Shah Faesal, a bureaucrat of Kashmiri origin has been known for his opinion on the relationship between Kashmir and India, and has emerged as an intellectual youth icon in the Valley.
His piece in The Indian Express, which went viral today, talks about how the Kashmir he knew since childhood has now been ruined due to ‘deadly politics of grief’. He also talks of how every agitation in the Valley now also follows a standard format and the outcome is often known right from the time it starts.
Faesal had earlier hit headlines when as the Director of the Education Department in Kashmir, he threated to resign on being pitted against Burhan Wani. Following the unrest in Kashmir, the media picked up Faesal as an example of what a good Kashmiri does – studying and getting into a Government job over the choice of picking up arms for the cause of ‘Azadi’. A few channels went a step further and put his pictures right next to Wani’s which furthered angered the bureaucrat.
Sharing this article on his Facebook page, Faisal wrote a thought provoking post about how all those people invested in the cause of Kashmir are actually beneficiaries of the conflict-ridden place. In his facebook post a while back this is what he had to say:
I think the first right to have an opinion on Kashmir crisis is of those who have lost their dear ones in last thirty years. Rest of us are direct or indirect beneficiaries of the conflict. I became a famous topper because I am from Kashmir, otherwise there are toppers every year and media doesn’t talk about all of them. You got a scholarship because you are from Kashmir and they were looking for candidates from a conflict zone. He didn’t get membership of the golf club so, post-retirement, he thought of writing columns on Kashmir so as to stay relevant. She has no other research work to her credit but since she writes on Kashmir so she is well known across the circles. This turmoil is an alibi now, a protectionist measure promoted by mediocre people to survive in a competitive world.
Kashmir is a part of our CV. Most of us have business interests in this war.
Are we worried about the occupation or the occupations, I wonder? Why are we not ready to ask questions even and listen to an alternative point of view? Can name-calling win us wars, sorry sir I don’t think so.
My simple point when I talk of a dignified exit from the conflict is that those who lost their sons and fathers and life partners, do want an immediate end to violence in Kashmir with obvious concessions that befit a struggle, right or wrong, of sixty years. I lost something very precious so I don’t want anyone to lose anything ever and that is the reason I write.