Geelani’s 230 day’s arrest

In a world, where ideas twirl and swirl in nano seconds, the imaginary of Kashmiri youth can sway and get redirected elsewhere in the absence of more compelling figures and narratives.

Hurriyat Conference (G) Chairman Syed Ali Shah Geelani completed 230 days, on December 4, in house detention in the year 2015. The continued incarceration of the octogenarian leader corresponds roughly with Government formation in Jammu and Kashmir. The PDP, it needs to be stated here, rode the momentum of anti-incumbency against the NC-Congress coalition government on the promises of ‘change’, and the so called ‘battle of ideas’.  

This had two components and constituencies: The theme of change pertained to the anti-incumbency against the former government and the battle of ideas referred to the clash of narratives –separatist and mainstream- especially in the vale of Kashmir. In hindsight and given the continued incarceration of Geelani, both appear to have been rhetorical devices – a siren song aimed to befuddle, to be used as a route to power.

This warrants a brief digression: historically, Kashmir and its politics can be defined as a politics of subterfuge, deception, hollow promises and crude manipulations. Right from the coercion- cooptation continuum of Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah by the state to the politics of intrigue and then the insurgency interlude, the people of Kashmir have been victims of this politics of subterfuge.  Geelani’s incarceration and the Government’s U Turn or hollow and self serving promises on the ‘Battle of Ideas’ and change, and then correspond to a pattern. But, if a trend analysis of the politics of Kashmir and its trajectory is carried out, it becomes evident that it is these hollow promises and their deceptive sheen and patina that have  been the bane of the conflict in and over Kashmir-especially its internal dimension. The respective Governments of the state have taken a managerialist approach towards both Governance and politics of the state. This, among other things, means an approach wherein law and order issues overlain by a narrow security prism becomes the overarching premise that informs policy making and execution. A narrow security prism renders the state acutely sensitive to disturbances that in the normal course of things would be dealt with prudence and sagacity. However, this has not been the case in Kashmir-historically and contemporarily.  Geelani’s extended incarceration is an indication of this. This reflects state paranoia.

The state of Jammu and Kashmir appears to be so paranoid about separatists that it reflexively takes the default option in dealing with them: incarceration. The state appears to believe that the ideational superstructure and substructure of the Kashmiri consciousness gyrates to the rhythm of separatism. This is as accurate as can be. And given that separatists are emblematic of separatism, the state’s response is to shut them out from public consciousness to engineer a disconnect between people and the separatists. (Obiter Dictum, this was precisely the same strategy adopted with Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah). But this approach and strategic premise of the state is short termist. The recent past of the vale of Kashmir is an eloquent testimony of this assertion. The insurgency that hit the state of Jammu and Kashmir enveloped the state for more than two decades. The state responded with a counter insurgency paradigm which included elimination of militants, draining and isolating militants from the people and an economic development strategy that can best be described as a patron clientist strategy. While militancy in the state has indeed ebbed and what exists in the state is residual or rump militancy, the sentiment or more accurately, the sentiment of separatism remains as strong as ever.   The state may have won the numbers game but it has not won the ideas game.

There then is a clear dialectic between the state and the people in Kashmir. In this dialectical dynamic and framework, state appears to wear out its opponent through attrition but while the opponent may get exhausted, the propellant ideas that fuel separatism remain. In fact, it might not be too inaccurate to state that the sentiment for/of separatism may get stronger with time. It is a cliché to state that Kashmir is in transition: a new generation or cohort of young people is replacing the older cohort. The new generation is more literate, aware and connected. But at the same time, this generation appears to me more radical in terms of separatism and more alienated and estranged than ever.

The implication of this development is that even if they are obscured from public view and isolated, it would not matter. Kashmir’s Gen Next is wedded to the ideas of separatism. Their only or major link with the state is functional- the kind that pertains to quotidian life. Geelani , or Yasin Malik or no Geelani or Yasin Malik, the world views and outlook of these youth will be determined by separatism. The Government’s approach of isolating them then is a non starter. In fact, incarceration and shutting out these people may be more dangerous. Geelani or Yasin Mallik have become emblematic in Kashmir for the stand and stance they have taken.  As a result, they have become respectable: they can determine the direction of younger people. However, left unmoored and without the paternalistic support of older separatists, the new, young cohort of Kashmir can go anywhere. In a world, where ideas twirl and swirl in nano seconds, the imaginary of Kashmiri youth can sway and get redirected elsewhere in the absence of more compelling figures and narratives.

The state should then review its approach towards separatists. This cannot happen in a vacuum or in isolation. To reiterate the cliché, the state must take recourse to a multi-perspectival and multi stakeholder approach to Kashmir. This means the inclusion of all stakeholders over Kashmir on the resolution of this ‘frozen conflict’. Once all stakeholders are on board, then a substantive dialogue which disavows a mono or uni perspectival approach to Kashmir must be adopted. Taking recourse to this method and approach would axiomatically mean the involvement of separatists in the discourse and dialogue over Kashmir. Sincerity of purpose, prudency, far sighted leadership and sagacious statecraft wherein all sides may have to climb down from their stated positions should be the bedrock of this strategic re-orientation and re-alignment. Barring this approach, what may be expected in Kashmir is more conflict-perhaps of an even more intense variety and nature- whose direction would be an unknown unknown. Arresting, isolating separatists , if a metaphor were to be employed here, amounts to putting fire to a wet bale of cotton –it smolders underneath while the surface looks normal-till , of course, it erupts into a ball of fire.

Kashmir’s Gen Next is wedded to the ideas of separatism. Their only or major link with the state is functional- the kind that pertains to quotidian life. Geelani , or Yasin Malik or no Geelani or Yasin Malik, the world views and outlook of these youth will be determined by separatism. The Government’s approach of isolating them then is a non starter. In fact, incarceration and shutting out these people may be more dangerous. Geelani or Yasin Mallik have become emblematic in Kashmir for the stand and stance they have taken.  As a result, they have become respectable: they can determine the direction of younger people. However, left unmoored and without the paternalistic support of older separatists, the new, young cohort of Kashmir can go anywhere. 

Follow this link to join our WhatsApp group: Join Now

MONTHLY	Rs 100
YEARLY	Rs 1000
LIFETIME	Rs 10000

CLICK FOR DETAILS