections could produce a result with reference to the final settlement of Kashmir. I think we will have to address the root cause in Kashmir, if we really mean to ensure peace, not peace of the graveyard but peace at heart, peace at home, once we choose to do it I am sure that we will be able to ensure a brighter future and a better region for the people in South Asia.

Q: In view of the political changes sweeping across the globe what steps do you suggest to make APHC a vibrant political forum?

Prof. Bhat: Competence and honesty are the virtues of leadership, where competence and honesty guides the leadership no hiccups can cause its death, where incompetence and dishonesty be the method of dealing with a particular situation you can visualize the consequences. Yes, the ineptness and the lack of sanity will in every case lead to failures. So for as the APHC as a forum is concerned there needs a lot of thinking, APHC will have to consider different issues no doubt about it, they will have to discuss the situation with reference to India-Pakistan as well as global changes, every thing has to be taken into consideration. The dynamics of the change will have to be taken into consideration let me tell you if we lose sight of the changes sweeping across we may be swept away by the winds of change. We will have to devise a strategy to ride the tide of change; if we don't do it I am afraid the change may swallow us deep down. So the members of the APHC in Kashmir will have to do a lot of thinking in hammering out a strategy to deal with the challenges ahead. Well failures are the pillars of success. But you only need the courage to admit and then correct your misdeeds. This will ensure success in any circumstances. So it is very important that people shouldn't now in any case ride a blind horse.

Q: What about restructuring of APHC?

Prof. Bhat: We have to have a constitution, although we have a constitution no doubt about it, but I feel that we need amendment in the constitution that will enable us to effectively workout a strategy to deal with any situation. If the constitution be somewhat hazy with reference to certain issues, certain pressing issues, we will probably never be able to deal with any situation therefore my first suggestion to APHC would be that the constitution of the APHC is amended to suit the genius of the people as well as address the current issues effectively. Restructuring is the stepping stone rather a launching pad for Hurriyat to restart political life as a whole.

Q: As an intellectual what do you think about the institutionalization of Hurriyat?

Prof. Bhat: Institutionalization of Hurriyat is an essential part of our collective forum, because we will have to build institutions not only to sustain the movement but also giving people some thing to think about, some thing to live with and something to live for. That is very important and I don't want to go into the further details………

We will have to produce ideas with reference to the solution of Kashmir. We need people who can provide us with ideas to deal with the situation, who can occasionally float some outlines of future solution of Kashmir. We need such institution that is one aspect of it but let it be clear that we don't need to dismiss Hurriyat as just a bunch of people with no ideas, this is not fair but at the same time it does not mean we are all Plato's of our times and none other than us will have the mandate to talk and mandate to deliver.

However, we are a forum that represents the peoples' aspirations. We need to explain to the people elsewhere that this forum represents the ashes of the houses, the last honour of our mothers, sisters and daughters. Where the investment be blood, ashes and the lost honour such political forums can never be marginalized. Whatever the situation they may experience hiccups I confess, they may commit mistakes, they may probably not be able to cope with any situation and they may sometimes fall prey to emotionalism and cause problems to be faced by entire people in the state that is true, I do admit but this is an undeniable fact that the Hurriyat represents the investment that is huge and which in terms of politics can never ever be ignored, impossible…

Therefore Hurriyat people will have to proceed not only with constitutional restructuring, institutionalization but also with deeper understanding of the problems facing us as a whole. For that you need think tanks to develop links with Hurriyat and with the people and probably with the future as well if that happens I am sure that we will be able to deliver.

Q: Other than the APHC there are some political forces in Kashmir who are talking of a durable and final settlement of Kashmir dispute. What do you think about having relationship with such forces?

Prof. Bhat: Well, we will have to have a working relationship with all such political parties in Jammu and Kashmir who by one way or the other seek permanent settlement of Kashmir dispute.

Kashmir belongs to all. We will have to move together, the togetherness I talk about will give us not only courage but wisdom too, to build a secure future for the next generation in Kashmir and in South Asia as well. This is how I look at it

Q: As a relevant political forum, how would the APHC prove its strength as cynics in India media say that the forum has lost support of the masses in Kashmir?

Prof. Bhat: I think Indian's falter in analysing any given situation so also may be probably the case in Pakistan in certain quarters that they falter and they do not consider Kashmir in a proper historical, political and psychological prospective. If you don't do it you will never be able to analyze a given situation scientifically objectively. And in my opinion while discussing Kashmir issue you will have to understand Kashmiris with reference to history.

My history as a Kashmiri is chequered, I have had to grow under tyranny, I have had to bear with oppression but my beauty lies not so much in mountains or the flowing rivers or gardens the Mughals made. No……my beauty lies in bearing the burden of sanity and that is a big thing wherefore I live as a community and I live as Kashmiri, otherwise, look at the people who invaded us, look at them they would have finished us …But we never could be finished this is because we understand the art of living, we know how to bear the burden of sanity. One more important feature of our collective personality is that in a conflicting situation we choose to adjust, this adjustability is unfortunately misconstrued either as normalcy or a surrender both are incorrect.

