Nayeem Ahmad Khan is a prominent face of Pro-freedom Movement of Kashmir. Being a senior face of Hurriyat (M), Nayeem Khan has spent several years of his life in Indian prisons.
In an exclusive interview with ‘The Kashmir Scenario Team’, Nayeem Ahmad Khan talks to Rameez Makhdoomi, Shahzad Hussain Hamdani & Kaiser A.Mir.
The recent trip of APHC delegation to Pakistan has been welcomed and criticized by many voices. What is your take on this?
Firstly i am thankful to the present generation of media since they have played an important role in the in the ongoing war of 21st century, whether it’s happening in Iraq, Palestine or any other conflict zones. So I believe that in the third world media has a very important role to play. Thus we all see you with high hopes that you represent the voice of the oppressed class.
Now coming to your question, as you all know that Kashmir is a political dispute and a long standing dispute of 20th century. Since 1947 many talks have been held on Kashmir. Late. sheikh Mohammad was once send to Pakistan by Late. Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru for Kashmir Talks but it didn’t remained fruitful because obduracy of India is the biggest Hurdle. Every statement of India and actions followed by them always contradict each other. AN example of it can be seen in the recent newspapers, where on one side Hurriyat conference Chairman-Mirwaiz Omer farooq asked from the unification of both sides across LOC and also the so-called Chief Minister also stated the same thing. While on the same section of the newspaper the Centre Home Ministry had stated that Permanent Fencing shall be done along the LOC.
So Since 1947, the Kashmir Struggle has always remained peaceful, but it is always Indian suppression that has forced our young Generation of Kashmir towards Gun. Presently our struggle is three Fronts-Political; Military and Diplomatic. SO the present delegation to Pakistan was on Diplomatic mission and needs to be seen in this sense.
Some questions have been raised that you and Shabir Shah are both part of Hurriyat (M) but you have more inclination towards Hurriyat (G). How much this is true?
See the time we entered the Kashmir Movement, there was no such Division and it was a sole Hurriyat Conference. The larger part is that we are political activists and we concentrate to check the political uncertainty which has almost engulfed our three generations. So we have always pleaded for a peaceful solution to the Kashmir Issue. See we started as Student’s League then in 1993 All Party Hurriyat Conference came into existence, but in later 2003, the unfortunate part was the division of Hurriyat into two. So i believe that the main objective is to work together for Kashmir movement and stand against Indian Aggression and illegal Indian Occupation.
In 2008 and 2010 Kashmir witnessed a massive uprising against the Indian aggression, which resulted in massive protest rallies and also innocent blood stained the streets of Kashmir. Hurriyat leaders were arrested and send to jails. The Scenario was such that many people thought that resolution to Kashmir is just at the door steps, but suddenly Kashmir witnessed a Post-mortem, where people criticized the Hurriyat Leaders of stepping back and Some Hurriyat Leaders felt the people withdraw the ongoing protest. What are the Reason which led to the failure of 2008 and 2010 uprising?
The 2008 and 2010 witnessed the most peaceful uprising in Kashmir. The movement was crushed by India which calls itself a democratic Nation, through ‘Brutal Force’. I accept that we have also been at mistake in 2008 and in 2010. But the onus lies with the Government of India who sended an All Party Delegation to Kashmir and this initiative was taken well by Public uprising. Again the promises set by that Delegation went in air and the commitment they had made of formulating a Parliamentary committee to held talk on Kashmir was found a big lie. Three persons were sent to Kashmir who was named as interlocutors. But I will surely state that leadership has also committed mistake at many instances.
Many such allegations leveled on the Hurriyat Leadership through newspapers and articles is that the Pro-freedom leaders had intermixed Kashmir Issue with Elections. The boycott call on elections is having a little impact when one witness the present percentage of voting turnout in Panchayat elections and same section of people are found participating in Pro-freedom rallies. Do you think that the time has come when Kashmir Issue and elections should be separated and not merged with each other?
The call for election Boycott has always been a slogan by countries that fought against oppression and for freedom. You have example of Ireland and even India has witnessed such boycott calls even in their own struggle movement against the British. Now as you said that elections have no bearing on the settlement of Kashmir Issue, this Statement is infact enshrined in the U.N resolution. Now when elections in Kashmir were under progress the Pro-Indian Leadership especially the National Conference stated the same thing that Elections and Kashmir Issue are two different things, but after elections they merged the two together in order to present a different scenario of Kashmir. So as i said it is India present Elections in Kashmir as a verdict in favour of India and this is the biggest reason that the Hurriyat Leadership boycott from contesting elections.
Apart from Kashmir issue, there are many section of people who have stated that the Hurriyat leadership has never addressed their basic problem what we call as “Roti-Kapdha aur Makaan” and many people also approached Mirwaiz Omer farooq with their grievances. What is your take on it?
See as you said about the basic problems faced by the people, in that case the Hurriyat leadership is minutely analysing and at least you cannot point finger on me for not listening to basic problems of the people. I remember in early 90’s there was a Tax debate happening in Kashmir, and i categorically stated that Farooq Abdullah is a Economic terrorist and he is leashing economic terrorism on Kashmir in order to break the political will of Kashmir. SO i want to state that it is the Indian propaganda to present Hurriyat like that but the real thing is since 90’s we have all been addressing the basic problem of kashmiri people apart from addressing the Kashmir movement.
Some months back a statement came from the Hurriyat leadership in which they proposed to contest the Election the state and also many such rumors aired in the streets of Kashmir that the Hurriyat conference led by Mirwiaz Molvi Farooq will contest the upcoming elections and also that the leadership has a positive inclination with People’s Conference and may support them through proxy voting. How much this rumor holds true?
Well till now there is no such decision formulated by the All Party Hurriyat to contest elections and as far as the rumour goes of Providing Proxy Voting to any third party, no such policy has been made like that and i believe it is an impression being created, since we believe in transparency and if anyone wants to contest elections then he should do it openly not under the shadow of dark corridors. So presently there is no such thing like that.
Indian State and many analysts have been projecting the Kashmir Issue as an issue concerning a small percentage of populace. Your take on this?
Yes Kashmir is definitely a political issue. It is the state of India that has tried to give communal colour to the Kashmir Movement. The Indian authorities have always been trying very hard to project it as an issue concerning the minority populace. But history is testimony to this fact that they have miserably failed in this regard.
Pro-freedom leadership is alleged of confusing the issue of elections and not recognizing the problems faced by common man?
Indian state uses high voter turnout as a referendum in its favour which is highly untrue even according to the United Nations Resolutions. Basically, we are well aware about the problems faced by common man on ground zero which compels him to vote and we do not blame him.
The Indian State and its authorities never let the pro-freedom camp to reach to the common masses and often arrest them when they plan public contact programmes and keep them under custody whenever they announce election boycott campaign. It is just a democracy in namesake.