Soon after becoming chief minister of Jammu and Kashmir, Mufti Mohammed Sayeed said that, if necessary, the state assembly would review POTA. This was the first gesture in his ‘‘healing touch’’ approach. He had to be reminded by the Union law minister that the state government could not repeal a law that dealt with terrorism and the sovereignty of India. On April 1, 2003, after meeting the Kashmiri Pandit community in Delhi, Sayeed told journalists that the ‘‘healing touch’’ — like Mahatma Gandhi’s non-violence — was a ‘‘philosophy’’, and not a ‘‘policy’’. On August 30, the chief minister stressed there was no alternative to the ‘‘healing touch’’. Immediately terrorist strikes in the valley escalated. The worst attack came on the chief minister’s residence itself, on 17 October. Militants threw grenades near Sayeed’s house, killing two soldiers and injuring many civilians. Later, not just one but three militant groups — Al Nasirin, Farzandan-e-Milat and Al Mansurian claimed credit. One Abu Shakir, a spokesman for Al Mansurian, told a local news agency, ‘‘Our target was the chief minister’s residence, but the two gunmen who launched the attack stormed the wrong building.’’ Fortunately, Sayeed survived and so did his daughter Mehbooba, who promptly told the media that the ‘‘healing touch’’ was in fact meant for the victims of terrorism. Thus the ‘‘philosophy of healing touch’’ had come a full circle, beginning with the victims of POTA and ending with the victims of terrorism itself. No one doubts Sayeed’s sincerity. But his kid gloves approach ended up giving the impression that his ‘‘healing touch’’ was his principal method to get terrorists off the path of violence. This was unrealistic, given the Pakistani sponsorship of violence. The first lesson Sayeed ought to have learnt is that killers require no healing touch. The terrorists’ initial target, in 1989-90, were defenceless Pandits, mercilessly killed or driven away from the Valley. After the Pandit community left, the targets were indiscriminate and indeterminate, toddler to octogenarian, families of security forces to political leaders. Second, Sayeed ought to have sensitised the people of Kashmir to the evil design of terrorists. Nothing short of a battle-cry from the chief minister against terrorism will do. Lastly, Sayeed must understand that behind the grenades, the RDX, the AK-47 rifles there lies ‘‘dirty money’’, generated from the thousands of tons of opium grown in Afghanistan and sold clandestinely by ISI cells in Europe and America. Though Pakistan is close to bankruptcy, the ISI is rich. The nexus between drug money and terrorism is no secret. Sayeed should focus more on this aspect rather than on his philosophy of ‘‘healing touch’’. Home Minister L.K. Advani’s proposed dialogue with Hurriyat chairman Maulana Abbas Ansari and the simultaneous announcement of 12 proposals to improve relations with Pakistan are no doubt welcome steps. Nevertheless, only a simpleton believes they will end terror.
