Five years back the Narendra Modi government had abrogated Article 370 of the Constitution and followed it with the bifurcation of the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir, into two Union territories (UTs) of J&K and Ladakh. This effectively meant liberating Ladakh from the troubled state, but leaving behind a symbiotic union of two very dissimilar regions, one mostly Muslim and the other mostly Hindu. The Kashmir Valley, of about 6.9 million people, is 96.4 per cent Muslim with Hindus and Buddhists accounting for just 3.6 per cent; and Jammu, with a population of 5.4 million, is 62.6 per cent Hindu and 33.5 per cent Muslims. It only ended up making a bad situation worse.
The new UT of J&K effectively meant an end to full democracy and self-government, and leaving an area bigger than many full-fledged states of the Indian Union, with a population of more than 12 million, with a government with much less power and authority than enjoyed by the erstwhile J&K state. For all practical purposes, it has been directly ruled by Delhi. We have seen how the Union government has emasculated the Delhi government, leaving the people of Delhi with little say in their government and living in the midst of a physical and political mess.
“Managing” Delhi is a lot easier, but managing an insurgency-ridden territory striving for “azadi” has been a bone too hard for the Modi government to chew. One thing is almost certain. India has very few now batting for it in the Kashmir Valley and the Muslim-dominated Poonch area of Jammu. The election results underline it.
When the Modi government and the RSS do not share the aspirations of a modern, egalitarian and truly secular nation, it would be quite ridiculous to expect the people of Kashmir and its leaders to aspire for it. It seems that the lessons of Nagaland have not been learnt by the Centre. Instead of democracy taking a step forward, it has taken a huge step backwards.
Kashmir is the northernmost geographical region of South Asia. Until the mid-19th century, the term “Kashmir” denoted only the valley between the Great Himalayas and the Pir Panjal range. Muslim rule was ushered in by Shamsuddin Shah Mir (1339-42), a courtier in the court of King Udayanadeva who seized the throne after his death. The Mughals took control in 1586 during the rule of Jalaluddin Akbar. The region came under the control of the Durrani Empire in Kabul from 1753 to 1819, when the Sikhs took over. In 1846, the treachery of Gulab Singh, a Dogra general and governor of Jammu, was repaid when the British gave him Jammu for it and further turned over the Kashmir Valley to him for Rs 75 lakhs.
These treaties formed the so-called princely state of Jammu and Kashmir and Gulab Singh became its first maharajah. This was also the first time that Jammu and Kashmir became one administrative entity. As governor of Jammu, Gulab Singh had also captured Ladakh and Baltistan. His son Ranbir Singh added Hunza, Gilgit and Nagar to the kingdom. Thus, a composite state of disparate regions, religions and ethnicities was formed. This is reflected in the present-day demographics.
The purpose of elaborating on this is two-fold. Historically, all the regions of Jammu and Kashmir are part of the present narrative of India’s composite history. Despite its preponderant Muslim population, the history of people of the Kashmir Valley is intertwined with all the different local histories of the many nationalities of present-day India, which is also home to the world’s second largest Muslim population. There is no separate Kashmir story as there is for Afghanistan or Nepal. It was always a part of the Indian mainland, except for a brief spell of rule from Kabul. There is no tradition or case for a separate Kashmir, like the Tibetans may have or the Palestinians have.
This J&K, with or without PoK and Ladakh, is an artificial entity of recent origin. Historically, culturally, ethnically and linguistically, Jammu, Ladakh and Kashmir have as much in common as Tamil Nadu has with Punjab or Assam with Gujarat. The destinies of the people of Jammu have to be delinked from Kashmir.
In the new India, old states got subsumed and new states were created. All the many regions of the erstwhile princely state of J&K, whether in India or under the control of Pakistan, have by and large settled down under their new national identities, except the Kashmir Valley. It is now India’s seemingly intractable problem. It has festered for over 75 years. Did we miss something?
Independent India is a nation of many nationalities and for the first time with power vested with the people by a lively democracy. More than being a nation bound together by shared history, shared culture and shared ethnicity, it is bound together by shared aspirations assured by the Constitution, written by our founding fathers that shared idealism and nationalism forged by shared experience. While it is amply clear that many, if not most, people in the Kashmir Valley do not share the aspirations that bind the rest of us, history does not offer them any basis for a distinct and independent identity either.
On the other hand, the narrative of Kashmir’s recent history has taken a distinct course different from the rest of the country. This India needs to recognise. In these past 70 years, India has made a hash of managing Kashmir either by placation or by an iron hand. The Indian republic now has to offer something tangible to satisfy most aspirations in Kashmir, and we are talking only about Kashmir. Instead, it seems that by linking Kashmir in an unnatural union with Jammu and bringing them under Delhi’s direct rule, India is only offering the troubled people of Kashmir a choice of jackboots. Delhi must seek to accommodate Kashmir with an autonomy that will satisfy the aspirations nurtured by this long period of revolt.
With accession to Pakistan or a complete independence not options, an acceptable via media must be and can be found. The breakthrough for that must happen in the minds of the rest of India. The heavens are not going to fall if Kashmir becomes an autonomous region within India. The extent of autonomy then becomes the only matter for discussion. We can afford to be generous. But it appears that the Narendra Modi government is still not ready for it? It lives under the delusion that all is well.
