Ramzan ceasefire ends: what it means for talks with separatists in Kashmir

The Centre’s decision to call off unilateral ceasefire in Kashmir may have also brought down curtains on dialogue offer to the separatists who had sought clarity over the proposal before committing to any kind of engagement with New Delhi.

During his visit to the summer capital of Srinagar on June 7, Union home minister Rajnath Singh had dropped enough hints about extending the halt in anti-militancy operations beyond Ramzan, raising hopes within the state government of a possible breakthrough for talks with separatists.

In fact, the chief minister Mehbooba Mufti had twice made a passionate appeal to Hurriyat to take the talks offer saying “such opportunity doesn’t come time and again”.

But a sudden surge in militancy-related incidents during the last two weeks of Ramzan seems to have forced government of India to reconsider continuation of the ceasefire, thus putting a “premature end to any chances of dialogue at least in immediate future”.

‘Can’t speak to walls’

The J&K government spokesperson Naeem Akhtar didn’t mince words to state that the dialogue initiative was as good as over. “When there are no takers you don’t speak to the walls. They (separatists) are not ready to talk. What can one say? Either they are not masters of their politics or they are not interested in contributing towards peace in the region,” he said.

The chief spokesperson of ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) Muhammad Rafi Mir explained further. He said the purpose behind the ceasefire was to break the cycle of violence and create an atmosphere for taking the peace initiative forward.

That never happened as militants continued with attacks on security forces, Mir said. “On the other side, the separatists remained adamant. Now, given the scenario, I don’t see any forward movement happening on dialogue at least in immediate future,” Mir said.

For almost one-and-a half years Mehbooba had been desperately urging New Delhi for resuming dialogue on Kashmir which has seen no end to protests and civilian killing since 2016 when Kashmir remained in grip of five month long uprising.

A PDP leader said that from day one, the Hurriyat leadership dismissed the talks offer as a “cruel joke” and militants rejected the ceasefire and continued with “provocative attacks” on security forces. File photo of Hurriyat leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani. Credit: PTI

Almost 100 civilians were killed and over 1,000 persons lost vision, completely or partially, to pellet injuries during the period following killing of popular rebel commander Burhani Wani. The civilian casualties during clashes between protestors and forces have only risen since then, earning criticism for the PDP-led government.

But the ceasefire announcement on May 17, followed by dialogue offer to Hurriyat leadership on May 30, by the home minister, was seen as a breakthrough that the state government in the restive region was looking for.

“We had thought these initiatives would be a starting point for building a peace process and later for a broader outreach for resolution of Kashmir,” said Akhtar, a close confidante of the chief minister.

But, he said, unfortunately from day one the Hurriyat leadership dismissed the initiatives (talks offer) as a “cruel joke” and militants rejected the ceasefire and continued with “provocative attacks” on security forces.

Political analyst Noor M Baba also felt that the chances of dialogue were “practically over” now. He said there was no let-up in violence even during Ramzan ceasefire which made it difficult for the government of India to continue with the halt in operations.

According to him, the killing of two civilians, including a 12-year old boy in Pulwama during past few days, was the sign of the things that Kashmir was set to witness again. “We are back to the square one, and I fear turbulent times ahead,” he said.

The ‘vague offer’

While the Hurriyat had shown readiness to enter into dialogue process it had, however, asked government of India to “clear ambiguity” over the proposal and “speak in one language” after senior central minister and top BJP leaders had come up with contradictory statements over the dialogue offer.

Akhtar, however, put the onus on Hurriyat leadership. He said the no less than the Union home minister and the chief minister made passionate appeals to Hurriyat leaders to take the dialogue offer which was “as real as we would have wanted it to be”.

“What else could have the Centre and the state government done despite the fact that militants wanted to sabotage the process from very beginning,” he asked. “Peace obviously is not their aim and hence in such an atmosphere how can once expect any initiative to continue.”

A senior separatist leader, however, said they had made their stand clear as far as talks were concerned, referring to the ambiguity remark. “But there was no response from their (the Centre’s) side which in itself speaks about their intentions,” the separatist leader said.

There are also questions being raised over the government of India’s “vague offer” to the separatists and “lack” of proper ground work.

“The contradictory statements from the ministers and BJP leaders that followed the dialogue offer raised enough doubts in the minds of separatists about this initiative. It rather seemed a well crafted strategy, lacking intent, to silence the Mehbooba Mufti government, which was consistently pushing for talks,” said Professor Baba.

He recalled the 2004 dialogue between Centre and the separatists followed by another round of talks between the two sides in 2005, saying that time the initiatives were “more serious and focused”.

“That is what was missing this time round,” he said.

Rise in violence & final call

At the end of the home minister’s press conference in Srinagar on June 8, a senior home ministry official told a group of journalists that the Centre hadn’t “lost much” after declaring the ceasefire”, suggesting the willingness of the ministry to support extension of ceasefire.

The killing of the armyman Aurangzeb and senior journalist Shujaat Bukhari, who was a strong votary of dialogue and peace, two days before Eid, seemed to have influenced the Centre’s final decision to call of ceasefire. Credit: PTI

A review of the situation for first 15-days of Ramzan had also pointed towards “success” of truce, according to a senior police official.

During that period, militancy-related incidents and protests had gone down “significantly” though one army man and a civilian were killed after militants had attacked an army camp in Kakpora in Pulwama district.

But by the time Ramzan ended, the scenario had changed completely. A surge in grenade attacks across Kashmir in which more than 70 persons including 18 forces’ personnel were injured, increase in rifle-snatching incidents by militants, including the attempts in the city as well, abduction and killing of the army man Aurangzeb and killing of senior journalist Shujaat Bukhari, who was a strong votary of dialogue and peace, two days before Eid, seemed to have influenced the Centre’s final decision.

A senior police official said at least 57 militancy-related incidents, including attacks on security installations, patrol parties, civilians and lawmakers were witnessed during the ceasefire, more than double the number of attacks for the previous month.

“These attacks continued to increase as terrorists didn’t relent despite the initiative from the Centre,” said J&K’s director general of police S.P Vaid, adding the final call w