JRL asks New Delhi to show clarity, end ambiguity on remarks over dialogue on Kashmir

Srinagar: Joint Resistance Leadership comprising Syed Ali Shah Geelani the Hurriyat Conference (G) Chairman, Mirwaiz Molvi Umar Farooq the Hurriyat of the Conference (M) Chairman and Mohammad Yasin Malik the JKLF of the Chairman on Tuesday said that they were ready to join a dialogue on Kashmir, but demanded that New Delhi should end ambiguity first.
The statement jointly issued by the three leaders after holding a meeting at Hyderpora residence of Syed Ali Shah Geelani is detailed below:
The statements emanating 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 Rajnath says there 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 it is not for militants but people while state DG had issued a statement that it is 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. Joint Resistance Leadership wants to put all this in perspective and once again reiterate its stand.
These statements come a few days after 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 while absolving government of India of all role and responsibility in the matter. Deliberately choosing to ignore the historical background of the Kashmir problem, its 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 Rajnath Singh said that we are ready to talk to Pakistan and Hurriyat to which Ms Sushma Swaraj added riders and caveats and Amit shah put out his clarifications, not to upset his electoral applecart and calculations .
Now the question is what these “talks” are about to which Singh is referring to? What is the agenda of these talks? Is it 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 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 effort that has no clarity and direction.