Can voting truly resolve the Kashmir issue? Past experience suggests optimism may be misplaced

By Raqif Makhdoomi* 

In the politically charged atmosphere of Jammu and Kashmir, election slogans resonated deeply: "Jail Ka Badla, Vote Sa" (Jail’s Revenge, Vote) and "Article 370 Ka Badla, Vote Sa" (Article 370’s Revenge, Vote). These catchphrases dominated the assembly election campaigns, particularly across Kashmir. 

Despite significant participation in rallies and a noteworthy voter turnout, the figures fell short of the record highs seen in the 2014 elections. Notably, Srinagar district registered the lowest turnout, a result few anticipated. 

The 2024 elections, however, marked a turning point, with slogans like "Burhan Banoge" (Will You Be Burhan?) and "Mufti Banoge" (Will You Be Mufti?) capturing widespread attention. 

Voters approached the polls with varied motivations, many uniting under the desire to keep the BJP out of Kashmir and to dismantle the repressive measures that have dominated the region since the abrogation of its special status. Some hoped that casting their ballots would lead to the release of loved ones imprisoned under stringent laws. 

In an emotional interview, an elderly woman expressed her longing for her son, who is incarcerated, hoping that voting would pave the way for his release. Her heartfelt plea went viral, sparking discussions online. Yet, whether she will receive the outcome she yearns for remains uncertain. Given past experiences and the authority wielded by the Chief Minister, optimism may be misplaced. 

Many in the region cling to the hope that their votes can alter their circumstances and break the oppressive silence, but it is essential to recognize that the individuals they voted for are often the architects of their suffering, implicated in arrests and systemic injustices. 

To understand the present, a reflection on history is warranted, particularly regarding Article 370. The initial significant amendments to this article were enacted under Congress, in collaboration with the National Conference. The Kashmir Accord, or Sheikh-Indira Accord of 1975, marked a pivotal moment, extending the jurisdiction of Parliament, the President, and even the Supreme Court over Jammu and Kashmir. At that time, the Prime Minister assumed the role of Chief Minister, and the Sadar-e-Riyasat became the Governor following the accord's signing. 

During subsequent Congress rule, significant legislation was implemented in Jammu and Kashmir, including the unfortunate incident of the 1987 election rigging, orchestrated by the National Conference with the backing of Congress. 

Further historical moments, such as the controversial West Indies cricket match on October 13, 1983, were manipulated by Congress to undermine Farooq Abdullah’s government, which had recently taken power after Sheikh Abdullah's death in 1982. Despite initial political tensions, Farooq later regained prominence through the 1986 Farooq-Rajiv Accord, which eroded Article 370 further. 

Currently, rumors of a potential NC-BJP alliance raise eyebrows, given their prior history of political maneuvering and allegiance. Those who campaign on promises to revoke the Public Safety Act (PSA) remain the same individuals who previously claimed its necessity. 

Omar Abdullah, during his tenure as Chief Minister, defended the PSA, contrasting his vocal outrage now with the subdued responses of his administration when detaining individuals under the same act. Moreover, many unresolved issues linger, including the tragic deaths of civilians like Asiya Nelofar and Tufail Mattoo, whose parents faced pressure to drop legal cases against the state. Such incidents raise critical questions about the accountability and integrity of those currently positioned as the voice of change. 

With such complexities inherent in the political landscape, skepticism about the real intentions of the National Conference and Congress is warranted. While Kashmir has endured immense suffering under their governance, the promises made to the populace remain largely unmet. 

---

*Law student and human rights advocate