What Will Abrogation Of Article 370 Mean for Jammu and Kashmir and India?

To understand the implications of the abrogation of article 370 in August 2019, and the parallel Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act we need to understand some basic things about the state of Jammu & Kashmir in the first place.

Joining the Indian Republic

At the time of independence from the British, Jammu & Kashmir was not a part of the Indian State. It was known as the princely state of Kashmir and Jammu. Though the demographics were overwhelmingly dominated by the Muslim population, the princely state had a Hindu ruler- Hari Singh. At the time of partition, the princely state was roughly 77% Muslim, with 20% being Hindu and the rest a mix of other religions, notably Sikh in the Jammu area, and Buddhist in the Ladakh area.

At the time of partition, the princely state had in place an agreement with Pakistan to allow for trade and other communication and was working on the same with India. This was to allow the ruler at the time, Hari Singh some time to decide which dominion to join, as all princely states were encouraged to decide by the British at the time of independence.

However, due to unrest possibly (probably really) instigated by the Pakistani government, there was internal unrest that culminated in the Poonch Rebellion and an attempt to secede and join Pakistan. Militias were being formed that began to raid the princely state- with the backing of the Pakistani government and military. Prior to this, the Muslim Conference, which was the rival of the Indian National Congress ally the National conference declared an Azad Kashmir in the northwest of the state.

It is due to both these actions that the Maharaja, Hari Singh agreed to accede to the Indian state, on the condition of support of the Indian army to drive out militias and Pakistan-backed forces. This subsequently led to the first India-Pakistan war over the state of Jammu & Kashmir in 1947. An inauspicious beginning for two newly independent and neighbouring countries. India was the winner of this war, though there was a ceasefire that divided the state roughly in half, but with India retaining the more populated and developed part of the state.

Shortly after this, India held elections in their part of the state, which allowed for the Congress allied National Conference to come to power in much of the state. The issue of Jammu and Kashmir belonging to either India or Pakistan was brought up in the UN by the latter, and in principle, it was agreed by both countries that an impartial plebiscite was to be held to determine the will of the people in the state.

However, the plebiscite never happened, due to India’s unwillingness to follow through, based on accusations (some of which were true) that Pakistan was not keeping up with its side of the bargain in clearing the state of militias. There was also more likely than not a fear of the plebiscite not turning out in India’s favour due to the demographics of the state. We will never know today, but one can guess what would have likely happened.

Upon accession to the Indian Republic, the state of Jammu and Kashmir was granted limited sovereignty- it could have its own flag, constitution and laws, but was unable to conduct foreign affairs or have a military of its own. This special status was known as article 370, and it was both key to maintaining peace in Jammu & Kashmir, and riling up Hindutva nationalists who hated the idea of a Muslim dominated state having special status.

Jammu and Kashmir as a part of India

The history of the state since joining India is a huge topic in and of itself, one I do not intend to tackle here. Check this article by the publication, Time, which correctly conveys the tone of how India has treated the state.

To summarise here, the vast majority of people in Kashmir, including prominent political figures have wanted to have their own nation, but have been suppressed by India, which has maintained one of the most militarised and oppressed zones in the world.

I do not know whether Jammu and Kashmir should be a part of India, or an independent nation. I do not think it would be better off in Pakistan for obvious economic and social reasons. I do however know that the way India has treated Jammu and Kashmir has been inhumane, criminal and short-sighted.

Whether it was under the rule of the Congress which has routinely interfered in state matters through use of the army and paramilitary forces as highlighted in this paper by Amnesty International in 1996, or the current BJP government at the centre which has unilaterally and without the consent of the governed decided that Kashmir does not get to have special status under article 370- completely illegally in the opinion of many- here, here and here. Not to mention the grossly inhuman act similar to the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. Additionally, the state routinely goes through communication blackouts and suspension of the internet. This itself is a human rights violation as well, which when coupled with the suppression of journalism has resulted in the outside world knowing little of what goes on in Jammu & Kashmir, other than what the Indian state allows or tells us directly.

It’s important to acknowledge that local elements in Jammu and Kashmir have contributed towards terrorism and secessionist movements, and have acted directly against the Indian army and state. That is however in retaliation to the way that India has treated the people of the state- as people that are always under suspicion, subject to routine and arbitrary checks, assaults on persons, no legal recourse due to the powers that the army enjoys, and the idea that the entire state is anti-India and therefore undeserving of basic human rights and dignities. It is no wonder that the state has been in a permanently restive and indeed violent condition- it is a people that has never had a choice in whether it belongs to the Indian state or not.

What will the removal of article 370 and the accompanying actions mean for Kashmir and India?

