Skip to main content

Normalcy? Why ban books when 'separatist' ideology supposedly has no takers in Kashmir

By Raqif Makhdoomi* 
We have highly educated people in jail—either for writing an article or for making a Facebook post that contained nothing more than historical facts and political realities. Seeing them behind bars made me feel deeply disturbed and even cost me sleepless nights. Some of them spent years under trial simply for expressing themselves through writing. Then my mind said: “Look at the ones who are ruling us.” The picture became clear, and I no longer lost sleep over it.
Six years have passed since Jammu and Kashmir was stripped of its special status and downgraded to a Union Territory. It is claimed that since the abrogation, everything has become much better. But is everything really better? That is a subject for another article. The more urgent question here is: why ban books when the “separatist” ideology supposedly has no takers in Kashmir anymore? If no one believes in that ideology, the books would simply gather dust.
Instead, banning them has sent a troubling message. Why were the books deemed dangerous if the ideas they contain are supposedly irrelevant? The move has shattered the government’s own claims of normalcy. Saying “all is well” while banning books simply does not add up. This action has conveyed to people that these books contain something the authorities do not want the public to see. Words and actions clearly do not match.
Among the 25 books declared “forfeited” is A.G. Noorani’s The Kashmir Dispute: 1947–2012. Noorani was not just a writer—he was a distinguished lawyer and one of India’s finest legal minds, fully aware of the meaning of “secessionism,” which the government cited as a reason for the ban. The order also claimed the books promote a “culture of grievance and victimhood.” But what is grievance if not reality? And what is victimhood if not the lived experience of many?
The government celebrates the Supreme Court verdict upholding the abrogation of Article 370, but conveniently ignores the words of Justice Sanjay Kaul, himself a Kashmiri Pandit. In his judgment, he wrote: “The valley of Kashmir carries the historical burden and we, the people of Jammu and Kashmir, are the heart of the debate.” He further observed: “Armies are meant to fight battles against enemies, not to control law and order in the state. The entry of the army created its own ground realities in the state… men, women, and children have paid a heavy price.”
If you doubt my words, the full judgment on Article 370 is available online. Justice Kaul even recommended the creation of a Reconciliation Committee to address concerns from both sides. Sadly, that recommendation has been forgotten—just as fundamental rights have been sidelined.
Kashmir is not the only place where books have been banned. During India’s freedom struggle, the British banned Mahatma Gandhi’s Hind Swaraj or Indian Home Rule in 1909. Another book, Hindu Heaven by Max Wylie, was banned in 1934 for questioning the work of American missionaries in India. A long list of banned books is available on Wikipedia, both in India and across the world. The reason is always the same: dissent is not acceptable to those in power.
Governments have always tried to ensure that only their version of events circulates, silencing all others. But that is not how democracy works. Over the past 10 years, we have seen how democracy itself has come under attack. The ruling party seems to admire China’s one-party system more than its economic model.
History tells us that when a powerful person is losing, their last refuge is raw power. When facts no longer serve them, they resort to coercion. This is what we are seeing in Kashmir today. The government’s facts are no longer enough, so it has fallen back on censorship and force.
The book ban in Kashmir may or may not serve its intended purpose, but one thing is clear: things are not what they are claimed to be. What Jammu and Kashmir needs most is reconciliation—more than rehabilitation or relief.
---
*Law student and human rights activist

Comments

TRENDING

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

CFA flags ‘welfare retreat’ in Union Budget 2026–27, alleges corporate bias

By Jag Jivan  The advocacy group Centre for Financial Accountability (CFA) has sharply criticised the Union Budget 2026–27 , calling it a “budget sans kartavya” that weakens public welfare while favouring private corporations, even as inequality, climate risks and social distress deepen across the country.

From water scarcity to sustainable livelihoods: The turnaround of Salaiya Maaf

By Bharat Dogra   We were sitting at a central place in Salaiya Maaf village, located in Mahoba district of Uttar Pradesh, for a group discussion when an elderly woman said in an emotional voice, “It is so good that you people came. Land on which nothing grew can now produce good crops.”

'Big blow to crores of farmers’: Opposition mounts against US–India trade deal

By A Representative   Farmers’ organisations and political groups have sharply criticised the emerging contours of the US–India trade agreement, warning that it could severely undermine Indian agriculture, depress farm incomes and open the doors to genetically modified (GM) food imports in violation of domestic regulatory safeguards.

When free trade meets unequal fields: The India–US agriculture question

By Vikas Meshram   The proposed trade agreement between India and the United States has triggered intense debate across the country. This agreement is not merely an attempt to expand bilateral trade; it is directly linked to Indian agriculture, the rural economy, democratic processes, and global geopolitics. Free trade agreements (FTAs) may appear attractive on the surface, but the political economy and social consequences behind them are often unequal and controversial. Once again, a fundamental question has surfaced: who will benefit from this agreement, and who will pay its price?

Why Russian oil has emerged as the flashpoint in India–US trade talks

By N.S. Venkataraman*  In recent years, India has entered into trade agreements with several countries, the latest being agreements with the European Union and the United States. While the India–EU trade agreement has been widely viewed in India as mutually beneficial and balanced, the trade agreement with the United States has generated comparatively greater debate and scrutiny.

Trade pacts with EU, US raise alarms over farmers, MSMEs and policy space

By A Representative   A broad coalition of farmers’ organisations, trade unions, traders, public health advocates and environmental groups has raised serious concerns over India’s recently concluded trade agreements with the European Union and the United States, warning that the deals could have far-reaching implications for livelihoods, policy autonomy and the country’s long-term development trajectory. In a public statement issued, the Forum for Trade Justice described the two agreements as marking a “tectonic shift” in India’s trade policy and cautioned that the projected gains in exports may come at a significant social and economic cost.

From Puri to the State: How Odisha turned the dream of drinkable tap water into policy

By Hans Harelimana Hirwa, Mansee Bal Bhargava   Drinking water directly from the tap is generally associated with developed countries where it is considered safe and potable. Only about 50 countries around the world offer drinkable tap water, with the majority located in Europe and North America, and a few in Asia and Oceania. Iceland, Switzerland, Finland, Germany, and Singapore have the highest-quality tap water, followed by Canada, New Zealand, Japan, the USA, Australia, the UK, Costa Rica, and Chile.

Michael Parenti: Scholar known for critiques of capitalism and U.S. foreign policy

By Harsh Thakor*  Michael Parenti, an American political scientist, historian, and author known for his Marxist and anti-imperialist perspectives, died on January 24 at the age of 92. Over several decades, Parenti wrote and lectured extensively on issues of capitalism, imperialism, democracy, media, and U.S. foreign policy. His work consistently challenged dominant political and economic narratives, particularly those associated with Western liberal democracies and global capitalism.