Explosive Claims: Yasin Malik Alleges IB Orchestrated Hafiz Saeed Meet, PM Manmohan Singh Thanked Him for Pakistan Visit

In a dramatic turn of events, jailed Kashmiri separatist leader Yasin Malik has made astonishing claims in court, asserting he met Lashkar-e-Taiba chief Hafiz Saeed in 2006 at the explicit instruction of India’s Intelligence Bureau (IB). Furthermore, Malik alleges that then-Prime Minister Manmohan Singh personally thanked him for his efforts following a significant trip to Pakistan.

These sensational revelations, emerging amidst Malik's ongoing hunger strike in Delhi's Tihar jail, cast a spotlight on the shadowy world of back-channel diplomacy and the intricate, often clandestine, interactions between state agencies and separatist figures.

Malik, who has been in jail since 2019 on terror funding charges, detailed these claims during a recent court appearance, painting a complex picture of his historical role.

According to Malik, the alleged 2006 meeting with Hafiz Saeed, a designated global terrorist and mastermind of the 2008 Mumbai attacks, was not a rogue encounter but a calculated move orchestrated by the IB.

He suggested that Indian intelligence operatives facilitated this high-stakes encounter, highlighting a potential strategy to engage with various stakeholders, even adversaries, in the fraught Kashmir conflict.

Adding another layer to his narrative, Malik recounted a subsequent meeting with then-Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

He claimed that following a visit to Pakistan, where he was reportedly involved in certain discussions or initiatives, PM Singh expressed gratitude for his contributions. This alleged commendation from the highest office suggests a tacit acknowledgment, if not direct approval, of Malik's activities on the international stage at that time.

Malik's statements are part of a broader defense strategy, where he appears to be positioning himself as someone who, at various points, acted in concert with or at the behest of Indian state agencies, despite his well-known separatist ideology.

His legal team is likely using these claims to challenge the perception of his activities as purely anti-national, suggesting a more nuanced, perhaps even state-sanctioned, role in certain historical junctures.

The timing of these claims, coinciding with his hunger strike over issues related to his ongoing legal battles and prison conditions, adds urgency and intensity to his pronouncements.

While Indian government officials have yet to officially respond to these specific allegations, Malik's assertions are poised to ignite significant debate and demand further scrutiny into historical intelligence operations and the complex dynamics of the Kashmir issue.

These claims, if substantiated, could redefine understanding of the Indian state's engagement with separatist leaders and its handling of cross-border terrorism, revealing a deeply intricate web of covert operations and diplomatic overtures that have shaped the region's tumultuous history.