In light of that background, it is hard not to think that the abrogation of article 370 is a sinister and cruel move- which in conjunction with the new domicile laws and procedures and encouragement of interstate investment and migration and the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, the aim of the undeniably Hindutva government, that the demographics of the state will slowly and irrevocably be changed to that of a Hindu majority. And this is by design, as it fits with the ideology of the RSS acolytes and Hindutva leaning politicians in the country. As the only Muslim majority state, it was an obvious target and indeed an electoral promise that the state would be rescinded its special status.

Part of the provisions of the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act is that the state of Jammu and Kashmir is to be divided into two union territories, Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh.

Ladakh is largely Muslim (46%), but outnumbered by the as referred to by Amit Shah, “Vedic” religions of Buddhism (39%), Hinduism (12%) and Sikhism (1%). One can imagine now that this union territory’s next election will not go in favour of the Muslim population.

Jammu & Kashmir is even more contentious than this. The process of delimitation also mandated by the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act has set out a target of having 90 seats instead of the previous 83. An increased number of seats is meant to be proportional to a growing population. The rationale for allocating seats is that the more populous the area, the more seats it gets. Therefore, the Kashmir division which has a population of 6,888,475 ought to have 56% of the total 90 seats as the Jammu division has 44% of the population of the current union territory. This would translate to 50 seats for Kashmir and 40 seats for Jammu.

Keep in mind that the religious demographics of Kashmir are such that 96% of the population is Muslim, whereas it is only 33.5% Muslim in Jammu. Now how does it seem if the new breakup of MLC seats is to be 47 seats for Kashmir and 43 for Jammu. This is clearly not a fair division of seats as far as population is concerned, and the motive behind it is clear. The six additional seats in Jammu are also coupled with reserved seats for SC/ST (7 and 9 seats respectively) and are meant to enable the state to be administered by the Hindu majority district in a Muslim majority state. By contrast, the more populous Kashmir district will only receive one additional seat.

It is not at all a stretch of the imagination to see that the Indian state, in its quest to promote “economic development” will encourage Hindus from other states to migrate in order to grow the economy and indeed further change the demographic breakup of the state, which will further change the electoral makeup and outcomes of a state that is already going through manipulation in favour of the Hindu minority through the process of delimitation.

This will, of course, continue to deepen the suspicion amongst the majority Muslim population that the Indian state seeks to further marginalise them, and they will respond in the only way that they know how; with protest, insurgency and violence. Jammu and Kashmir has seen a never-ending vicious cycle of communal violence, oppression and hatred and that will continue, and be stoked as is the common Hindutva method- instigate violence, have the state suppress the oppressed (and victims of the violence) and declare the whole incident as clashes (implying that both sides are at fault), whereas in reality they are carefully orchestrated acts of violence against a minority community.

Ultimately the resistance of Kashmiri Muslims will be used as a further excuse to demonise and persecute Muslims across the rest of the country. This will have disastrous and fatal consequences for the Muslim minority and will enable the militant right wing to further target other minorities in the country- Christians, Dalits, Sikhs, Atheists. Anyone that threatens the idea that India is indeed secular and diverse, and isn’t inherently a Hindu only nation.

It is vital that the Supreme Court of India ceases its dithering and delaying of the many petitions that are challenging the validity of the central government's actions in 2019. It is hard to think of more pressing issues facing the apex court (perhaps the challenges to CAA/NRC). Certainly issues such as Arnab Goswami’s trip to prison does not merit more attention than these existential issues.

Indeed, it is vital for not only the course of justice and following the rule of law but also for ensuring that India does not have another method by which it can spiral into cycles of riots, vengeance, communal violence and majoritarian religious tyranny.

Somehow their delay seems indicative of where their eventual judgement will land- which in addition to the erroneous and unjust Babri Masjid Ayodhya verdict leads me to think that this issue will have a similar and predictable (unhappy) ending.

P.S-

To those wondering, the actions taken by the government has thus far not resulted in any economic development and progress in the state. The economic data for Jammu and Kashmir is (conveniently for the central government) unavailable as well.

Violence and incidence of terror attacks have reduced sharply, but that would be in keeping with the increased presence of the military and other paramilitary forces in the region. It is unsustainable and unwise to keep Jammu and Kashmir a police state for the foreseeable future, it will only lead to more frequent and terrible violence down the line.

In terms of the return of Kashmiri Hindus and Pandits- a passionate and vociferous cause for those of a Hindutva bent of mind, only a small percentage have returned to the valley. In fact, more were returned and facilitated under the auspices of the Indian National Congress.

Overall, it is not a great track record post abrogation, and it is likely to get worse.