Seven years after the Narendra Modi government revoked Article 370 and dismantled Jammu and Kashmir’s semi‑autonomous status, the region stands suspended between two realities: the stability claimed by New Delhi and the trauma felt by Kashmiris themselves. What happened on 5 August 2019 was not merely a constitutional act; it was a rupture that tore through the political, psychological and geopolitical fabric of one of the world’s most contested territories.
Today, the consequences of that decision are visible everywhere — in the hollowed‑out democratic institutions of Jammu and Kashmir, in the lived experience of its people, and in the shifting dynamics across the Line of Control (LoC). The debate has moved far beyond legalities. It now centres on legitimacy, trust and the future of India’s relationship with Kashmiris.
Seven years on, the question is not whether Article 370 should have been removed. The question is whether India has a strategy to build a stable, inclusive and durable political order in its aftermath — or whether it has merely replaced one form of paralysis with another.
A Democratic Revival Without Democratic Power
The 2024 Assembly elections were historic. For the first time since Jammu and Kashmir was downgraded to a Union Territory, voters returned to the polls. The National Conference–Congress alliance won decisively, buoyed by an extraordinary surge of first‑time voters — not teenagers, but adults in their 30s, 40s and even 60s who had never voted before.
This democratic awakening was real. It reflected a yearning for political agency after years of silence. But it also revealed a paradox: an election without power.
Under the current arrangement, the elected government has no meaningful control over policing, law and order, or key administrative services. The Lieutenant Governor — an unelected official — retains authority over the police, the anti‑corruption bureau, and the appointment of law officers. The Chief Minister presides over a government that cannot command its own security apparatus or shape the administrative machinery that governs daily life.
The National Conference’s first Cabinet decision was a resolution demanding the restoration of full statehood. It remains unfulfilled. As The Hindu observed, “J&K still awaits restored Statehood and accountable governance.”
The democratic deficit is structural, not symbolic. Without statehood, the elected government cannot deliver justice, enforce accountability or build trust. Elections alone cannot substitute for genuine political empowerment. Kashmiris voted — but they did not receive power in return.
The Lived Reality: Trauma, Disempowerment and Economic Distress
The abrogation of Article 370 was accompanied by unprecedented coercive measures: tens of thousands of additional troops, mass detentions of 3,500-5,000 political leaders and activists, curfews and a communications blackout that lasted months. These were emergency actions taken without declaring an emergency.
Seven years later, the psychological impact remains profound. Kashmiris speak of a sense of existential insecurity — a feeling that their political identity, cultural autonomy and civil liberties can be suspended at any moment.
Economic Indicators Tell a Troubling Story
Despite government claims of development, the economic data paints a mixed picture:
Per capita income relative to the national average has fallen from 79.9% (2013–14) to 76.6% (2025–26). Unemployment remains nearly double the national average. Graduate unemployment stands at 23.9%, among the highest in India. Internet shutdowns — the highest in the country since 2019 — have crippled businesses, education and digital livelihoods.
The Public Safety Act (PSA) and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) continue to be used on flimsy grounds. Mass summons have become routine; in July 2026 alone, over 2,000 people were called in for questioning after a single incident.
Political leaders and many more remain imprisoned, deepening the sense of political exclusion.
A Region in Perpetual Trauma
The abrogation did not create Kashmir’s trauma — but it intensified it. The sense of disempowerment is not abstract; it is lived daily. Kashmiris speak of being governed without consent, policed without accountability and represented without authority.
The Modi government might have ended what many of his supporters called the constitutional ambiguity. But it also created a governance vacuum that has yet to be filled with legitimacy.
Across the LoC: Pakistan’s Hypocrisy Laid Bare
If the abrogation achieved one strategic objective, it was this: it exposed Pakistan’s decades‑long manipulation of the Kashmir conflict.
For seventy years, Pakistan projected Kashmir as a simple morality play — India the villain, Pakistan the saviour. As Italian journalist Francesca Marino wrote, the Kashmir issue gave Pakistan’s military “an identity, a permanent enemy, an inexhaustible supply of jihadists, and every failing government a diversion from bankruptcy and repression.”
Seven years after the abrogation, the contrast between the two sides of the LoC is stark.
The Crisis in Pakistan‑administered Jammu and Kashmir (PaJK)
In June 2026, PaJK erupted in mass protests over governance failures, inflation and economic collapse. The Pakistani state responded with a brutal crackdown that has killed more than 80 people and injured hundreds. Thousands more are detained, tortured and held incommunicado and without any legal basis. The internet has been throttled most of this time, media access blocked and the roads sealed.
Worse, the Pakistani army has severely restricted essential supplies — food, medicine, fuel to force the public into submission. The Joint Awami Action Committee (JAAC) that has been campaigning for the local rights has been banned under anti‑terrorism laws.
