More articles by

Tariq Bhat
Tariq Bhat

INTERVIEW

I will give the interlocutor a chance

56-Omar-Abdullah Omar Abdullah

Interview/ Omar Abdullah, former J&K chief minister

Former chief minister Omar Abdullah has adopted a wait and see approach to the Centre's announcement of Dineshwar Sharma as its interlocutor for talks on Jammu and Kashmir. Excerpts from an interview:

How do you see the announcement of an interlocutor?

They have appointed an interlocutor, but what remains to be seen is what mandate he has been given, because the home minister has talked about the legitimate aspirations of people. Now, who is to decide what those legitimate aspirations are? [Chief Minister] Mehbooba Mufti has said the dialogue would be unconditional. If that is the case, then legitimate aspirations will also include the aspirations of the Hurriyat Conference. That will be interesting to see.

What do you make of a retired intelligence officer being chosen as an interlocutor?

More than the individual it is the process that matters. If the individual comes with the full mandate from the government of India then the process will work. But if there is confusion in the mind of the interlocutor as to what his role is, then the chances of success will be far less. But we need to give the interlocutor some time to show us through his deeds what he intends to do. Then we will arrive at a better conclusion what he is up to.

Home Minister Rajnath Singh has said that the interlocutor is free to decide whether to talk to the Hurriyat.

No. That decision rests with the government of India. The interlocutor represents the government, not himself. The interlocutor has to be given clear guidelines and a clear mandate. He is not coming to talk to people in his individual capacity. The government of India has said it will be a sustained dialogue. It cannot be left to the interlocutor whether he can talk to the Hurriyat or not.

What are your expectations from the offer of talks?

I am not going to pass judgment on what is and what is not possible. I am ready to give him a chance. Let's see what his mandate is. Everybody knows what the National Conference stands for. We have not shied away from stating what our position is. We need to know the timeframe for the talks. Is it open-ended or is there a timeframe?

You have said the talks offer is the defeat of people who believed in the use of force.

Clearly it is. You are accepting that it is a political problem. The political problem requires a political dialogue. This is exactly the message we took to the prime minister last year at the height of the agitation. Thank goodness this announcement has come. Now it needs to be followed through. But it clearly shows that the Doval doctrine is not now the guiding light because the Doval doctrine suggests there is no political problem; it is a security problem.

What is there to talk for the political parties whose demands are known?

If the dialogue is unconditional, and if it is a serious attempt, then we are well within our rights to reiterate our roadmap. Obviously, you cannot have the dismemberment of Article 35A on the one hand and political dialogue on the other. We will be looking to what happens to Article 35A in the Supreme Court because that will also indicate where the Centre stands. I think it is important to remember that the Centre has now made itself party to the case against Article 35A.

You cannot talk about a dialogue with stakeholders talking about legitimate aspiration and shy away from defending Article 35A. The BJP may have its own point of view on the article but the government of India is not a political party. Therefore, we will be very keenly watching that.

The BJP has refused to return the control of power projects and even talk about revoking the AFSPA. Then what is there to talk about?

I understand that sentiment. They have legitimate grounds but it's premature to be wary about this process of dialogue. I will give them a chance to see what their intentions are. So let's wait and see what steps the interlocutor takes, because we have had interlocutors in the past also. Let's see how his mandate differs from the previous interlocutors'.

This browser settings will not support to add bookmarks programmatically. Please press Ctrl+D or change settings to bookmark this page.
The Week

Related Reading