Kashmir's Voice Roars: NO to BJP

The history of Kashmir is a multifaceted tapestry that is interwoven with political shifts, cultural heritage, and frequently acrimonious conflict. In 1947, Maharaja Hari Singh led the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir to accede to India amid the turmoil of Partition. However, this decision was not without its controversies. The United Nations promptly intervened, proposing a plebiscite to ascertain the future of the region; however, this proposal was never implemented.

Since that time, Article 370 of the Indian Constitution has granted Jammu and Kashmir a distinctive position within the Indian union, granting the region its own Constitution, flag, and decision-making powers on internal matters, with the exception of defense, foreign affairs, and communications. This arrangement, despite its contentious nature, served as a testament to the distinctive identity of Kashmir within India. However, the BJP has long regarded Article 370 as an anomaly, as a result of its Hindutva nationalism ideology. The BJP's ideology has been centered on the unification of all Indian states and the integration of Kashmir into the national consensus. This culminated in August 2019, when the Government of India, under the leadership of the BJP, abrogated Article 370 and divided Jammu and Kashmir into two union territories—Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh—thereby rescinding the special status of the state.

The potential for cultural erasure, political marginalization, and a new era of direct control from New Delhi was raised by this decision, which sent shockwaves across the region. The change was not merely a legal one for many Kashmiris; it was a direct assault on their identity, right to self-determination, and future. Today, that voice, which has endured lockdowns, curfews, communication outages, and military presence, is once again resonating with a resounding "No to BJP."

When Article 370 was first imposed, it provided a temporary yet crucial solution to integrate Jammu and Kashmir into the Indian Union while preserving its autonomy. The consequences of this special status were varied and far-reaching. Economically, the region retained control over land ownership and resource allocation, which helped protect local industries, particularly agriculture and handicrafts. This autonomy also preserved the cultural and demographic makeup of the state, preventing outsiders from buying land and diluting the local culture.

Statistically, during the early years of Article 370, there was a significant boost to local industries such as handicrafts, with Kashmiri shawl exports increasing by 35% between 1960 and 1970. Additionally, land ownership regulations helped maintain the demographic balance, with over 97% of landowners in the state being local residents until the 1980s. Politically, the region maintained a 90% voter turnout in local elections during the 1950s and 1960s, showing strong engagement and belief in regional governance. Politically, the imposition of Article 370 allowed Kashmir to have its own Constitution, and state laws were prioritized over Indian laws (except in matters of defense, communications, and foreign affairs). This created a distinct political environment that allowed local leaders to make decisions aligned with the region’s unique needs. However, the status also created friction between the central government and the state, with successive Indian governments often viewing Article 370 as a barrier to complete integration.

The consequences of Article 370 also extended to social and cultural dimensions. It provided a safeguard for the distinct cultural identity of Kashmir, ensuring that the demographic composition remained unchanged. This provision was viewed as crucial by many Kashmiris who feared losing their cultural heritage in the face of rapid national integration. Despite the tensions it created, Article 370 was seen by most Kashmiris as an important shield that protected their rights, identity, and way of life.

Article 370's repeal has had a lasting impact on Kashmir, influencing the political landscape and the daily lives of ordinary citizens. Local governance has been one of the most substantial effects. The BJP government centralized decision-making to the point that Kashmiris began to perceive themselves as subjects under a colonizing authority rather than citizens of a democracy by dissolving the local assembly and reducing the state's powers. This action was seen by the BJP as a step toward the "integration" of Kashmir with the rest of India, which would facilitate investment, development, and normalization. Nevertheless, for the majority of Kashmiris, this assurance was false. An protracted lockdown ensued, during which the internet was disabled, movement was restricted, and civil liberties were significantly restricted. Public dissent was suppressed with a harsh hand, and security personnel patrolled the streets. Political activities were severely restricted, and numerous political leaders were detained.

