The decades-old chasms that exist between New Delhi and Srinagar have again been reflected in the just concluded elections for the Lok Sabha. While the battle in rest of India was about managing more seats to come to power, apart from the insignificant campaign (in terms of issues), in Kashmir people were wrestling on the polling days on the issue of boycott and vote. This again showed how Jammu and Kashmir state (except for Jammu and Ladakh regions) was differently placed when it comes to the critical issue of democracy and strengthening the democratic institutions.
The process has been projected as having nothing to do with the larger question of resolving the issue of Jammu and Kashmir. This has been the policy adopted by the pro-India political parties whose main objective has been to be in power. However, negating their own argument the same parties have also chipped into the political discourse and carved out a space for being the stakeholders in the final resolution. For example, both National Conference and Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) have come up with their solutions to address the Kashmir issue. Though they know that the political empowerment is something which New Delhi will not allow a regional party to enjoy, the noise continues unabated. The bottom line for all the discourses these pro-India parties are shaping is to attract the attention of people. And this is being done through a collage of “restoring dignity and honour” and “a quality life” by way of good governance.
Similarly, the separatists have not brought any change in their strategy. They continue to call for the boycott but fail to give any pragmatic roadmap for taking the process of resolution forward. Notwithstanding the fact majority of people in Kashmir boycotted the elections, but that was not purely because of their boycott call. They did thank people in wholesale for “paying heed” to their call, but that was not the case when it comes to real situation on the ground. They failed to explain as to who should own those who chose to vote in these elections.
What has New Delhi gained?
For those who are at the helm in Delhi, it hardly matters how many people would come to vote. For them conducting the process is more important. In past six decades they have not learnt any lesson so they would refuse to do so in this round as well. When the UPA government sent Afzal Guru to the gallows, it was a clear message to people in Kashmir that they don’t care about what they thought about the “illegitimate” rule of Delhi. They are confident about the power to overcome any challenge in Kashmir. And at the global level too there are more takers for India’s version than that of Kashmir or Pakistan. However, what they cannot ignore for long time is the fact that Kashmir’s new generation has empathically declared that it was at far distance from them both politically and emotionally.
Mainstream Failure
Those who have been in power in Kashmir for last over 17 years have also lost the battle. Leaving the results aside, the way people, especially youth, behaved in these elections, it puts the entire pro-India political set up in a bad picture. Leaders of both NC and PDP came under attacks from youth and it was the demonstration of growing influence of those who don’t support the electoral process.
Fear may be an important factor in keeping many voters away but the majority of people did not allow legitimizing this process out of their own will. The incident of beating those in Sopore and Baramulla, who voted in frontier district of Kupwara, is another example of how people of an ideology perceived it.
Separatists Illusions
On the other hand, the separatists also need to introspect. Like in 2010, this time also the people took the control of enforcing the boycott. Stone pelting on polling days, locking of polling booths and attacking those who wanted to vote or encouraged others to vote was the telltale story on polling days. Except for the routine statements they did not lead the people. They did thank them for the boycott but so did the mainstream parties for voting (to those who did). They also claim to represent the people of Jammu and Kashmir but then in Jammu and Ladakh there was record turnout. Why did the people at these places not listen to them?
There are lessons for all but will they ever think of taking them seriously. People also need to think on shedding this stigma of “40 lakh” being with all the parties. If one goes by the election meetings held in past two months, it is difficult to understand as to why there was low turnout. However, the urban centers such as Srinagar, Baramulla, Sopore, Tral, Anantnag and Pulwama have shown that they are steadfast in their ideology of not taking part in the elections. This election was no different in the context of Kashmir politics – competing narratives and crossing ideologies.
The author is a journalist based in Srinagar
The process has been projected as having nothing to do with the larger question of resolving the issue of Jammu and Kashmir. This has been the policy adopted by the pro-India political parties whose main objective has been to be in power. However, negating their own argument the same parties have also chipped into the political discourse and carved out a space for being the stakeholders in the final resolution. For example, both National Conference and Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) have come up with their solutions to address the Kashmir issue. Though they know that the political empowerment is something which New Delhi will not allow a regional party to enjoy, the noise continues unabated. The bottom line for all the discourses these pro-India parties are shaping is to attract the attention of people. And this is being done through a collage of “restoring dignity and honour” and “a quality life” by way of good governance.
Similarly, the separatists have not brought any change in their strategy. They continue to call for the boycott but fail to give any pragmatic roadmap for taking the process of resolution forward. Notwithstanding the fact majority of people in Kashmir boycotted the elections, but that was not purely because of their boycott call. They did thank people in wholesale for “paying heed” to their call, but that was not the case when it comes to real situation on the ground. They failed to explain as to who should own those who chose to vote in these elections.
What has New Delhi gained?
For those who are at the helm in Delhi, it hardly matters how many people would come to vote. For them conducting the process is more important. In past six decades they have not learnt any lesson so they would refuse to do so in this round as well. When the UPA government sent Afzal Guru to the gallows, it was a clear message to people in Kashmir that they don’t care about what they thought about the “illegitimate” rule of Delhi. They are confident about the power to overcome any challenge in Kashmir. And at the global level too there are more takers for India’s version than that of Kashmir or Pakistan. However, what they cannot ignore for long time is the fact that Kashmir’s new generation has empathically declared that it was at far distance from them both politically and emotionally.
Mainstream Failure
Those who have been in power in Kashmir for last over 17 years have also lost the battle. Leaving the results aside, the way people, especially youth, behaved in these elections, it puts the entire pro-India political set up in a bad picture. Leaders of both NC and PDP came under attacks from youth and it was the demonstration of growing influence of those who don’t support the electoral process.
Fear may be an important factor in keeping many voters away but the majority of people did not allow legitimizing this process out of their own will. The incident of beating those in Sopore and Baramulla, who voted in frontier district of Kupwara, is another example of how people of an ideology perceived it.
Separatists Illusions
On the other hand, the separatists also need to introspect. Like in 2010, this time also the people took the control of enforcing the boycott. Stone pelting on polling days, locking of polling booths and attacking those who wanted to vote or encouraged others to vote was the telltale story on polling days. Except for the routine statements they did not lead the people. They did thank them for the boycott but so did the mainstream parties for voting (to those who did). They also claim to represent the people of Jammu and Kashmir but then in Jammu and Ladakh there was record turnout. Why did the people at these places not listen to them?
There are lessons for all but will they ever think of taking them seriously. People also need to think on shedding this stigma of “40 lakh” being with all the parties. If one goes by the election meetings held in past two months, it is difficult to understand as to why there was low turnout. However, the urban centers such as Srinagar, Baramulla, Sopore, Tral, Anantnag and Pulwama have shown that they are steadfast in their ideology of not taking part in the elections. This election was no different in the context of Kashmir politics – competing narratives and crossing ideologies.
The author is a journalist based in Srinagar