On July 14, 2025, Greater Kashmir carried a front-page headline: “Government locked up Government.” It referred to how the elected government in J&K and other leaders of various political parties were house-arrested by the law enforcement agencies under Lieutenant Governor. Odd as it may sound, but, it is a part of the strange normal in the current Union Territory setup. Over the last eight years, the political structure of Jammu and Kashmir has changed drastically. What started with the fall of the PDP-BJP coalition in 2018 has led to a new kind of governance—marked by reduced autonomy, greater central control, and a restricted governance space. The most pressing question now is: where is this all leading? To understand how Jammu & Kashmir got here, we must look back to June 2018. The fragile PDP-BJP coalition collapsed when the BJP withdrew its support. That move ended the last functional political partnership in the former state. The subsequent Governor’s Rule set the stage for deeper constitutional and political changes. On August 5, 2019, Parliament of India abrogated Articles 370 and 35A, thereby ending J&K’s special constitutional status. Along with that, the state was divided into two Union Territories: Jammu & Kashmir with a legislature, and Ladakh without one. This marked the first time in India’s post-independence history that a state was reduced in constitutional rank. It fundamentally redefined the region’s relationship with the Union, replacing federal partnership with bureaucratic control. From 2019 to 2024, the region remained under direct administration by the Centre. The Lieutenant Governor and a team of bureaucrats managed affairs. While certain metrics—like infrastructure delivery—did improve, the prolonged absence of an elected government created a vacuum. The people were left without a voice in decisions that shaped their lives, raising serious questions about the governance by the unselected setup. In 2024, elections were held and the National Conference won the most seats. A government was formed, but under the Union Territory model, it operates with limited powers. Key matters—law and order, police, land, and civil service postings—remain in the hands of the LG and the Union Home Ministry. This is not a full restoration of democracy; it is, at best, a symbolic one. That leads to a range of pressing concerns. Is this Union Territory structure now the permanent future of J&K? Governed under Article 239A, similar to Delhi, will the region ever regain full statehood? Or is this model of governance here to stay? Will the Centre fulfil its promise to restore statehood?The government in Delhi has stated many times that statehood will return “at an appropriate time.” But what does that mean? Will it happen after one or twoyears of the present government’s tenure? Or after the full five years? The absence of clarity only deepens the uncertainty. What will the National Conference do next?Will it adjust to its limited role, or may consider resigning in protest over the UT model’s constraints? Such a move seems unlikely at the moment, but under enough public or internal pressure, it cannot be ruled out entirely.
All scenarios remain open—new alliances, surprise resignations, administrative changes. Yet, no one can confidently predict how this story will unfold. J&K stands at a pivotal point; its people seek lasting dignity rather than token reforms: governance with authority, development with inclusion, and real governance, not just visible. It’s time for all parties—within the region and beyond—to shift from managing silence to meaningful resolution, bringing this long phase of limbo to a stable, democratic, and dignified conclusion.
Are new political arrangements possible?Could the BJP form coalitions with splinter groups and independents? Will dissidents from the NC or other parties create new formations? If the NC gives up space, would the PDP try to reclaim it? These developments remain speculative, but in the present atmosphere, nothing is too far-fetched. Could J&K be split further?The 2019 separation of Ladakh set a precedent. Some analysts now fear that Jammu and Kashmir may also be divided, perhaps along the administrative, geographical or cultural lines. While there’s no official indication, the worry is alive in public imagination. All these questions point to one reality: political uncertainty now defines the region. J&K exists in a space where democracy appears functional but is fundamentally limited. There is a government, but its wings are clipped. Votes are cast, but the outcome doesn’t translate into full authority. While DDC and panchayat elections are regularly highlighted as grassroots successes, they do not replace an empowered assembly. The people of J&K are not new to political discourse. Their aspirations go beyond governance—they seek meaningful representation and respect. The revocation of Article 370 was not just a legal act. It was a major political step, and its effects are still being felt. For many, the trust in constitutional assurances has been shaken. Restoring that trust will take more than roads and conferences. It will require dialogue, fairness, and a shared vision. This undefined situation brings long-term risks. A generation of young people is becoming distant from politics. Though militancy has declined, political silence and indifference have taken its place. That kind of withdrawal is just as harmful. If statehood remains a distant promise, politicians will be left with a harsh choice: stay silent and survive, or speak up and risk irrelevance. Neither path offers hope unless a clear roadmap is laid out by the Centre. So when we ask, Where will it end?, we are not being rhetorical. We are asking what future is being shaped for J&K. Will J&K remain an example of centralised development and tight control? Or will it return to its status as a full-fledged state? Will its leaders adopt quietly or rise to demand more? And will the Union government engage seriously with these concerns? At the moment, all scenarios remain open—new alliances, surprise resignations, even administrative changes. But nobody can say with confidence how this story will unfold. What’s certain is that J&K stands at a pivotal point. Its people have shown patience and resolve in the face of continuous political shifts. What they now seek is not token reforms but lasting dignity. Governance with authority. Development with inclusion. And governance that is real, not just visible. The time has come for all concerned parties—within the region and beyond—to move from managing silence to engaging in meaningful resolution. That alone can bring this long phase of limbo to a stable, democratic, and dignified conclusion.
(The author is a teacher and a researcher based in Gowhar Pora Chadoora of Central Kashmir’s Budgam district. The views, opinions and conclusions expressed in this article are those of the author and aren’t necessarily in accord with the views of “Kashmir Horizon”)
Dr. Ashraf Zainabi
[email protected]