Those who ignore the history of Kashmir and the Kashmiris should bear in mind that people of Kashmir have not given up their cause. I want to remind them just a couple of months back there was just a spark, which engulfed the entire state. The issue of Shrine Board….what happened, it was a department to department issue, a trivial issue but look at it when people got an opportunity they rose, rose as one politically homogeneous unit, they did not demand any thing else but raised a slogan "we want freedom"…this was a ladder which we used to reach the ultimate destination. And let the cynics, wherever they be, appreciate the dynamics of Kashmiris' political strategy. They strike and strike harder when it gets hot and if they don't feel, blame shall lie with them.

Q: Destination! What do you mean?

Prof. Bhat: The destination is permanent settlement of the dispute of Kashmir; it is in the permanent settlement of the dispute of Kashmir that you will not only ensure peace but also purposeful progress, the progress for each region that is again very important. And when Kashmiris say we seek a permanent settlement of the dispute they are at the same time introducing an element of flexibility into it that is there are people in some parts of Jammu and Ladakh who don't want to go with you, you can not ignore them. So you have to go together, move together and when you talk in terms of Jammu, Ladakh, Kashmir and Azad Kashmir you need a large heart.

Q: In your opinion what is the way forward to seek a workable solution of Kashmir dispute?

Prof. Bhat: You have to be imaginative and pragmatic you can't live in a vacuum, impossible, you can't draw lines on running water, no pictures can come up when you recognize the sombre political realities that yes considering contradictions in Jammu and Kashmir you have to introduce an element of flexibility into your attitudes and your approach towards the problem that will facilitate the resolution of Kashmir problem if that does not happen I am afraid we may land ourselves in a huge trouble and that should be avoided. I think when we say the permanent settlement of Kashmir we mean that we will never ever ignore the people living in the parts of Jammu and Ladakh. Even we can not ignore India and Pakistan at any cast because both the nations are deeply involved in Kashmir.

India and Pakistan are two sovereign states, I represent the dispute in Kashmir, I don't represent the state as such, I am not sovereign, and my sovereignty is in dispute when Kashmir is in dispute, everything is in dispute, the peace of land is in dispute, the grip of India is in dispute. I don't go into the semantics of words I am talking in terms of the sombre political realities we will therefore have to understand that it is through a dialogue, a purposeful, comprehensive and productive dialogue that we can ensure a brighter tomorrow better region for the generations to come.

Considering nuclear weaponization, the open market economy, the Chinese and American involvement in South Asia, considering all this we have to work together with sanity and pragmatism to achieve a breakthrough to resolve the dispute of Kashmir amicably. To seek a settlement, Kashmiris have to be content with two conflicting situations (a) we have to live, if we don't live we need no freedom, we need freedom for the people who live not for the dead (b) we never ignore the sentiment we never accept the political hegemony, India and Pakistan will have to accept this reality, well for that matter Kashmiris don't want to ride rough shot on anybody they don't allow any other to ride rough shot on them that is the principle therefore while addressing in a given situation, the forces operating in the conflicting zone must not misconstrue this adjustability of Kashmiris as normalcy or as an improvement in the situation. This is absolutely wrong, that is why I say while analyzing the Indians falter and probably Pakistanis too in many cases.

Q: How can APHC prove its strength on ground as well as on the international level?

Prof. Bhat: My strength doesn't lie in ballot papers; my strength doesn't lie in holding huge rallies, my strength lies in the sentiment, rooted deep down into the hearts and minds of the people in Kashmir. My strength lies in the realization in Europe and America that unless we address the root causes, we can never fight violence. Well how do we do it? We are proceeding towards what we have been preaching over the years that is the entire world realizes that unless the root in Kashmir is addressed no arrangement can work, no arrangement whether it be between India and Pakistan, whether it be between Pakistan and Kashmiris, between Indians and Kashmiris it is not going to yield any positive results. I know trilateral dialogue is probably not workable at the moment but a trilateral arrangement in any case is workable wherein Kashmiris should be taken into confidence. Unless they do it I am afraid we will not be able to make any headway.

This is what is shaping up, shaping up not only in the subcontinent, but elsewhere in the world. You know just a couple months back, people of Kashmir rose; they rose in such a fashion that produced music in terms of global politics there are the countries who asked India not to use force against peaceful protestors in Kashmir. Even Indian intellectuals came up with statements saying that it is in the interest of India that they free themselves from Kashmir, and Kashmiris free themselves from Indian. This was a huge statement, I don't think we don't have to worked hard but the need of the hour is to have a deeper sense of understanding and a lot of rethinking on many issues which are probably, occasionally as trivial as any issues but these issues some times cause turmoil in our ranks therefore we have to be wakeful and not blind to. If competence and honesty not be the criteria, no miracles can happen.....

Q: Any message for the leadership of India and Pakistan?

Prof. Bhat: There has to be imaginative and pragmatic approach in New Delhi as well as in Islamabad towards the people of the subcontinent as a whole. What is that? That is the Indians and Pakistanis declare they are brothers, we are good neighbours, we have problems but we have the capacity to resolve these disputes in the larger interests of the people of the region for that matter you will have to resolve the dispute of Kashmir because Kashmir is the mother of all odds, if the mother is treated, health is restored I am sure that we will absolutely have no illness either in terms of relationship or in terms of our politico-psychological behaviour.