The curfews and communication blackouts were indicative of the silencing of an entire population. The Jammu and Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society (JKCCS) conducted a study that emphasized the severe human rights violations that occurred in the aftermath of the abrogation. The study detailed thousands of arrests, an increased military presence, and a growing number of enforced disappearances. The abrogation was a devastating setback to the aspirations of the young people of Kashmir. The future appeared uncertain as a result of the internet being inaccessible and schools and colleges being closed. Additionally, businesses were significantly affected. The region, which had previously relied on tourism and handicrafts, was isolated from the global economy, resulting in substantial economic losses and elevated unemployment.

The BJP's strategy in Kashmir has been met with extensive opposition, and the factors contributing to their defeat in the region are multifaceted. The party's heavy-handed approach, which has included curfews, lockdowns, and a substantial military presence, is a critical factor. This has resulted in a profound sense of alienation among Kashmiris, who perceive that their voices are not being heard and that they are being regarded as second-class citizens. Numerous individuals perceived the repeal of Article 370 as an act of treachery. Rather than cultivating trust and integration, it exacerbated dread and resentment. The Kashmiris were left feeling impotent as a result of the dissolution of the local assembly and the absence of local representation, as decisions regarding their future were made in New Delhi without their input. This significant motivator of the "No to BJP" sentiment has been the erosion of political autonomy. In addition, the economic repercussions have been pivotal. The tourism and handicraft sectors, which are the foundation of Kashmir's economy, have been significantly impacted by the unfulfilled promises of development and prosperity. The economic downturn was further exacerbated by the extended internet outages, which resulted in heightened unemployment and hardship for the local population.

The BJP's initiatives to modify the demographic composition of the region by enacting new domicile regulations and promoting the settlement of foreigners in Kashmir have also been a significant source of dissatisfaction. This is perceived as an effort to weaken the cultural identity of Kashmir and establish a more significant degree of control over the region. The Kashmiris' determination to oppose the BJP's policies has been fortified by the resultant apprehension of cultural erosion. The people have not responded favorably to the marginalization of traditional political parties and the establishment of new political actors who are in alignment with the BJP's ideology in the political sphere. The People's Alliance for Gupkar Declaration (PAGD) has become a symbol of resistance, mobilizing support for the restoration of Kashmir's autonomy and special status. The BJP's defeat in Kashmir has been significantly influenced by its inability to establish trust with the local populace and the robust opposition from regional political alliances.

The potential erosion of Kashmir's cultural and demographic identity is a significant concern fueling the "No to BJP" sentiment. Many perceive the BJP's efforts to allow outsiders to buy land and settle in Kashmir as an attempt to alter the region's identity. Before the repeal of Article 370, only permanent residents could own land, preserving Kashmir's unique culture. Locals now fear mass migration from other parts of India could lead to demographic shifts, marginalization of the indigenous population, and a transformation of Kashmir's cultural heritage. The new domicile rules, granting residency rights to outsiders, are seen as a deliberate effort to change the demographic balance, sparking outcry from local leaders, activists, and citizens who view this as a threat to Kashmiri culture and identity.

India's influence in Southeast Asia, once seen as a rising force, has started to wane in recent years. This decline is evident across several countries in the region, with growing competition from China and other regional powers challenging India's historical dominance.

In Nepal, India has traditionally held significant sway, but this influence has diminished as Nepal has strengthened its ties with China. The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has played a major role in this shift, with China investing heavily in Nepal's infrastructure projects. Between 2015 and 2022, Chinese investments in Nepal increased by over 40%, while India's investment growth stagnated at around 15%. The increasing Chinese presence has led to a realignment in Nepal's foreign policy, reducing its dependency on India.

Sri Lanka has also seen a growing Chinese influence. China's investments in the Hambantota Port and Colombo Port City project have totaled over $8 billion, while India's investments in Sri Lanka during the same period were approximately $1.4 billion. Sri Lanka's strategic location in the Indian Ocean has made it a key battleground for influence, and India has struggled to keep pace with the extensive infrastructure and financial aid offered by China. China's trade with Sri Lanka reached $4.9 billion in 2023, whereas India's trade stood at $3.4 billion.

In Myanmar, China's role has expanded through investments in infrastructure projects like the Kyaukpyu deep-sea port and special economic zones. Between 2018 and 2023, China invested $6.7 billion in Myanmar, compared to India's $1.3 billion. India, on the other hand, has faced setbacks in its engagement due to political instability in Myanmar and its cautious stance regarding the country's military regime. This has allowed China to fill the gap, further marginalizing India's influence.

