The chapter on Jammu and Kashmir seems to have turned over to a new one following the talks at the Prime Minister’s residence a day ago. It was the formal interaction between the political leaders of Jammu and Kashmir and the Prime Minister since August 5, 2019 when the Article 370 was abrogated along with the Jammu and Kashmir being ‘demoted’ to a status of Union Territory. Furthermore, Ladakh was separated out to form a new Union Territory in itself. There was a crackdown of sorts in the Union Territory and political leaders were arrested. It was felt that the leaders themselves wanted to go behind bars for a short period to demonstrate they are fighting for what they consider the rightful causes of the territory of J&K. Apparently in private, many J&K leaders including the Abdullahs had indicated to the PM stating it would need sometime for Kashmir too cool down post abrogation of 370. The abrogation had been challenged in the Supreme Court where it currently awaiting to be heard.
The discussion at the PM’s residence seems to have been cordial. There have been various readings of the discussions based on the political preferences and the audience they were addressing to. It is quite possible the discussion would have gone a slightly different note in the actual session. There seemingly were floated sticks and carrots to the interlocutors from the state to ensure they hinged back onto the mainstream. There was a view in some quarters over the PM surrendering of sorts to the Kashmir lobby yet again when he invited them for talks. There was a view in some other quarters that the talks were being held under foreign pressure. Meanwhile the right wing groups on the social media platforms like Twitter were critical of ignoring what they called the Hindu sentiments. Their grouse was Jammu groups and the Pandit groups were ignored. However, this has to be discounted since the meeting was with the political groups in the UT rather than social groups. Moreover, there eight representatives from Kashmir and six from Jammu. This more or less settles the representation from both the regions.
In all likelihood there was little pressure from foreign governments. Neither the notes from the meeting suggest that the PM had surrendered to the Kashmir lobby. In fact, what emerges is quite different than what was believed to be. In all probability, the issue of Article 370 is done deed. There seemed to be more or less reconciliation on this among all parties. The fact that everyone was talking about it being resolved in the court testifies to the same. In all probability, the case will lie hanging in the Supreme Court for a fairly long period of time. It suits every party since it keeps the issue alive without a change in status quo. Interestingly, of the five demands kept by the Congress, restoration of 370 does not seem to be one of them.
The key issue that seem to have emerged was the demand for the restoration of statehood to the UT. There seemed to be unanimity in the Kashmiri political parties barring BJP on this. Yet, there seemed to be firm assurance on the timeline for the restoration barring a commitment to do so at some point of time in the future. To the PM and his team, it seemed the delimitation was the key issue followed by the elections. The PM seemed to have stressed upon the speedy conclusion of the delimitation process. He seemed to have suggested the early elections could be made possible only if the delimitation process could be completed as fast as possible. In this he was obviously suggesting to the parties that their participation would be critical in the process if they have aspirations of regaining power in the state. The elections would be linked to the delimitation and the statehood to the elections and possible behavior of the Kashmiri political groups post elections.
The roadmap seems to be clear from the government side. While there is a demand for restoration for statehood, the government seems to be in no mood to commit to an early restoration unless the elections are completed. There is an uneven distribution of seats in the legislative assembly between Jammu and Kashmir regions. In the erstwhile assembly, Jammu had 37 while Kashmir had 46. Kashmir has greater population but Jammu is greater in terms of area. The new delimitation might seek to get parity between the two. It is likely that both regions will get 45 seats each in the assembly while gain two seats each in the Lok Sabha. The fifth Lok Sabha seat might be created out of areas from both regions. This would give leverage to the BJP since it is dominant in the Jammu region. Post elections, if they are able to form the government, there might be possibility of early restoration of statehood. One reason why state was converted into UT was essentially to facilitate delimitation without having to constitute the assembly. The UT can have indefinite period of President’s rule in theory in contrast to the state wherein the Presidents under Article 356 necessitates Parliamentary approval.
Therefore, the delimitation process will be given greater credence and to a good extent the government seems to have made it clear. Once the delimitation happens, there would be elections in the UT with a new government taking over post the elections. The government has wielded a carrot of restoration of statehood if the law and order improves in the territory. The Home Minister’s response seems to have very clear with the linking of statehood prospects to improvement in situation. Unless the insurgency and terrorism dies down, it is unlikely the government will do something in handing powers back to Srinagar. It is likely that Jammu will greater say in terms of the elected representatives rather than the Kashmiri centric electoral power play so far. For all that matters, GN Azad is the only CM from the Jammu region. The Hindus of Jammu still await their first CM. In all probability, the Modi government seems to be pushing towards this. The political parties in the Valley seems to have reconciled to the same. This is perhaps the more unambiguous message from the PM’s meeting with the Kashmiri leaders.
Thoughts on Theory and Practice 