Shutdowns and the ‘Self Determination’ Movement

He may have said it merely for the sake of justifying the frequent shutdown calls that are being given by the joint resistance leadership (JRL). However, by saying that “We have only one option (and) that is calling for a shutdown to let the world community know about the oppression Kashmiris are facing,” Hurriyat(M) chairman Mirwaiz Umar Farooq has unwittingly accepted that the ‘shutdown strategy’ that the separatist conglomerate has been following so diligently ever since its inception has proved to be a complete failure. What else can one infer when it is obvious that even after thousands  of shutdowns that have been observed over a period spanning nearly a quarter century, the international community continues be least bothered about what the Mirwaiz calls the “brutal suppression andoppression in Kashmir by India”?

The Hurriyat (M) chairman’s statement raises two vital questions-one, despite the extreme hardships the public has undergone on account of shutdowns for so many years, why is the international community behaving like mute spectators? And second, when the shutdown strategy hasn’t achieved anything in nearly twoand a half decades, why are our leaders continuing to repeatedly call for shutdowns? 

In order to find an answer to the first question, we need to go back in time since the ‘self determination’ movement in Kashmir has been going on ever since the UN passed its resolution calling for a plebiscite seven decades ago. However, the “brutal suppression and oppression on Kashmiris by India” that the Mirwaiz is talking about is a much more recent development. The Hurriyat (M) chairman has clearly indicated so during his video address at Harvard University last year by saying, “Since 1989 when the peoples’ struggle for self determination became a mass movement more than 89 thousand Kashmiris have been killed…” So the Mirwaiz accepts that the brutalisation of Kashmiris is directly related to the “mass movement” is the Mirwaiz referring to and this raises the question- what is this “massmovement” the Hurriyat (M) chairman is talking about?

It is obvious that the Hurriyat (M) chairman is referring to the “armed struggle” which the JKLF brought into Kashmir in 1989 and calling it a “mass movement” was merely to make it sound more civil and acceptable. And by intentionally avoiding any reference to the ‘armed struggle’ while addressing foreign audiences theMirwaiz has indirectly admitted that the international community has no appetite for supporting violence in the guise of “mass movements.” Thus, it’s not at all surprising that the international community is not impressed when the JRL calls for a shutdown to protest against the killing of militants in encounters or protesters who try and help trapped militants to escape by attacking security forces at the encounter site. And even when the JRL called for a shutdown on the anniversary ofthe Sopore killings, militants ruined the sanctity of this event by carrying out bomb attacks and killing police men performing routine law and order related duties.

Whether we like it or not but the hard fact is that as long as militants continue waging their ‘armed struggle’ and protesters keep turning violent, law enforcement agencies can at best be accused of using excessive force and no responsible nation or organisation will ever accuse New Delhi of “brutal suppression andoppression of Kashmiris.” Moreover, the Mirwaiz’s complaint of being denied political space doesn’t find favour with the international community because while people living in Indian administered Kashmir (IaK) can question its accession to India, the people of Pakistan administered Kashmir (PaK) are constitutionally disbarred from doing so. Though this issue may be considered meaningless by our leaders but since the international community considers both IaK and PaK as disputed entities, they find the political atmosphere in PaK more stifling than in IaK. 

Moreover, our leaders and militant groups defend poll boycott by saying that they are forced to do this because elections in Kashmir are a “sham” but theinternational community doesn’t think so and views this as an attempt to deprive locals of their democratic right of franchise. Thus, how can one expect theinternational community to support those who complain of being brutalised but openly endorse militancy? And how can we ever expect the world to respect andsupport our leaders who don’t even consider it necessary to offer a word of consolation leave alone call for a shutdown when Kashmiris are killed by militants? It’s time our leaders stopped viewing Kashmir from Pakistan’s prism and instead be more concerned with how the international community views the Kashmir logjam!

Tailpiece: If shutdowns are the Hurriyat’s last resort then there something very seriously wrong with their strategy and thus the JRL has to urgently take necessary steps to remedy this and ensure that shutdowns don’t remain meaningless actions. If the Hurriyat can ensure that shutdowns make the international community take notice of Kashmir then it is fine. However, if they can’t do so then they have no moral right to call for shutdowns at the drop of the hat as hartals put the entire public through extreme hardships and there can be no justification in making people suffering for no rhyme or reason!