In the case of Maldives, India's influence has fluctuated over recent years. Although the current administration in the Maldives has been friendly towards India, the previous government had leaned heavily towards China, inviting Chinese investments of over $1.5 billion between 2013 and 2018. During the same period, India's investments were limited to $350 million. This back-and-forth between governments illustrates the fragile nature of India's influence in the region.

Thailand and Vietnam have also seen increased Chinese engagement through trade and investment. In 2023, China's trade with Vietnam reached over $230 billion, compared to India's trade volume of around $14 billion with Vietnam. Similarly, China's trade with Thailand was approximately $100 billion, while India's trade was just $13 billion. While India has made efforts to enhance its strategic ties with these countries, such as through defense cooperation and maritime exercises, the economic clout that China wields has overshadowed India’s initiatives.

Indonesia, the largest economy in Southeast Asia, has likewise strengthened ties with China. Beijing has become a major trading partner and investor in Indonesia, particularly in the construction of key infrastructure projects like the Jakarta-Bandung high-speed railway. In 2023, China's investments in Indonesia totaled $8.4 billion, whereas India's investments stood at $1.2 billion. India, while maintaining good relations with Indonesia, has not been able to compete with the scale and speed of Chinese investments.

Bangladesh has also seen a reduction in Indian influence, as China's investments and involvement in infrastructure development have grown significantly. Between 2015 and 2023, China invested over $10 billion in various infrastructure projects in Bangladesh, including power plants, bridges, and roads, while India's investments stood at approximately $2 billion. Trade between Bangladesh and China reached $25 billion in 2023, whereas India-Bangladesh trade was around $16 billion. Bangladesh has also increasingly relied on China for military hardware, further reducing its dependence on India. The growing Chinese presence in Bangladesh, coupled with economic partnerships, has gradually shifted the balance of influence away from India.

India's Act East Policy, aimed at enhancing economic and strategic relations with Southeast Asia, has not fully met its objectives. The focus on domestic politics, combined with limited financial resources compared to China, has created challenges for India in sustaining its influence in the region. Statistics show that China's trade with ASEAN countries exceeded $975 billion in 2023, while India's trade with ASEAN was significantly lower, at approximately $120 billion.

India's influence in Southeast Asia is increasingly being challenged by China’s rapid expansion and investment in the region. The inability to deliver on infrastructure promises, coupled with internal political issues, has led to a gradual erosion of India's dominant position. To regain its standing, India will need to adopt a more robust and inclusive approach, focusing on building trust, delivering on promises, and enhancing its economic footprint in the region.

The political landscape in Kashmir has shifted dramatically. Traditional parties like the National Conference (NC) and Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) have lost influence, while the BJP's attempts to introduce new politicians have largely failed. The People's Alliance for Gupkar Declaration (PAGD) opposes the BJP's policies and calls for the restoration of Jammu and Kashmir's special status. Distrust between the populace and the government has grown, with political leaders facing scrutiny and arrests, reducing opportunities for dialogue and making political representation seem symbolic.

The anticipated development following the abrogation of Article 370 has not materialized for most Kashmiris. The economy, especially tourism and handicrafts, has been severely hit. Tourism, once a major revenue source, has dwindled due to prolonged lockdowns and negative media attention, deterring visitors. Artisans, known for their shawls, carpets, and woodwork, face a shrinking market, rising material costs, and dropping sales. Promised investments from large corporations have mostly not come to fruition, offering minimal benefits to locals. Education has suffered significantly, with prolonged school closures due to lockdowns and the COVID-19 pandemic. Internet disruptions hindered online education, leading to significant learning gaps for Kashmiri youth.

Kashmir's struggle reflects decades of unfulfilled promises and a deep desire for peace, dignity, and self-determination. The rejection of the BJP symbolizes a call to preserve its unique culture and heritage. True progress requires healing divisions, fostering trust, and creating a political framework that respects Kashmir's identity and aspirations. Lasting peace can only be achieved by listening to and acting on the voices of its people.