JK assembly dissolution, the decision taken by the governor on November 22nd or its suspended animation since June, the 20th 2018 has hardly had any effect on larger Kashmir question. Or, the political manoeuvrings of mainstreamers could hardly be expected to impact the Kashmir scene in a meaningful manner. Still, it could be said that whatever comes to pass in the mainstream realm proves the utter futility of managing Kashmir by powers that be. The state narrative framed by Delhi stays poles apart from the dominant sentiment of an overwhelming majority in J&K. The state nevertheless seeks to impose its writ. The political space mainstreamers of various hues occupy in J&K is largely designed by Delhi. In designing J&K mainstream in the wide sweep of dominant sentiment, democratic miscarriages at regular intervals make the murky situation murkier.
There is another aspect to managing the mainstream. In order to serve the state narrative, it has to remain fragmented, lest any segment of it gets too big for its shoes. As and when, a segment of mainstream gets beyond state’s ‘Lakashman Rekha’ the heavy hand of the state asserts, the disciplining follows. The state as such is constant; the party that runs it in Delhi in a particular time phase may change. However, the mainstream in Kashmir, whichever segment of it is in lead has to abide by not only the state narrative, but also stay to the right of the party handling the state. The rule has held, whether it was the congress managing the state, or the BJP. In 1984, as Farooq Abdullah was seen crossing the ‘Lakashman Rekha’ defection was engineered to topple him. In the 21st century, the scenario hasn’t changed. As soon as a combine was seen threatening BJP, suspended animation status of the assembly was changed to dissolution. Vis-à-vis Kashmir, the explanation provided is national security, it sells. National security has been pleaded virtually with every change wrought in the mainstream since 1953. The mainstream actors were never allowed any space to move beyond Delhi’s scripted drama. The shuffling of actors has remained the norm, it continues.
In substituting one actor with another since 1953, constitutional provisions have been made subservient to the state narrative. It mattered the least whether Sadr-e-Riyasat was supervising the change in 1953 and 1963 or in subsequent years the Governor. From Karan Singh in his garb as Sadr-e-Riyasat to Governor Malik, the Raj Bhavan incumbent has signed on the dotted line. Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah’s 1953 dismissal, side-lining Bakshi Ghulam Mohammad’s proxy—Shams-ud-Din in 1964 was engineered without observance of constitutional norms. In fact these mainstream actors of earlier years were left cooling their heels in prison before fulfilling the constitutional norm of testing their support or lack of it on the floor of assembly. In another mainstream shuffling in 1975, Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah was foisted as leader of an assembly formed of another mainstream dispensation. The tailored assembly accepted the shuffling without demur, as it didn’t have a footing of its own. It was yet another Delhi scripted political drama, yet another shuffling of actors. In 1984, the shuffling put Ghulam Mohammad Shah in forefront, as Farooq Abdullah was shown the door for acting in variance with the script of state narrative. Indira Gandhi led congress shaped it. The democratic norm, much in vogue in Indian nation state stays halted at Lakhanpur—entry point of J&K. Instead the democratic dispensation is adjusted to the script of the state narrative.
As 20th century evolved into 21st, at the turn of the century the mainstream space faced a devised division with formation of PDP. The divided space made it easier to script the state narrative. The political drama staged assumed a different hue, as JK mainstreamers—NC and PDP had had to survive on oxygen fed either by congress or BJP. The coalitions formed in 2002 and 2008 were congress supported. In 2008, congress was heading UPA alliance in Delhi; hence JK coalition was in tune with the state narrative. In 2002 BJP was leading NDA alliance; however PDP-Congress alliance was allowed to pass, as BJP hardly had the numbers to force their way into the alliance. In 2014, BJP collected the numbers to stake claim. Mufti Syed much more tuned to state narrative than any other politician in the state worked as per the script, justifying it on the basis of accommodating Jammu. However, the meek argument was roughed by calling it meeting of North Pole and South Pole. BJP’s cultural nationalistic narrative has no room for accommodating the distinct JK status. The aggression in tone and tenor reflects widely in the media. The hostility in BJP devised state script made the coalition unsustainable, given the ground situation in Kashmir.
BJP throwing away its democratic garb set aside the PDP in June, 2018. The state narrative was re-scripted to have the governor run the state. Governor Malik, a politician to the core was thought to be a better proposition than the incumbent—NN Vohra, a bureaucrat. The change was affected. BJP with Jammu numbers in their bag started looking for pliable allies in Kashmir. The process of fragmenting the mainstream further to suit BJP’s designs was on, ever since Governor Raj initiated. Sajad Lone led the charge in Kashmir. However, before the re-scripted state narrative would bear fruit, PDP/NC/Congress staked claim of forming the government. It was meant to outdo the BJP bait. Since the claim did not tune with the state narrative, the assembly in suspended animation was dissolved. The claims and counter claims of horse trading, money changing hands, or seeing a Pakistani hand in the given political scenario, amounts barely to political posturing. The fact stays that state narrative cannot take democracy breathing on its own in Kashmir, as the narrative stays at odds with the dominant sentiment.
Yaar Zinda, Sohbat Baqi [Reunion is subordinate to survival]
iqbal.javid46@gmail.com