 Hello and welcome to NewsClick. So the government of India has once again appointed an interlocutor, Dineshwar Sharma, for initiating a dialogue in Kashmir. To discuss the issue, we are joined by Gautam Navalakha, an eminent human rights activist who has been working on the issues related to Kashmir for more than few decades. So Gautam, welcome to NewsClick once again. Thank you for having me. So this interlocutor has been appointed by the government. What's the relevance of this? Can you just throw some light on the context? Well, this is the fourth interlocutor appointed by government of India. The first time it was by Bajpayee government when they appointed KC Panth in 2001, followed by NN Vora, who is the present governor of Jammu and Kashmir in 2003. In both the first two cases, most of the people refused to, especially the Hurriyat leadership, they had refused to meet with this team and they insisted that they would like to speak to somebody, either prime minister or somebody as senior, a political person. The third time around, it was in 2010 when the UPI government appointed Dilip Padgaonkar, Radha Kumar and M.M. Ansari, Professor Ansari to form the three-member interlocutor's team. They submitted the report also and nothing came out of it. So this is the fourth effort. The appointment of Dineshwar Sharma is interesting for two reasons. One is that he was head of intelligence bureau till 2016. So he's recently retired. He has served in Jammu and Kashmir and as an intelligence officer, it is claimed that the people will find it easier to speak to him, but he doesn't carry the political clout. If it's a political issue which has defied any solution for the last 70 years, then why have an intelligence officer, however competent he or she may be, to initiate a process which has actually never been completed. I mean, there have been ample opportunities in the past also. So as you pointed out, this is the fourth one who has been appointed. What have been experiences in the past three such occasions when the governments have appointed interlocutor to initiate a dialogue process in Kashmir? As I pointed out, not just the previous three interlocutors, but all other efforts. I mean, if you look at the round table conferences that the UPA government under Dr. Manmohan Singh organized in 2006 and 2007, it came to nothing. Starting actually, if you go back to 1990s with Rajiv Gandhi's initiative in 1990, followed by several such interaction and efforts that were made throughout 1990s, and then the appointment of interlocutors by the Bajpayee government, they haven't led anywhere. So the basic question that conferences is, why is it that they have failed? And what is it that Dineshwar Sharma led, I mean, interlocutor Dineshwar Sharma can achieve which the previous efforts failed to realize? And I think that's where we come to the basic fundamental question. What is it that the government of India interested in doing? We saw in the past as well as now. I mean, if you go back, if we just confined ourselves to this fourth interlocutor who's been appointed, just look at two aspects. The agenda of Alliance of BJP and PDP talked about holding talks with all internal stakeholders. The statement that was issued officially by the Ministry of Home Affairs, the appointment of Dineshwar Sharma, talks about drops this internal stakeholders and brings in a new formulation called legitimate aspirations. Now, many people have asked question. I mean, who is to decide what is legitimate? But I think if we have been following the development so far, in Kashmir it is very clear what is meant by legitimate aspiration. Government of India and especially the present dispensation has made its position amply clear. I'm not talking about the determination in the last three and a half years to shun talks and the very idea of talks. In fact, if you remember in 2014, the same government had rejected appointment of interlocutor saying that it's no use. But then they also led an old party delegation. They did. But the whole point is how much of it is Sharad meant for public consumption and how much is actually seriously meant. Especially when we know for a fact that there is a trust deficit in Kashmir and it's been there and it's become worse. Three of the reasons why it has become worse is not only because of the operation all out or what the three and a half year old BJP RSS government has been doing in Jammu and Kashmir but also the developments in Jammu, the rabid Hindutvization in Jammu which also receives official patronage and state backing in promoting it and the refusal to recognize that there are and pushing their own agenda for instance 35A which creates the fear of demographic transformation of Jammu and Kashmir, especially Kashmir. All these. Then about the beef ban also. Beef ban. All of this and the lynchings that have taken place in Jammu. All have contributed to creating this tremendous trust deficit. Now how do you bridge that? Dineshwar Sharma says that his brief is and main effort is would be to talk to the youth and to win them over. Well that was the case when the interlocutors were appointed by the UPI government and Chidambaram did the same thing. Reach out to the youth. So how is it going to be different? What is it that they are going to offer? How are they going to ensure the people they are interacting with that they actually mean that they are sincere and serious this time around? Given the baggage which this this government carries of 70 year old history of relentless propaganda and campaign against the Kashmiri Muslims and article 370 and 370 and they've been asking for them. I mean they've been talking openly about doing away with 370 and 35A for a very, very long time. Shyama Prashad Mukherjee's whole campaign which is so dear to the RSS BJP, it was fundamentally this. So that's a million dollar question. I mean what is it that they'll achieve which others fail to? That's the million dollar question and how do you bridge the trust deficit? How do you ensure? Will they be talking in addition I like to add? Will they be talking to Hurriyat? Because what's the point of talking to the pro India elements? I mean they are already on board. They're not questioning the constitutional element. I think one of the reasons why they put this word called legitimate is only to put out these things that they're not going to talk to these people. Looks like it because once you add a prefix legitimate then obviously it implies that some things would be legitimate. And we know for sure. I mean it's no secret. We know that they have been talking about not only that there will be no talks with anybody outside the framework of constitution. But even when they talk about the constitution, the kind of constitution and the changes that they envisage themselves doing away with article 370, makes it clear that their own understanding of constitution itself is extremely narrow and rigid. So Gautam this would be my last question. What do you think what should be actually done? What should be the way forward? Well the only way forward is if you create. I mean there is much abuse term confidence building measure. The government says that this appointment of interlocutor is a confidence building measure. I would say if you really believe in confidence building measure and if operation all out is such a great success that Jitendra Singh, the minister in the prime minister's office could declare that the lifespan on militants has been reduced to a few days if not few weeks and that they are on the last phase. If all that is true then the single most important confidence building measure is demilitarization. Withdraw, reduce troops, withdraw draconian and stringent laws. I mean do away with public safety act, remove the army so that there is no need for ASPA to be invoked. Reduce legal immunity and allow cases for war crimes or crimes that have been committed against the civilians to be brought before the criminal court etc. These would be the steps that are required to give the message that the government of India and the Indian society is actually serious for once. If you don't do it and you start by sending an ex director of intelligence bureau and a point, however competent that person is, however popular and dovish he is the point is it still doesn't carry the cloud that is required and the kind of message that you want to send across that you mean that this time you mean business and you're willing to talk. And this would also do away with this fear or the fear that people have that this is just yet another exercise in fooling them and delaying because things are not as hunky-dory as the government of India is trying to make it out. Thanks a lot Gautam for talking to us on this issue and I'm sure as these things proceed we'll be coming back to you on such thing. Thank you. Keep watching Newsclick for further details. More such news keep following our Facebook page, our Twitter handle and our YouTube account.