“Dissent is democratic, but protest cannot replace performance. Jammu and Kashmir’s political leaders must move past Article 370 battles and move beyond rehetorics.”
Seven years after the abrogation of Article 370, Jammu and Kashmir remains caught in a political argument that appears increasingly incapable of answering the most basic question before its people: what comes next? Political parties are entitled to oppose the constitutional changes of August 2019. They are entitled to demand restoration of statehood, question the Centre’s decisions and mobilise public opinion. Protest is an essential component of democracy. But protest cannot become a substitute for politics, and Article 370 cannot become a permanent licence for political parties to avoid the harder business of governance. This distinction has become particularly important today. The Centre has maintained that its commitment is to restoration of statehood, not restoration of the pre-August 2019 constitutional arrangement. Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha has also reiterated the position that statehood is the promised objective. Political parties may disagree with this formulation, and they have every democratic right to do so. But the debate cannot remain frozen indefinitely around what happened seven years ago. Jammu and Kashmir’s political class must also answer what it intends to do with the present. The people are not living in August 2019. They are living in 2026. A generation has grown up amid conflict, political uncertainty, security restrictions and repeated disruptions. The younger generation now entering adulthood is not interested only in the politics of constitutional provisions. It wants education that leads somewhere, employment that provides dignity, healthcare that is accessible, infrastructure that works and an economy capable of absorbing its aspirations. This is where the political discourse needs a fundamental correction. There is a tendency in Jammu and Kashmir to treat every political question through the prism of Article 370. Anniversaries become occasions for mobilisation, speeches return to the events of 2019, and political parties compete over who can articulate the strongest opposition to the constitutional changes. But how long can this remain the principal vocabulary of politics? The issue is not whether Article 370 matters. It clearly does, both politically and historically. The issue is whether it should consume virtually the entire political imagination of Jammu and Kashmir. It should not. A mature democracy must be capable of holding two conversations simultaneously: one about political and constitutional rights, and another about the everyday welfare of its citizens. The people of Jammu and Kashmir deserve both. The fourth generation growing up in the region cannot be expected to inherit only the grievances of previous generations. They must also inherit opportunities. Their political leaders must speak to them not merely about what was removed but about what can be built. Where is the comprehensive political roadmap for employment? Where is the sustained debate on improving government schools and colleges? Where is the political urgency around strengthening public healthcare? Where is the long-term strategy for agriculture in the face of changing weather patterns, shrinking farm incomes and repeated climate shocks? Where is the serious discussion on industrialisation, entrepreneurship, tourism, technology and private investment? These questions are not less political than Article 370. For an ordinary citizen, they may be far more immediate. Jammu and Kashmir has suffered enormously because politics was for decades dominated by confrontation, instability and violence. Families lost loved ones, businesses collapsed, educational opportunities were disrupted and generations learned to live with uncertainty.
“While debates over statehood and Article 370 endure, Jammu and Kashmir’s true test lies in deliverable governance. The rising generation demands safety, education, and prosperity over political inertia—proving that while history shapes J&K, it cannot be allowed to shackle its future.”
The lesson from that history should not be another generation trapped in political stagnation. The political class must therefore move beyond symbolic politics and demonstrate what democratic representation means in practical terms. A legislator should be judged not only by the strength of his statement on August 5, but also by what he does for a school, a hospital, a road, a farmer, a student or an unemployed young person. Similarly, the Centre cannot expect development alone to settle every political question. Roads, tunnels, electricity projects and investment are important, but political confidence also requires institutional trust. If restoration of statehood is the stated commitment, the people deserve clarity about the roadmap. A promise without a credible pathway inevitably creates uncertainty. The Centre and the political parties of Jammu and Kashmir therefore have responsibilities that run parallel, not contrary, to each other. New Delhi must provide greater political clarity and continue strengthening democratic institutions. Regional parties must demonstrate that their politics is not confined to opposition to the events of 2019. They must present an alternative vision for governance. The real challenge before Jammu and Kashmir is not choosing between politics and development. It is understanding that good governance itself is political. A functioning hospital is political. A job opportunity is political. A transparent recruitment system is political. A farmer receiving timely support is political. A student receiving quality education is political. A village getting reliable roads, drinking water and digital connectivity is political. These are the tangible expressions of democracy. There is also a danger in allowing Article 370 to become an electoral shortcut. It can provide political parties with a ready-made language of grievance without requiring them to explain how they will solve difficult governance problems. It can keep society permanently engaged with the past while allowing the present to escape scrutiny. That is not sustainable. Jammu and Kashmir needs a politics that can remember history without becoming imprisoned by it. The demand for statehood can continue. Constitutional disagreements can continue. Political protests can continue. But alongside them must come a far more consequential political competition: who can deliver better governance and a better future? The fourth generation deserves nothing less. The people of Jammu and Kashmir have already paid an enormous price for political conflict. They should not now be asked to pay the price of political inertia. The ultimate measure of August 2019—or of any political era—will not be the number of speeches delivered, protests organised or slogans raised. It will be whether the people are safer, freer, better educated, healthier and more prosperous. Article 370 may remain a defining chapter of Jammu and Kashmir’s political history but it cannot be allowed to become the whole of its political future.
Editor @thekashmirhorizon.com
