THE ongoing tension in Azad Kashmir is not only badly impacting lives of the people in the liberated territory and adjoining areas of Pakistan but also has external dimensions as well but the Government seems to be in no hurry to resolve it in a satisfactory manner. It is also a reality that some hardliners among the ranks of the protestors are exploiting the situation through provocative statements and using it to create hatred against Pakistan.
Political differences are considered a routine in a democratic polity but unfortunately we have a history of using them to settle scores ignoring implications of such tendencies for national unity and interests. There are parties and leaders in Pakistan that should have intervened much earlier to sort out the problem but they are not moving beyond rhetoric and PR tactics. This was highlighted by the abortive move of Maulana Fazlur Rehman, who announced his intention to mediate but could not make any progress due to rigid stance of the proscribed Joint Awami Action Committee (JAAC) and the Government and the latest initiatives of the TTAP delegation and announcement of Jamat-e-Islami to mediate. The delegation of the opposition parties was not allowed to proceed to Azad Kashmir and stopped at Sihala on apprehensions that they wanted to join protestors in Rawalakot. However, the leaders forming the delegation – including Mahmood Khan Achakzai, Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, Allama Nasir Abbas and Mustafa Nawaz Khokhar – maintained that their objective was to visit the scene and listen to grievances and demands of Kashmiris. Abbasi claimed that they were going there for a good cause and it was necessary to interact with protestors for the purpose. The Government’s decision was apparently influenced by the assessment that the opposition parties were trying to use the issue to drum up support for the forthcoming elections in Azad Kashmir. In a related development, JI chief Hafiz Naeemur Rehman announced that his party has accepted the responsibility of mediation and is playing its role in restoring trust between the government and the committee to prevent “bloodshed and unrest”. This is a welcome initiative and the two sides must extend a helping hand to the party with the objective of ending the deadlock, the continuation of which will benefit none. However, the efforts of JI can succeed only if it reads the situation correctly and does not resort to pleasing one side or the other. The JI leadership has claimed that the JAAC has expressed complete confidence in JI and postponed its long march, sending a positive message. As against this the Government side believes JAAC protestors have been contained to Rawalakot because of administrative measures. There is also an impression that some elements within the movement are going beyond legitimate demand, which is indicative of an agenda other than the popular demands, many of which already stand accepted. There is every reason to cooperate with the JI on this issue as it has declared unequivocally that the “mediation with JAAC is within the constitutional and national framework of Pakistan and the Kashmir issue. As long as this framework remains intact, every possible effort will be made to resolve the matter”. No one can cast doubts on the commitment of the party to the cause of Kashmir and therefore, its mediation is likely to remain within the acceptable bounds. The task is challenging but not difficult despite the fact that some analysts believe the JKLF, which pleads for independent Kashmir, has hijacked the movement by initially championing popular demands and then moving towards realization of its own designs and goals. Whatever the situation, bloodshed should be avoided and issues sorted out through dialogue and discussions. Status quo must end as shutter downs and wheel jams have also created acute shortage of essential commodities in the length and breadth of Azad Kashmir.
