Kashmir’s Electoral Verdict: The Enduring Struggle for Identity: Modi’s Failed Gamble
- Revocation of Article 370: India's abrogation of Article 370 in August 2019 ended Jammu and Kashmir's special autonomy, fueling protests and military repression.
- Electoral Fallout: Elections held post-abrogation were condemned as a facade, with results highlighting deep communal divides between the Muslim-majority Kashmir Valley and Hindu-majority Jammu.
- Intensified Resistance: Modi's policies have heightened local resistance, reinforcing the Kashmiri struggle for self-determination and exacerbating tensions, with the region's future unresolved.
On 5th August 2019, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government took the bold decision to revoke Article 370 from the Indian Constitution, thereby dismantling the special autonomous status provided to Jammu and Kashmir. Due to this autonomy, the region had spent a certain degree of time enjoying independence to conduct its legislation and governance, except in defense, foreign affairs, and communications. The government cited the move as a way to encourage integration and development in Kashmir but was severely condemned by both Kashmiris and the rest of the world. The move was roundly criticized as India attempted to assimilate the Muslim-majority region by sidestepping the territorial and cultural disputes, making Indian-occupied Kashmir one of South Asia’s most contentious regions.
The Backdrop of Conflict
Since 1947, the epicenter of a bitter dispute over territory between India and Pakistan, and between two squadrons of military jets, has been Kashmir. For decades it has been a source of violence and a magnet for insurgencies, military crackdowns, and human rights abuses. Article 370 abrogation made it worse. After the move, there is a strict militarisation policy in the area instigated by the Indian government, and at this time it is normal to experience communication blackouts, curfews, and a taking in of local political leaders. Taking notice of what ensued, many believed this was an effort to suppress dissent and change Kashmir’s demographic and political landscape, sidelining its Muslim majority.
The international community also worried over the legitimacy of the Indian government’s actions. The British holding that Mansergh referred to was completely against United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 91 of 1951, which had clearly stated that no political or administrative changes could be brought in Jammu and Kashmir without consultation of its people through a UN-supervised plebiscite. The Indian government ignored this resolution, and the principle of self-determination was fixed in international law by unilaterally revoking the special status.
The Competing Electoral Landscape
After the abrogation of Article 370, elections were held in Jammu and Kashmir. This, the BJP said, would mark a step towards normalization and democracy in the region. But these elections were universally condemned as a facade because they were held without the slightest respect for the will of the Kashmiri people in a heavy military presence. For many in Kashmir, they were seen as part of a strategy to further cement India’s grip on the region, denying their right to self-determination. They saw the elections as an effort to impose a political reality on a people who had not agreed to have their autonomy stripped from them.
But the results of the elections sent a strong message to the people of Kashmir. Historically, Jammu and Kashmir’s National Conference (JKNC) party, which has previously fought for rights and regional autonomy in the Kashmir Valley, won overwhelmingly in the Muslim-majority Kashmir Valley. Contrary to that, the BJP did very well in the Hindu-majority part of Jammu. The result of this electoral outcome underlined the deep communal and geographical cleavages that are deepening in the region with Modi’s policies. Its resounding rejection in the Valley was widely understood as the rejection of the government’s efforts to marginalize the Valley’s unique identity.
Modi’s Miscalculation
Modi’s policies in Jammu and Kashmir have been thoroughly anti-compromising Hindu nationalist policies. But never before has it been so clear that his government seeks to alter the region’s demographic and political landscape, and that this is part of its broader strategy of religious polarization within India. In a region where heightened repression and militarization have marked the years since 2019, the BJP rhetoric of integration and development has not squared.
Modi’s gamble to shore up political legitimacy in Kashmir through these flawed democratic processes failed the election results. Rather than ensuring the region’s integration into India, the BJP’s policies have driven the local population even further from the center, furthering a perception of occupation it cannot shake. On the whole, the elections proved that Kashmiris, and Kashmiri people in the Valley especially, have refused to yield on their stance against the BJP’s agenda.
In Jammu, where the BJP retained the sheen, it was evident which side the polarizing state government was leaning on. Modi’s policies of division, not inclusion, are clear for all to see, even in the voting patterns here, where the Hindu-majority Jammu contrasted sharply with the Muslim-majority valley. The BJP’s strategy has resulted in a highly dangerous dichotomy where two communities are set against each other and the already weak region takes further turns into disaster.
The Path Forward
Jammu and Kashmir’s elections have backfired for the BJP as a referendum on its policy for the state. It solidifies the failure of the government’s efforts to win hearts and minds in the region. Modi’s method, based on coercion and a disregard for international norms, has merely exacerbated the conflict and bolstered the Kashmiri resistance.
Things are still riding high in Kashmir. Internationally, the people of the region have continued to build upon their right to self-determination, as promised by international law. The Indian government’s refusal to seriously engage in dialogue and drilling down methods is not an unpopular action—the general rise in resentment and resistance to this is caused by this. If India is committed in real terms to peace and stability in Kashmir, then the region’s people make their voices heard, and India will return to the negotiating table. There should be a just solution for Kashmir that would be respected by its people for its future. The struggle for identity and self-determination will continue till then, and the scars of August 5, 2019, will remain one important symbol of the Kashmiri resistance against what the people of Kashmir call their colonization.
The author is a graduate in International Relations from NUML, Islamabad.
