The recently concluded elections in Jammu and Kashmir have been hailed as a victory for democracy by many, including Arun Joshi in his article, Kashmir Elections: A Ray of Hope, published recently in a local newspaper.
Joshi celebrates the elections as a reflection of the people’s will and a return to normalcy in the conflict-ridden region. However, a critical examination reveals an alternative perspective — one that raises pertinent questions about the authenticity, integrity, and implications of such elections in a region fraught with complex political realities and historical grievances.
To equate the mere act of holding elections with the functioning of a democracy is, at best, an oversimplification. In Jammu and Kashmir, the political environment remains heavily dominated by unelected and imposed authorities.
Since the abrogation of Article 370 on August 5, 2019, the region’s autonomy has been significantly undermined, with all functional powers concentrated in the hands of the Delhi-appointed Lieutenant Governor.
Whether it is public order, policing, or the appointment of judicial officers, decisions are made without meaningful involvement from elected representatives. In such a setup, elections risk becoming a façade, offering the illusion of democracy while depriving representatives of the authority to effect meaningful change.
Additionally, the heavy militarization and circumstances—raise serious concerns about the conditions under which these elections were conducted. This environment undermines the overall integrity of the electoral process. To celebrate elections while ignoring the underlying issues of autonomy, security, and human rights risks perpetuating a superficial narrative that fails to address the aspirations of the people.
The election results themselves challenge the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) narrative of development and integration within the Indian Union. The electorate’s choices indicate a rejection of the BJP’s policies and a desire for genuine representation and the restoration of pre-2019 conditions, including the special status granted under Article 370. The results reflect not just dissent but also a broader yearning for the reversal of the unilateral actions imposed after August 2019.
Omar Abdullah, leader of the National Conference (NC), finds himself at a political crossroads in this fraught environment. The electorate’s demand for statehood and greater autonomy puts immense pressure on Abdullah and his party to deliver on their promises. Yet, navigating the political landscape dominated by the BJP and Prime Minister Narendra Modi presents significant challenges.
Public Expectations: Abdullah’s party has historically positioned itself as a defender of Jammu and Kashmir’s special status. Failure to actively pursue these goals could result in a loss of credibility, with voters perceiving the NC as complicit in accommodating central government policies.
Political Realities: The BJP’s dominance at the national level, combined with its assertive stance on Kashmir, limits the NC’s ability to challenge the central government. Abdullah’s cautious approach, likely aimed at avoiding further marginalization, may alienate the party’s supporters, who expect a more assertive stance.
Electoral Viability: The NC’s struggle to maintain relevance mirrors the decline of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), which has faced similar challenges in adapting to the post-2019 political climate. Without effectively advocating for statehood and autonomy, the NC risks further erosion of its support base.
The inability of the current government to restore the powers of the state assembly further undermines the legitimacy of the electoral process. Without a functional legislative body capable of addressing the region’s aspirations, the elections are reduced to a symbolic exercise—a rubber stamp for decisions made in New Delhi.
The aspirations of the people of Jammu and Kashmir are multifaceted and cannot be addressed through superficial electoral processes alone. True peace and prosperity will remain elusive unless there is a genuine effort to engage with the voices and concerns of the local population. This requires acknowledging their right to self-determination and addressing the historical grievances that have fuelled conflict for decades.
While elections are an essential component of democracy, they must be contextualized within a broader framework of political autonomy, security, and representation. In Jammu and Kashmir, the fundamental conditions for genuine self-governance remain absent.
Until the aspirations of the people are realized and the political landscape becomes genuinely representative, celebrating elections as a triumph of democracy rings hollow.
The real test of democracy begins after the votes are cast. It lies in upholding freedoms, accommodating civil society, and respecting the aspirations of its people. A democracy that fails to embrace these principles risks devolving into little more than an autocracy.
The author is the Chairman of the Kashmir Institute of International Relations (KIIR) and can be reached on X at @sultan1913.
Have you liked the news article?