Statehood Is Necessary, But Not Enough

On 5 August 2019, the Reorganisation Act split Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories. For Ladakh, and Leh in particular, it fulfilled a long-cherished aspiration. For Jammu and Kashmir it came as a shock. Never before in independent India had a state been reduced to a Union Territory. Larger states have been divided in the past, but always into states.

The demand to restore statehood is therefore just. But before demanding back the old arrangement, a crucial question to ask is this: What did the old arrangement actually give us?

For seven decades, Jammu and Kashmir had full statehood and special powers under Article 370. Yet it struggled with corruption, unemployment, weak economic growth and poor public services. A status meant to protect the people was too often used to protect the powerful.

Nepotism became a system. The constitutional promise of equal opportunity in public employment was routinely broken. Relatives and party loyalists entered government through the back door and were later absorbed into the administrative services - KAS, IAS and IPS.

During the Sadiq era, several politically connected men were appointed Deputy Superintendents of Police without any test or interview by the Public Service Commission. Some rose to become IGPs and Additional DGPs.

Through the decades, merit and seniority were set aside whenever convenient, even when choosing the head of the Public Service Commission itself. Countless capable young people without connections paid the price.

Elections were manipulated, and with them a generation's faith in democracy. The Custodian Department and the Auqaf were run like private estates, their properties leased to party workers at token rents. The result was deep and lasting alienation.

The present system has not fixed this. Transfers in departments like higher education are still said to come at a price. Dal, Nageen, Brari Nambal and Anchar are being encroached upon in broad daylight while officials look away. Accountability remains as elusive as ever.

The lesson is simple. Statehood restored on the old terms would only hand the old machinery back to the old players. Jammu and Kashmir needs statehood with a new vision, built on three pillars: deeper democracy, real decentralization and people’s ownership of their culture and resources.

Free and fair elections, transparent recruitment through truly independent commissions, and real accountability for those in power.

Power must flow down to panchayats, municipalities and local communities instead of staying locked in the secretariats. Those closest to a problem should have a say in solving it.

Our land, lakes and forests belong to the people, not to land mafias or political patrons. Safeguards in the spirit of Article 371, which is also the central demand in Ladakh, and which also protect land and identity in several other states, could secure our resources and the centuries-old cultural bonds of the diverse communities who share this soil.

At the heart of this vision lies reconciliation. The safe, dignified and lasting return of Kashmiri Pandits is not a side issue. It is central to restoring Kashmiriyat. They were driven out under threat to their lives, erasing our pluralism. Many liberal and secular families of the majority community suffered too, and some still feel unsafe. A practical plan for their return and resettlement, with security and livelihoods, must move forward alongside statehood.

Statehood will restore Jammu and Kashmir's dignity. Only democracy, decentralisation and people's ownership of their land and culture will give it a better future. Let us demand statehood and let us demand more than statehood.