Why Omar Abdullah’s government in J&K struggles to deliver within UT framework while clinging to statehood nostalgia?
Dr. Ashraf Zainabi
The larger problem for Omar Abdullah’s government lies in its over-reliance on a singular political narrative: the demand for the restoration of statehood. While the return of statehood may indeed be a legitimate political aspiration, it cannot become a substitute for governance. The day-to-day lives of people in Jammu and Kashmir can not pause until a constitutional status is restored; their pressing issues—employment, healthcare, education, pollution, and administrative accountability—demand solutions today, not in some indefinite future tied to political negotiations with New Delhi.
This overemphasis has also allowed the administration to evade accountability. The argument becomes circular: if schools remain poorly funded, or if hospitals lack doctors, the excuse is that “without statehood, nothing can improve.” But history tells us otherwise. During decades of statehood and even special constitutional status, successive governments—many under NC itself—failed to reform recruitment, ignored pollution, and institutionalized the very dailywager culture that is now being critiqued. The dailywagerism of the 1990s, designed as a short-term fix, became a long-term structural weakness, leaving thousands of families trapped in precarious employment for decades.
Compare this with the Union Territory model elsewhere. In Delhi, despite restrictions on policing and land control, the AAP government under Arvind Kejriwal delivered measurable improvements in public schools, mohalla clinics, and basic civic services. The lesson here is that even within the constraints of a UT, innovation, and accountability are possible when governance is prioritized. Kashmir’s present UT administration under Omar, however, appears stuck in a mindset where political status dominates discourse, while administrative creativity is sidelined.
The result is an erosion of public trust. The recruitment scams—whether in JEE electrical examination paper leak or other departmental exams—have shaken the confidence of youth already suffering from one of the highest unemployment rates in the country. The inability to provide clean water, control pollution in rivers and wetlands, or ensure reliable power supply reinforces the perception of incompetence. Educational institutions, particularly government schools and colleges, continue to be plagued by structural and functional issues. In healthcare, the shortage of doctors and specialists in district hospitals means families must travel long distances to Srinagar for even basic treatment.
The danger is that by refusing to accept responsibility within the UT framework, Omar Sarkar risks leaving governance in limbo. The public sees little difference between administrative inertia under UT rule and the inefficiencies of the past under full statehood. This could eventually weaken NC’s political credibility even among its loyal base. For a party that historically presented itself as the voice of peoples aspirations, such a disconnect between rhetoric and delivery is particularly damaging. If Omar Abdullah wishes to rescue his government from this perception of incompetence, a recalibration is urgently required.
“Blaming all failures in Jammu and Kashmir on the lack of statehood can prove counterproductive. This approach apparently leads to stagnant governance, increasing public dissatisfaction, and a loss of credibility for the National Conference (NC). A Union Territory (UT) model, like Delhi’s, can still be effective if government is committed and capable. Omar Abdullah Government’s risks will be seen as incompetent and inert unless it delivers tangible results. People want solutions, not excuses, and the government’s future depends on its ability to provide them, regardless of the limitations of the UT model.”
First, NC must stop hiding behind the shield of statehood restoration for every administrative shortcoming. The demand for statehood can remain a political plank, but parallel to it must run a clear, results-driven governance agenda tailored to the UT framework.
Second, addressing the long-pending issues of dailywagers and need-based workers requires honesty. These workers deserve dignity and stability, but the NCs legacy of creating such unsustainable employment models cannot be denied. Rather than another round of temporary assurances, a transparent roadmap for regularization, skill enhancement, and job diversification must be drawn up.
Third, pollution and ecological degradation need urgent action. The decline of rivers like the Jhelum and Doodganga, along with the shrinking wetlands, is not just an environmental tragedy but also a socio-economic crisis. Tourism, agriculture, and even basic health are threatened by this neglect. A governance model that cannot even keep water sources clean is bound to fail.
Fourth, reforms in education and healthcare are non-negotiable. The Delhi example has shown that even within limited powers, significant improvements can be achieved if there is political will and managerial focus. Omar’s administration must prioritize accountability, increase funding transparency, and adopt a data-driven approach to measuring progress in schools, colleges and hospitals.
Finally, unemployment must be tackled not just through government hiring but by fostering entrepreneurship, supporting start-ups, and facilitating private sector investment. Why J&K can’t be opened to private players in Higher education, IT, and other sectors? The youth of Kashmir have talent and energy, but they remain trapped in a narrow government-job mindset due to a lack of enabling policy.
The ultimate question for Omar Sarkar is whether it will choose excuses or action. If every failure is attributed to the absence of statehood, then governance will remain stagnant, public anger will deepen, and NC’s credibility will erode further. The UT model, though limited, is not inherently doomed; it is leadership that determines whether constraints are turned into opportunities or excuses.
Delhi’s success demonstrates that a committed government can use even a restricted framework to deliver for its people. By contrast, the current trajectory in J&K suggests that Omar Sarkar risks being remembered not for its reforms, but for its inertia. Unless it quickly demonstrates that its writ can be enforced and its promises translated into results, the slogan of statehood will not shield it from the charge of incompetence. For the people of Jammu and Kashmir, the demand is simple: they want solutions, not alibis. The question is whether Omar Abdullah is willing—or capable—of providing them.
(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”)
