When a woman in her 40s disrupted the Congress Vice-President Rahul Gandhi’s rally at Budgam during June last year by repeatedly shouting that none other than Mast Gul was her leader, it brought back memories of a bygone era. The year was 1995 and a band of Hizbul Mujahideen ‘freedom fighters’ under the leadership of Mast Gul had taken control of the historic 14th century Charar-e-Sharif Dargah in Kashmir. The army, after surrounding this historic Dargah, asked the ‘mujahideen’ within to either surrender or be prepared to perish and when they paid no heed to these threats, they were even offered a ‘safe passage’. However, the Hizb ‘freedom fighters’ refused and this led to a two month long stand-off. The atmosphere was charged with emotion and TV footage of this period show a Kalashnikov wielding and defiant Mast Gul vowing to fight for ‘azadi’ in Kashmir till his last breath while being lustily cheered by a mammoth crowd.
What made him the ‘poster-boy’ for the Kashmiris at that time was the fact that inspite of being a Pakistani national, Mast Gul had considered it his ‘religious’ duty to come to Kashmir and wage ‘jihad’ to emancipate Kashmiri Muslims from their Indian oppressors. As a Hizbul Mujahideen commander, Mast Gul made it clear that he was here to fight a ‘righteous’ war and in doing so, he had no hesitation whatsoever in laying down his life for this noble cause. His profound concern for the people of Kashmir, as well as the willingness to embrace martyrdom made him the epitome of valour and sacrifice, capturing the imagination of the youth. He kept his word and when Charar-e –Sharif was finally attacked by the security forces, Mast Gul made a dramatic escape, giving Kashmiris the hope that he would surely return one day to fulfill his vow of ‘liberating’ Kashmir. Thus, Mast Gul became a legend, not only in Kashmir but in Pakistan as well, where the Jamaat-i-Islami party chief Qazi Hussain Ahmed described him as ‘a symbol of Kashmir’s jihad’.
Some may see mischief, intrigue or even politics behind the incident of a lady trying to disrupt Rahul Gandhi’s Budgam rally in 2013 by eulogising Mast Gul. However, I feel she was merely recalling the general feelings of respect and gratitude that her generation (which would have been in the impressionable age group of teenagers or boys and girls in their early twenties when the Charar-e –Sharif incident occurred) had developed for this great Hizbul Mujahideen commander who left his home in Pakistan to fight for the Kashmir cause. Those were chaotic days – though the newly formed Hizbul Mujahideen had become the undisputed leader of the ‘armed struggle’ in Kashmir by ousting the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front, it was still in the process of finding its feet. Luckily, volunteers from various countries started pouring-in and they were fondly referred to as ‘mehmaan mujahideens’ or ‘Guest militants’. Mast Gul was one of them and even though he never really came into prominence after Charar-e-Sharif, he was always considered by the people of Kashmir as the ‘ultimate freedom-fighter’ who could make the ‘difference’ and thus they anxiously awaited his return.
On February 4th this year, a local hotel in the predominantly Shia populated locality of Peshawar’s old city was attacked by a suicide- bomber. Addressing a press conference in Miramshah a day after this bombing, Mufti Hasaan Swati, the Tehreek-e-Taliban (TTP) ‘commander’ for Peshawar while admitting responsibility for this attack, revealed that the TTP “militant commander for Peshawar” who was sitting beside him was the architect of this ghastly act. To everyone’s surprise, the ‘mastermind’ of this attack who was so proudly presented before the reporters by Swati, turned out to none other than Mast Gul! I am sure that the lady who a year ago had lauded Mast Gul during Rahul’s rally a year ago, would have never have expected this. I am sure, she would never expected that her hero, who was the “symbol of Kashmir’s jihad” and had once publically proclaimed that he would “take revenge for Charar-e-Sharif’s desecration by Indian forces” as well as vowed to continue fighting until ‘Kashmir’s freedom’, would now be engaged in sectarian violence in Pakistan and bombing its innocent citizens!
