Today, probably no other place on the globe confronts so many complex and ambivalent forms of politics as Kashmir does. India claims the region as an integral part of the nation and Pakistan thinks it is part of the unfinished task of partition. For some, it is part of the larger Umma while for others it is a strategic asset where, according to E.F. Knight, three Empires used to meet.
All these perceptions and the way the Kashmiris have been dealt with by a variety of forces from within and outside, disallow them to have unanimity in their approach towards this assembly election of 2024.
Kashmiris no longer look forward to a miracle of sudden change in which people will be exalted and show capacities for wise self-government of which their previous conduct had given ground for no suspicion.
The crisis that this region faced from 1947 has made even ordinary Kashmiris knowledgeable and insightful, they are in touch with their time quickly, reorganize their conditions, and are intentionally silent.
Perhaps, this silence on their part is perceived by the contemporary Indian state as an acknowledgment of its legitimacy which is partially doubtful.
In several regions, Indian democracy has been connected with extreme instability of government, with rapidly increasing unemployment, lawlessness, broken promises, inflation institutional and constitutional breakdowns, perpetual military insurrections, with constantly recurring alternations of anarchy and despotism.
Many Kashmiris feel politically disenchanted. They are not giving serious thought to public affairs, nor do they have any spontaneous wish to take any part in them. If they are induced to do so and forced to act under complete pressure and direction of individuals or organizations from outside the region their response would be harsh.
The 1987 alleged rigging of elections that led to militancy in 1990 is a case in point. Kashmiris were permanently displaced by various forces in this changing milieu post-1990, hindering their ability to adapt to new circumstances.
Kashmiris are influenced by deeply ingrained traditions, customs, and institutions, as well as fear. The complex attitudes of Kashmiris towards the current political situation stem from the central government’s discriminatory and coercive measures. The BJP government’s recent delimitation efforts, seemingly targeting demographic patterns, have exacerbated tensions.
In the present election the abolition of Article 370, bifurcation and demotion of Statehood to union territory and the BJP’s communal policies and apathy towards non-BJP ruled states are important elements in many constituencies, which are distinct from all vicissitudes of opinion, and entirely irrespective of the good or bad policy of the Government.
It has become a conspicuous and important element in most constituencies and will contribute powerfully to the outcome of 2024 assembly elections in the region.
In Kashmir’s politics, apart from National Conference, Congress, Apni party, AIP, BJP and PDP leaders, the other two most powerful forces are religious sects and the local leaders connected with separatist linkages.
In a Kashmiri democracy, the art of winning votes this way is also one of the chief parts of practical politics. Religiosity and prejudice are also a great force in political propagandism in Kashmir.
In rural Kashmir, the demagogues of various political parties including dissenters try to persuade the voters that by following a certain line of policy every member of his class will obtain some advantage.
The Gujjars and Bakerwals are no longer an ignorant community, they have opinions of their own. Among them, biases of their creed and religiosity also often display great vitality.
The Kashmiri Pandits are the smallest minority and their vote share is not decisive at all. They are sober, industrious, and literate but the forced migration from their homes has pushed them within the narrow circle of their own suffering, ideas, surroundings, and immediate interests. Although they are sparsely spread all over the globe and do not contribute to Kashmir’s public opinion anymore, yet they exhibit no small shrewdness of judgment.
In the Jammu region, the political culture is slightly different. Apart from other political parties, there are sections of strong votaries of RSS/BJP in almost all constituencies except Doda and Poonch but the larger issue that dominates the public opinion is that BJP’s policies have brought an increasing decline in businesses in the region and impacted Jammuites lives very seriously.
Therefore, they are in a dilemma this time. The Jammu business class has an identity and considerable material interest; they probably exercise local influence as businessmen and employers of labour.
The forms of corruption which are practiced in a pure democracy are in general far more detrimental to the prosperity of Kashmiris than those which existed in other days.
Some of the conditions of democracy in Jammu and Kashmir are essentially different from those prevalent in rest of India and the worst effects of the delimitation experiment in government must be profoundly interesting to every serious political inquirer in Kashmir and outside. There is a widespread feeling among the intelligentsia in Jammu and Kashmir that a considerable amount of well-bred political apathy is very desirable in such circumstances.
If it were animated by a strong and earnest political spirit it would never acquiesce in the completely subordinate position assigned to it, especially as this position is largely due to the abrogation of Article 370, bifurcation and scrapping of Statehood to Jammu and Kashmir. Many among the disappointed lot hope for some organic change to come in due course of time.
Cutting across political parties and ideologies, the politicians in Kashmir and New Delhi should remember that many misconceptions are still in the possession of the public mind in Kashmir. The BJP’s political policymakers in New Delhi should know that in the larger frame of multiculturalism, Kashmiris are a part of organic life and will grow by assimilation over time and not by coercion.
The characteristic function, of the present government should be to administer affairs with steady wisdom, tolerance, and uprightness, however, most people in Kashmir greatly doubt whether the current government and its own version of democracy fulfill these requirements.
One of the most conspicuous features of this government is the extreme under-representation of certain communities which has the potential to result in the astonishing instability of the Indian state.
Indian Democracy in Kashmir can be sustained if it is conciliatory in nature and attractive enough to discard the politics of secessionism so that the vibrant political life of Kashmir which has been suppressed or unexpressed or strangulated for long does not burst out with a volcanic fury again.
Have you liked the news article?