As a Kashmiri activist, I find it imperative to address the recent remarks made by External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar at Chatham House in London regarding the abrogation of Article 370 and the situation in Kashmir.
While the minister lauds this unilateral decision as a step in the right direction, it is crucial to examine the reality on the ground, the historical context, and the promises made by Indian leaders to the people of Kashmir.
The abrogation of Article 370, which granted special status to Jammu and Kashmir, was not merely a legal manoeuvre; it was a political act that stripped the people of Kashmir of their autonomy and rights. The special provisions enshrined in the Indian Constitution were not just privileges but commitments made to the people of Jammu and Kashmir.
The founding leaders of India, including Jawaharlal Nehru, recognised the unique circumstances surrounding Kashmir and assured its people that their aspirations would be respected. The abrogation of Article 370 is a betrayal of these promises and a violation of the trust placed in the Indian state.
Claims of development in J&K
Minister Jaishankar claims that Kashmir is thriving and that development is at its peak. However, this narrative stands in stark contrast to the lived experiences of the Kashmiri people. The ground realities tell a different story—one marked by a pervasive atmosphere of fear and repression. His government’s failure to honour these commitments speaks volumes about its disregard for the democratic rights of the Kashmiri people.
The situation in Jammu and Kashmir has drawn international attention, with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights addressing Kashmir’s human rights situation in global updates and UN officials expressing concern over deteriorating conditions. Jaishankar’s remarks reflect deep-seated frustration in the face of international scrutiny.The narrative of normalcy is a façade that crumbles under the weight of the lived experiences of the Kashmiri people.
Rather than addressing these concerns, the government resorts to frustration and denial. When questioned about its actions in Kashmir, the government issues statements devoid of substance, attempting to dismiss legitimate concerns as mere propaganda. This reaction is indicative of a government that is losing its grip on the narrative and is unwilling to confront the reality of its actions.
The refusal to demilitarise Kashmir raises further questions about commitment to normalcy. If the situation is indeed as stable as the External Affairs Minister claims, why does India maintain a heavy military presence in the region? The continued militarisation of the region is a clear indication that the government is aware of the fragility of the situation and is unwilling to take genuine steps towards reconciliation.
Draconian laws
None of the draconian laws, such as the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) and the Public Safety Act (PSA), have been withdrawn. These laws continue to enable impunity for human rights violations and further alienate the Kashmiri people.
The abrogation of Article 370 and the subsequent claims of development and normalcy are nothing more than a smokescreen to mask the ongoing repression in Kashmir. The government must confront the reality that the aspirations of the Kashmiri people cannot be silenced through force or propaganda. The path to lasting peace and stability in the region lies in acknowledging the rights of the people of Kashmir and engaging in a sincere dialogue that respects their aspirations.
It is time to honour commitments to the people of Kashmir and work towards a peaceful resolution that respects their rights and aspirations. The international community must also play a role in holding players accountable for their actions and ensuring that the voices of the people in Jammu and Kashmir are heard and respected.
The External Affairs Minister’s assertion that people participated in large numbers in elections must also be scrutinised. While electoral participation is often touted as a sign of normalcy, it is essential to understand the context in which these elections are held.
'Stolen part of Kashmir'
In a region under military occupation, where dissent is met with repression, the legitimacy of such electoral processes is highly questionable. The people of Kashmir view these elections as a façade, a means for the Indian state to project an image of democracy while suppressing their genuine aspirations for self-determination.
To further bolster his claims, Jaishankar pointed to the need to reclaim the “stolen part of Kashmir” occupied by Pakistan. This rhetoric not only perpetuates a narrative of hostility but also conveniently ignores the fact that the Kashmir conflict has an international dimension with a historical background etched in the events of 1947–48 that cannot be ignored.
Even in addressing the issue of the so-called “stolen part” of Jammu and Kashmir, a diplomatic and inclusive dialogue is essential—one that includes all stakeholders, particularly the people of Jammu and Kashmir, whose views must be ascertained through a fair, independent process.
Have you liked the news article?