Srinagar/ Kashmir: Pro-freedom Kashmiri leader held a marathon meeting on Tuesday (May 29) to discuss the recent statements by Indian leadership inviting Kashmiri leaders to hold talks on Kashmir issue. The Kashmiri leaders, who term their coalition as Joint Resistance Leadership (JRL) issued a statement the meeting terming New Delhi’s invitation as ambiguous and unclear.
From L to R: Satad Ali Geelani, Yasin Malik, Omar Farooq [File Photo]
Following is the statement of JRL after its leaders Syed Ali Geelani , Mirwaiz Umar Farooq and Mohammad Yasin Malik met at Hyderpora on Tuesday:-
The statements eminating regarding “talks “in the course of last few days from different people at the helm of affairs in New Delhi , are unclear and ambiguous. While Mr Rajnath says their should be dialogue with both Kashmir and Pakistan but Both “Kashmir and Kashmiri is ours” Ms. Swaraj puts a rider and says no talks with Pakistan unless “terror is stopped “then Mr Amit Shah gives a spin to the ceasefire that’s it’s not for militants but people while state DG had issued a statement that it’s for militants to come back home. All this ambiguity leaves little room to consider the talk about talks seriously with a purpose or warrant a response. Join Resistance Leadership wants to put all this in perspective and once again reiterate its stand
These statements comes a few days after Mr Modi said in srinagar that the panacea to the Kashmir problem according to him is “development “and “peace “is a prerequisite for that to happen , putting the onus of bringing peace on people will absolving government of India of all role and responsibility in the matter. deliberately Choosing to ignore the historical background of the Kashmir problem it’s internal and external dimensions the reason for the presence of lakhs of his troops here the daily aggression and the highly volatile situation on ground and near LOC in the conflict ridden region . It was like Mr Modi was playing a cruel joke on the people .
Then a few days back Mr Rajnath Singh said that we are ready to talk to Pakistan and Hurriyat to which Ms Sushma Swaraj added riders and caveats and Mr Amit shah put out his clarifications , not to upset his electoral applecart and calculations .
Now the question is what is this” talks “about to which Mr Singh is referring?what is the agenda of these talks? Is it be about Mr Modi’s suggestion of development ?
JRL does not want to score points by highlighting the discrepancies and conflicts in their statements but wants to understand what GOI is conveying through them to respond accordingly.
JRL said that since people of J&K are at the receiving end of the lingering 70 year old conflict , being the worst affected ,we are most keen to find an end to it. And hence have always advocated that being a political and human issue it needs to be addressed likewise, not militarily as GOI has been doing. And for a political redressal of the conflict dialogue among stakeholders is the best process and option available. As J&K is a divided territory and half of it is in Pakistan , this dispute has three stakeholders India Pakistan and people of this land. Meaningful talks based on a clear agenda underlined by sincerity among all the three stakeholders is an assured and peaceful way to resolve the conflict of Kashmir in all its forms and dimensions. Absence of any one stake holder in the process will not yield to any solution. It is also important to have transparency in such a process and an assurance from all sides that promises and pledges made will be honoured. Talks that are so held keeping in view the concerns and needs of stakeholders especially the most afflicted party , to the satisfaction of all will surely be successful and result oriented.
Any effort that GOI makes in this direction will find takers in Kashmir and Pakistan. Let GOI give clarity on what it wants to talk about and speak in one Language we are ready to join the process.
The stakes for people of Kashmir are very high We have invested heavily in our struggle for our Right to self-determination and cannot afford to be part of an ambiguous efforts that has no clarity and direction.