Hizbul ticks off Qureshi for statement on reviving talks

Qureshi had acted as a go-between after the Hizb declared a unilateral cease-fire on July 24 and arranged the talks the group offered to India. But the cease-fire and the talks collapsed on August 8 when India rejected the group’s demand to include Pakistan in the talks.

Qureshi had claimed in his interview that the Hizb would soon resume the dialogue with India. Other secessionist groups operating in Kashmir would also join the dialogue once the negotiations reached a “certain point”, he said.

Without Pakistan, the process of resolving the Kashmir problem could not be carried forward, he added. But “it is not practical for Pakistan to be involved in the process initially. There are some difficulties in it that Pakistan should realise,” Qureshi had said.

Salahuddin said in his statement: “The principled stand of the Hizbul is crystal clear. We consider Kashmir as a dispute between three parties –India, Pakistan and the people of Kashmir. There could be progress if India is ready to accept this reality.”

Hashmi’s statement condemned the alleged campaign by the Government of India for “distorting the permanent stand of the separatist body for the resolution of the 53-year-old dispute.”

Qureshi, however, told The Indian Express that he had told the Press only what Salahuddin had discussed with him. “Two days back he (Salahuddin)reiterated that if India agrees to the inclusion of Pakistan, he will wasteno time in once again declaring the cease-fire,” Qureshi said.

Asked about some of the interviews and comments attributed to him by themedia, he said: “That has nothing to do with the Hizb. Whatever I have said was in my personal capacity and not as the Hizb’s mediator,” he said. “They sought my services and I made myself available to them in good faith,” Qureshi clarified.

The development has, however, given Hurriyat a shot in the arm as it feltQureshi, who is a general council member, had hogged the limelight at its expense. “This is for him (Qureshi) to explain. He was not mediating as a Hurriyat leader but that of the People’s Political Front. He had gone public first and then he informed us,” said Prof Abdul Gani Bhat, Hurriyat Chairman.

About his reported proposal to split the Hurriyat’s executive council into two with three and four members each for simultaneously holding talks with Pakistan and India, respectively, Prof Bhat said it was his personal proposal and not that of the Hurriyat.

Has this plan been discussed in the Hurriyat? “Not yet,” he replied. Sources, however, said the Hurriyat executive was meeting tomorrow to discuss the plan mooted by Bhat.

“One group will talk to India and the other to Pakistani interlocutors.This will go a long way in building the broken bridge between the twoneighbours.” he added. The two groups can later swap sides for effective negotiations. “This will help build confidence. This will be repeated at periodic intervals,” he said.

Prof Bhat argued that this way both India’s resolve to localise the issue and keep it a bilateral one will be satisfied. Pakistan’s insistence that it should have a key role in the negotiations will also be addressed, he said.

The move, said the source, is likely to be backed by the liberal lobby of Yasin Malik, Abdul Gani Lone and Umar Farooq. However how far the accession lobby will support the plan remains to be seen.