Kashmir - people's perspective

The abrogation of Article 370, a constitutional provision that granted Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) significant autonomy, was one of the most consequential changes in Indian legal and political history. It was officially revoked by the Indian Parliament on August 5, 2019. Article 370 had been part of the Indian Constitution since 1949, providing Jammu and Kashmir with its own constitution, a separate flag, and considerable autonomy in administrative and legal matters. Here is a breakdown of the significant details and the reaction of the Kashmiri people to this development.

Background of Article 370

1. Special Status to Jammu and Kashmir: Article 370 was designed to acknowledge the unique circumstances under which Jammu and Kashmir acceded to India in 1947, including its distinct identity, demographic makeup, and socio-political context.

2. Autonomy in Governance: Under Article 370, J&K had autonomy over all areas except defense, foreign affairs, finance, and communications. This autonomy was protected by the clause that no law passed by the Indian Parliament (except in the areas mentioned) was applicable to J&K unless the state assembly agreed.

3. Article 35A: Alongside Article 370, Article 35A was also part of the framework that provided J&K with unique privileges, including defining who the “permanent residents” of the state were. This provision meant that non-residents could not buy land or seek government jobs in J&K.

Abrogation of Article 370

1. Legal Pathway: The Indian government, under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, abrogated Article 370 through a Presidential Order, which bypassed the requirement of the J&K state government’s consent by arguing that the J&K Legislative Assembly’s powers had been transferred to the Governor (who represented the center) after the imposition of President's Rule.

2. Reorganization of J&K: The abrogation was accompanied by the passage of the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, which bifurcated the state into two Union Territories—Jammu & Kashmir (with a legislature) and Ladakh (without a legislature). This reorganization aimed to integrate the region more closely with the rest of India.

3. Implementation: With the abrogation of Article 370, all Indian laws became applicable to J&K and Ladakh, including provisions related to property rights, education, and healthcare.

Implications of the Abrogation

1. Economic Development: One of the primary arguments for the abrogation was that it would foster economic growth by allowing investments and development projects in J&K. It was argued that by removing restrictions on land ownership, businesses from outside the region could bring capital and create jobs.

2. Integration with India: The central government highlighted that the abrogation would lead to stronger political and social integration, creating a unified India without the legal and administrative barriers that previously isolated J&K.

3. Security and Counter-Terrorism: Another critical reason cited was improving national security and controlling terrorism, as the government believed that the removal of special status would reduce separatist sentiments and enhance the central government’s capacity to curb insurgency in the region.

Reactions from the People of Kashmir

The response to the abrogation of Article 370 has been mixed and complex, with a variety of perspectives within the Kashmir Valley, the Jammu region, and Ladakh.

1. Kashmiri Sentiments:

Fear of Demographic Change: Many Kashmiris worry that the removal of the special status will lead to demographic changes, with an influx of non-Kashmiri settlers diluting the region's unique cultural and religious identity.

Anger and Resentment: A section of the population views the abrogation as a breach of trust, arguing that the Indian government disregarded local sentiments and altered their political landscape without their consent.

Impact on Local Governance: The dissolution of J&K’s separate constitution and powers has led to concerns about the erosion of regional authority. Many feel their voice in political decisions has been minimized.

2. Jammu and Ladakh Reactions:

Mixed Reception in Jammu: Jammu, which has a significant Hindu population, generally viewed the move positively. The people there largely believe it would bring prosperity, greater integration with India, and improved security.

Ladakhi Sentiments: In Ladakh, the reactions have varied, but there was some positive sentiment about becoming a separate Union Territory, as locals believed it would lead to more direct and tailored development and governance in the region.

3. Economic and Social Concerns:

Limited Economic Benefits: While the government’s stated goals included economic development, many locals have yet to see tangible improvements in job opportunities or economic conditions since the abrogation.

Impact on Daily Life: There has been a strain on daily life due to increased military presence, frequent internet shutdowns, and lockdowns in the region, which has affected tourism, communication, and overall quality of life.

4. Mixed Opinions Among Youth: The Kashmiri youth have shown mixed responses. Some believe the abrogation might lead to better opportunities, while others feel it has intensified tensions, leading to more restrictions on their lives and limited career prospects due to the prolonged disruptions in internet services and infrastructure.

International Reactions

The move attracted significant international attention, with some countries expressing concerns over human rights and the political process involved, while others viewed it as India's internal matter. The United Nations and a few international human rights organizations have raised questions about freedom of expression, movement, and the humanitarian impact on local populations due to the intensified security measures in the region.

Current Scenario and Future Outlook

The central government has made efforts to bolster development and infrastructure projects in J&K, including road construction, tourism promotion, and job initiatives. However, many Kashmiris feel the changes have yet to significantly impact their lives and remain cautious, if not skeptical, about promises of economic growth and security benefits.

The situation remains fluid, with hopes of gradual integration and development, but also underlying concerns among the local population about the long-term cultural, demographic, and political impacts of the move.