What exactly made Mast Gul abandon his unwavering support to the ‘Kashmir struggle’ may never be known. Yet, one thing is certain-by turning against his own mentors and attacking Pakistani citizens, he has transformed himself from a ‘good freedom-fighter’ into a ‘bad terrorist’. This change of loyalty may come a big surprise to many, but is certainly not unusual or an isolated case. One is reminded of the Late Ilyas Kashmiri, another ‘good’ freedom-fighter waging ‘jihad’ in Kashmir, who too subsequently turned into a ‘rogue’. And his case is even more intriguing as unlike Mast Gul, who was an unknown person before the Charar-e-Sharif incident, Ilyas Kashmiri was a seasoned and renowned fighter. Starting off as a ‘mujahid’ fighting a ‘righteous war’ against the Soviets in Afghanistan, Ilyas Kashmiri later turned his attention to Kashmir and joining the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HUJI), actively participated in the ‘armed struggle’ against the Indian security forces. His exploits, which included the dramatic escape from an Indian prison made him a legend and such was his commitment towards the ‘Kashmir cause’, that when he fell-out with the HUJI chief Qari Saifullah Akhtar, Kashmiri floated his own outfit named ‘313 Brigade’ to continue ‘jihad’ in Kashmir.
However, for reasons unknown, Ilyas Kashmiri soon vanished from the scene, till he was finally arrested in 2003 for his alleged complicity in an assassination attempt on President Pervez Musharraf. Though finally released for lack of evidence, isn’t it ironical that the same Ilyas Kasmiri, who on an earlier occasion had been given a cash reward of Rupees one lac when he ‘presented’ the decapitated head of an Indian soldier to General Musharraf, would ultimately be arrested for an assassination attempt on the very person who had once felicitated him? Thus, when one correlates the Ilyas Kashmiri case with that of Mast Gul, a natural question arises- is there any substance in the claim made by some that ‘good terrorists’ really exist? These examples seem to suggest otherwise and reinforce the popular belief that there is no such thing as the ‘good militant’ or a ‘righteous cause’ and the stark reality is that by using euphemisms such as ‘freedom fighters’ and ‘mujahids’, nations are merely trying to sanctify the cult of terrorism, just suit their own unscrupulous motives and crying ‘foul’ when any such person or group turns against them!
It were the Americans who were the first ones introduce the idea of the ‘good’ militant into the region by creating ‘mujahideens’ to fight their ‘proxy war’ against the Soviets in Afghanistan. Till the time these ‘mujahideens’ were engaging in terrorist activities against the Soviets, they were ‘good guys’- but once they subsequently started fighting the Americans in Afghanistan, they suddenly became ‘bad terrorists’! Thus, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s observation that there can be no ‘good’ terrorists, “Because that’s like the guy who keeps poisonous snakes in his backyard, convinced they’ll only attack his neighbours,” makes perfect sense as it is based on experience. And who can be better qualified to adjudicate on this issue than the Americans themselves, for they are the ones who had to suffer the most vicious ‘snakebite’ in their history when one of their own ‘pet snake’ by the name of Osama bin Laden repaid the largesse of Washington with the deadly 9/11 attacks!
Unfortunately, during the ‘cold war’, our subcontinent became the undeclared battlefield between Russia and America and both India as well as Pakistan unwittingly became its pawns in this ‘great game’. Putting to good use the mutual animosity and deep suspicion which both countries harboured right since partition, we were made to believe that our neighbour wished us ill and this sent us scurrying into the arms of either America or Russia for safety. An arms race followed and ‘ultra nationalism’ overtook rational thinking in both countries, which were by now bristling with weapons. Consequently, wars were inevitable and with each side accusing the other for starting the same, any scope of reconciliation was lost forever. However, since waging wars became an expensive proposition and attracted ire of the international community, engaging in ‘proxy wars’ became a convenient alternative. But, this folly has cost us dear and so, it is time for not only Pakistan but also India and Afghanistan to seriously rethink on its policy of waging war against each other through ‘proxies’ and stop breeding ‘snakes’ in their backyards, for despite lavishing all the love and affection, a ‘snake’ will remain a ‘snake’ and someday it will have no hesitation in biting the very hand that feeds it!