The Pakistani army’s actions have shocked most Kashmiris on the Indian side. As one Srinagar journalist told me: “The murders and economic blockade in PaJK have opened our eyes. The Pakistani army is doing worse than anything we have witnessed. I can’t believe our lives feel safer than theirs.”
The events in PaJK shattered the myth of Pakistan as a guardian of Kashmiri rights. It revealed the deep state’s willingness to crush dissent — not in India, but in territory under its own control.
Ending the Two‑Sided Payroll: A Strategic Break
One of the least discussed but most consequential outcomes of the abrogation was the dismantling of what I call the “two‑sided payroll” system.
For decades, India and Pakistan cultivated the same political actors, separatists and intermediaries. Many individuals drew salaries, patronage and protection from both sides. They were simultaneously beneficiaries of Indian state support and Pakistani intelligence largesse.
This dual loyalty created a political class incentivised to maintain conflict rather than resolve it.
The abrogation ended this arrangement overnight. By centralising control and eliminating the old patronage networks, New Delhi severed the financial and political pipelines that sustained Pakistan’s influence.
This was not just a constitutional act — it was a strategic strike at the heart of Pakistan army’s Kashmir policy.
The Strategic Challenge Ahead: Winning Kashmiri Trust
There is no doubt the security indicators have improved while militancy has declined sharply. Tourism has surged. Elections have seen unprecedented participation. But stability built on coercive control is not sustainable.
The real challenge is political: How does India win back the trust of Kashmiris who have
lived through decades of conflict, betrayal and trauma? So, what lies ahead must be chalked with sensibility and sympathy.
A Ten‑Point Plan to Build a New Kashmir
The first and most urgent step is the restoration of full statehood. Without it, the democratic process remains hollow. A chief minister who cannot control the police, appoint law officers or direct the anti‑corruption bureau is a chief minister in name only. Restoring statehood would signal that New Delhi is ready to trust the people of Jammu and Kashmir with genuine political agency — not symbolic participation.
Equally important is the release of political detainees. Their continued imprisonment perpetuates grievance and strengthens negative propaganda. A carefully calibrated policy of release, rehabilitation and political reintegration would open space for dialogue and reduce the appeal of extremism. No democracy can claim moral authority while keeping political leaders behind bars indefinitely.
The third imperative is the repeal or reform of draconian laws such as the Public Safety Act and UAPA. These laws have been used on flimsy grounds, creating fear and resentment. Ending mass summons, arbitrary detentions and communication shutdowns would demonstrate India’s commitment to civil liberties and democratic norms. Kashmiris must feel protected by the law, not threatened by it.
Economic distress must be addressed with urgency. With graduate unemployment at 23.9% and per capita income falling relative to the national average, Kashmir needs a targeted economic revival plan. Investment in skill development, digital infrastructure, tourism diversification, agriculture modernisation and start‑up incubation can create sustainable livelihoods and restore economic dignity. Economic hopelessness is political instability by another name.
Education and youth development must become central pillars of policy. Decades of conflict have left deep psychological scars. Investment in schools, universities, vocational training and mental health services is essential to rebuild confidence and opportunity. A generation that has grown up amid conflict needs pathways to hope, not lectures about normalcy.
A truth and reconciliation commission is vital to address historical grievances. Such a body — independent, credible and empowered — could document past violations, acknowledge suffering and recommend reparative measures. Healing requires recognition; reconciliation requires truth. Kashmir cannot move forward without confronting its past.
Local governance must be strengthened. Panchayats and municipal bodies should be given real authority, budgets and decision‑making power. Empowering local institutions builds ownership, reduces alienation and creates a more responsive governance structure. Democracy must be felt at the mohalla level, not just proclaimed from Delhi.
New Delhi must also engage every Kashmiri, regardless of past associations. Former militants, separatists, political workers and ordinary citizens must all find a stake in the new political order. Inclusive engagement isolates hardliners and builds a broad coalition for peace. No society heals by excluding its wounded.
A strong wall of resistance against outside interference can only be built by addressing grievances at home. When Kashmiris feel respected, empowered and economically secure, all propaganda loses its appeal. The most effective counter to outside mischief is a politically confident and economically thriving Kashmir.
Finally, the benefits of peace must be visible in everyday life. Better hospitals, reliable electricity, modern schools, improved roads and expanded digital connectivity must reach every village. A tangible peace dividend transforms political sentiment and builds trust in the democratic process. Peace must be felt — not merely announced.
A Strategic Opening, Not a Strategic End
Seven years after the abrogation of Article 370, Jammu and Kashmir may look more stable, but it is not secure in its current political identity. Breaking the old order was easy. But building a new order — one rooted in legitimacy, dignity and democratic empowerment — is the greater and real challenge.
The 2024 elections showed that Kashmiris are willing to participate in democracy. Now New Delhi must respond with equal seriousness: restore statehood, release political detainees, end draconian laws, address economic distress and build trust through inclusion and justice.
The opportunity is real. The question is whether the political will exists to seize it.
Have you liked the news article?