The Elections in Indian Occupied Kashmir: A Grim Picture of Future Political Freedom
In 2019, Jammu & Kashmir was relegated to a Union Territory under the federal government when Modi revoked its semi-autonomous status, and these recent elections were the first ones to take place after that. New Delhi kept putting off announcements regarding elections until the Supreme Court proclaimed in December 2023 that the government must hold the polls before September 2024 ends.
The National Conference (NC), Kashmir’s oldest regional party, won the recent elections, securing 42 out of 90 seats in the regional Assembly, thanks to a pre-election coalition with the Indian National Congress, which gained six seats, NC leader Omar Abdullah will return as the chief minister, a role he held from 2009 to 2015. The Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) came in second with 29 seats but did not win any in the predominantly Muslim Kashmir Valley, where it only fielded candidates in less than half of the constituencies. The BJP’s strategy was hindered by widespread belief that it was using independent candidates to undermine opposition support, suggesting that voters actively resisted the BJP’s efforts to weaken its rivals.
Historical Context and Political Backdrop
Since the abrogation of Article 370 in August 2019, which stripped Jammu and Kashmir of its unique status and statehood, the region has been under direct administrative rule from New Delhi. This action of the Indian government was presented to the outside world and the Indian public as a measure to bring the region into the mainstream Indian political arena to create a balanced and integrated ‘development framework’ for the Kashmir region and to curb the unending militant resistance to Indian occupation. However, this was seen as India’s further encroachment into the region to smother the self-determination movement of those supporting independence from occupation or even self-governance.
The essence of the electoral process in the context of the Indian Occupied Jammu and Kashmir has been reduced mainly to systematic manipulation of the existing facade of a democratic mandate in order to create a veil of legitimacy over an increasingly authoritarian political regime that readily disregards the fundamental civil liberties of the electorate. After Kashmir’s Special Status was abolished, the region faced a severe communication shutdown, the arrest of political leaders in large numbers, and restrictions on mobility and assembly, which unsettled the region’s political structure. The promise of restoring statehood and holding elections has thus been viewed with skepticism.
Elections as a Mechanism for Perpetuating Occupation
The conduct of elections in Jammu and Kashmir, under the current political conditions, can only be interpreted as a tool for perpetuating India’s occupation of the region. From a theoretical perspective, this aligns with broader frameworks in political science that examine how elections can be used in semi-authoritarian states to reinforce the status quo rather than challenge it. Electoral authoritarian regimes often hold elections to legitimize their rule, not necessarily to facilitate genuine democratic change. In the case of Kashmir, elections serve multiple purposes. By conducting elections, India tries to project an image of democratic governance in Kashmir, which it uses to counter international criticism. The elections in Kashmir, regardless of their outcome, would allow India to argue that it provides avenues for political participation and that the region functions within the democratic framework of the Indian Union.
In the Indian context, elections also dilute the distinct political identity of Jammu and Kashmir, especially in the post-era of Article 370 abrogation. By integrating the region into the broader Indian electoral landscape and removing its unique status, the central government seeks to assimilate Kashmiri political life into the mainstream Indian polity. This includes promoting political parties that align with the ruling autocratic Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its ideological vision while sidelining or weakening local parties that may have historically advocated for autonomy or independence.
Widespread Dissatisfaction and Voting Trends
A substantial section of Kashmiris continues to be politically unsatisfied, and this could be seen in terms of protest votes against the BJP. In recent elections, hundreds of thousands of people from Kashmir have voted for other political parties except the BJP to protest against the central rule. The electorate was primarily motivated by a desire to counter the BJP, which might have benefited from low voter turnout, by forming a regional government. Instead of boycotting the polls to express their rejection of Indian sovereignty over the region, voters opted for high turnout as a form of protest. This choice was not necessarily an endorsement of other parties, but rather a clear statement of their rejection and disagreement with the BJP, with a strong desire to prevent their victory. This protest voting was also seen in the overall share of the votes in the State going to the regional political formations such as the National Conference and the People’s Democratic Party, especially in rural areas where the anti-BJP sentiments are high.
While the BJP received a decent number of votes in the parliamentary elections through its combination of vote bank and alliance over small regional parties in Jammu and Kashmir, it did not achieve much. Despite making some inroads in the Hindu-dominated areas of Jammu, the party has no following in the predominantly Muslim parts of the State of Kashmir. This geographic and religious polarization shows that a divide remains firmly in place within the region and that many Kashmiri Muslims regard the BJP and its principles as manifestly hostile to their religious, political, and ethnic ambitions.
Limited Powers of the Legislative Assembly
Though the election results show non-BJP parties gaining a majority in the proposed Legislative Assembly, the structural limitations imposed on the Assembly’s powers mean that little significant change is likely to occur. Since the abrogation of Article 370, the Legislative Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir has been relegated to a status similar to that of other Union Territories in India. In other words, critical public administration sectors such as law and order, land policy, and local security services will remain under the direct control of the central authority and its Lieutenant Governor. The elected Assembly would have miniscule independence to solve issues most relevant to the political and economic rights of the people of Kashmir, thus demoting the Assembly to a mere symbolic ground of political representation.
The Grim Future
It is necessary to place the elections that took place in Indian-Occupied Jammu and Kashmir into the context of New Delhi’s process of tightening its grip on the territory. Although elections may bring some political activity, they do not provide coherent measures to resolve matters of self-determination, genuine autonomy, or continued military occupation. When power is concentrated in New Delhi, and when the Legislative Assembly has such a narrow remit, there are grave questions to be asked about the likely value of these elections. However, they seem to be in line with a more extensive exercise to give political cover to Indian occupation and dismantle any resistance.
For many Kashmiris, voting for non-BJP affiliated parties is a vote against the BJP, not the full satisfaction with or support of those opposing parties, which are largely puppets of New Delhi all the same. As such, these votes will have little to no change in the political status quo of occupation, power, and resistance that the people of Kashmir have been subjected to for decades. Despite the claim that elections are meant to introduce democratic principles in the administration of the occupied valley, the reality is that they will barely address the political and human rights problems therein. These time old Chanakyan policies are an affront to humanity and more often than not cynical exercises in futility. Kashmiri culture is grounded in strong moral and ethical principles and they will emerge triumphant at the end.
