Louder Message of 2014 Assembly Elections of Jammu and Kashmir

Latent Dynamics of 2014 Elections

The emerging scenario augurs renewal of debate on Kashmir at international level

Punchline

Z.G. MUHAMMAD

Did “democracy – nee elections” triumph over the “sentiment” – the sentiment that has been emphatically resounding in Jammu and Kashmir for the past eighty four years. It is a big question. That will answer itself as time ticks on.
The discourses and ‘noises’  orchestrated  by the corporate electronic media about everything going to be hunky-dory on political front  in the state after the elections have often proved to be soap bubbles. ‘Elections are a panacea’ for the political uncertainty is a cliché-ridden discourse that has been resonating in the state since 1950, when elections were held for the State Constituent Assembly. Most of the New Delhi based newspapers had projected the 1951 elections as ratification of the accession.’ Barely, two years after the protagonist of the Constituent Assembly was jailed.  The United Nations had rejected the actions taken by this assembly. Genesis of the Constituent Assembly that could be traced to a Firman issued by the fugitive Maharaja from Bombay 19 months after abdication of throne is not subject   this column. However, notes of interrogations have been suffixed to the creation of this Assembly and actions that  taken under its canopy- including legality of the elections held under rules framed by it.
It was believed once the Constituent Assembly is elected and it endorses the “Instrument of Accession” the dispute over future of Jammu and Kashmir will cease to exist. But, it did not happen. Instead, it prompted couple of resolution in the Security Council reassuring right to self- determination to people of Jammu. Despite, these resolutions reiterating the plebiscite under UN as solution for Kashmir problem, every elections held after 1956 was projected as ratification of the accession of the state.
History, testifies that these assertions have more than often tumbled down like a pack of cards. The elections of 2008, could be an ideal illustrations, the 60.5 percent overall voter turnout not only was seen as triumph of democracy over the ‘sentiment of Azadi’ but also as an epitaph for the leadership.  The three summers of dissent that followed these election, with millions converging on the streets and protests resonating for months together belied these pronouncements. The 2014 elections with its 65.23 percentage have not been much different than those held during 2008, so far as the corporate media discourses are concerned.
Nevertheless, the 2014 Assembly elections have created their own history by   throwing up the first hung assembly with a highly polarized mandate- overwhelmingly on regional and communal lines. The People’s Democratic Party (PDP) that has share of thirty two percent seats in the hung assembly won all the seats from the Muslim majority areas of Kashmir Valley and the BJP that has share of twenty eight percent has won most of it seats from Hindu majority areas of Jammu.  Division of votes in Muslim majority areas of Jammu province helped it to secure some seats in old Doda district and Rajouri and Poonch districts. The National Conference that shares   17.2 percent seats has secured all minus two seats from the Kashmir valley. Formation of government, with no party having a majority may not be difficult, it can happen with various permutations and combinations. Nonetheless, the twist lies in the highly polarized election results. The big question is in what direction are these results going to steer the state of Jammu and Kashmir. Will this polarized mandate renew the demand for a separate Jammu state or revive the debate for division of the state on the basis of the basis of religion. Or will it breathed a new life into the Dixon plan that saw resolution of the Kashmir dispute in holding district wise plebiscite in the State.  And if a separate Jammu state is carved out, will the Kashmir problem once again finds its way to the floor of the United Nations Security.
Immediately after the end of the feudal rule and installation of Sheikh Abdullah as Prime Minister of the state in 1948, slogans like a separate Dogra Desh were raised. It did find some takers in right wing politicians at New Delhi, who articulated this demand time and again.  ‘In 1966, some leaders from Jammu including Prof. Balraj Madhok advocated division of the state on the basis of language and culture. They argued that the article 370 had contributed to the neglect of Jammu. And Kashmir was being pampered at the cost of Jammu. But, the demand for a separate Jammu state could not gather momentum of a mass movement and remained confined to some press statements.  After the Indra- Sheikh Accord, more particularly after the 1977 elections the demand for a separate Jammu was once again voiced. A supra regional party was launched to strengthen the regional sentiment. ’ (Onlooker August 1, 1978)
History, is replete with instances of right wing politicians time and again voicing demand for a separate state of Jammu. During the 2008 Amaranth row and the blockade thereof the fissures- more so on communal lines were further deepened and the state almost came me to the brink of disintegration. More than politicians, it was for the role played by trading community of the region, that it was prevented from assuming more serious dimension. Looking at history of   politics of separate Jammu state, it seems the emergence of BJP as the largest political party in Jammu province has the potential of working as a catalyst for renewing this demand.  Can a separate Jammu state with all shove from the BJP leadership become a reality?  It is easier said than done.
The division of Jammu and Kashmir State on the basis of religion and geography has been central to Kashmir narrative since early 1948. Jawaharlal Nehru and his team of bureaucracy saw it as an alternative solution to Kashmir Dispute after the UNCIP passed a resolution in 1948 for holding a plebiscite in the state. Nehru towards end of his life in 1962, also favoured division of state…Kashmir valley going to Pakistan with a guaranteed corridor through the Valley to India was seen as a solution…Division of the state continued to be debated as solution on track two during both the NDA and the UPA governments.
For any student of contemporary political history the emerging scenario  augurs renewal of debate on Kashmir at international level.