When the British left India back in 1947, they left it in two- India and Pakistan. Before the British arrived, India was politically divided into multiple warring kingdoms. Although India never existed as a single political entity before the British, the geographical virtues made it so that the very idea of India as a single territory dates back to the 10th century. However, when the British paramountcy over India ended, India was left in the same political state as it was invaded- 562 princely states.
In theory, the states were free to choose whether to join India, Pakistan or remain independent. This accession was mainly made on the basis of religion- the states with a Muslim majority acceded to Pakistan whilst the Hindu majority states joined India. The Maharaja of Kashmir – a Muslim-majority state with a Hindu ruler – dithered over which of the two to join and opted for the idea of remaining independent. His decision was solely based on one assumption- accession to India would anger the Muslim majority and joining Pakistan would lead to vulnerability of Hindus and Sikhs in the state. But rumours that the Maharaja was leaning towards India, despite his clear desire to remain independent, prompted an invasion from Muslim revolutionaries and Pakistani tribesmen. The Maharaja, fearing that his state would fall to the marauders, requested India to send troops to stop the aggressors and India promptly did so but on the condition that Kashmir accedes to India. The Maharaja signed a document called ‘The Instrument of Accession’, something that was signed by all princely states who desired to join the Republic of India.
After the accession, India incorporated Kashmir under the Indian Constitution but with Article 370 which gives the state a special status. Article 370 has certain provisions that ‘delink’ the state from the rest of the country. For instance, the Parliament of India requires the state government’s concurrence for applying any law except for those concerning defence, foreign affairs and communications. In a sense, the state government has veto power over the Parliament. Article 35A is another example which restricts the integration of Kashmir with rest of the country. This prohibits any citizen of India (except those who possess a PR status of Jammu and Kashmir) to buy property in the state. Many believe that this article was implemented by Nehru to pacify the Muslim population of the state, whilst he worked with the National Conference leader, Sheikh Abdullah. After the incorporation of such articles, Sheikh Abdullah and his National Conference won the local election by a landslide in 1951. His populist policies alienated the Kashmiri Pandits and led to them fleeing from the state fearing violence. Hence, the majority of the state remained Muslim and it still is.
Article 370 and 35A hinder the establishment of industry in Kashmir. No one wishes to establish business in an area wherein they cannot buy property. The lack of industry in Kashmir leads to the high rates of unemployment it faces. The youth in Kashmir are only offered a handful of government jobs- survival in the state is tougher than anywhere around the country. Moreover, Kashmiris have lost complete faith in the Indian government. The ever-growing distrust that began after the arrest of Sheikh Abdullah in 1953 manifested into insurgency by the eighties. Kashmiri youth wanted complete freedom from India. Thus, began the secessionist movement in Kashmir.
This aspect is precisely what Pakistan and the terrorist organizations exploit. Kashmiri youth with no jobs and no faith in India desire two things- a purpose and this purpose (because they have no jobs) becomes azaadi. Moreover, religion is also at play here- majority of the youth in Kashmir are Muslims and in the name of Islam, it becomes rather convenient to blackmail them into carrying out attacks against India. Furthermore, because poverty is also extremely prevalent, the money also serves as an incentive for the jihadis- if they don’t have the means to tend to their family’s needs, the offer for a significant sum of money (that the terrorist organizations promise to pay) that assures the well being of their family seems enticing. Overall, there are two aspects that Pakistan and the terrorist organizations take advantage of- religion and unemployment.
This is where Article 370 and 35A come in. As mentioned above, they deter the establishment of industry which leads to the lack of jobs in the area, which in turn contribute to the unemployment rates. The repealing of the articles will lead to the establishment of industry in the area and in turn, the provision of jobs. Hence, the removal of these articles (and others that contribute to the ‘disintegration’ of Kashmir) is necessary to solve the Kashmir conflict. If the common youth of the country have a job that functions as a source of income, why would they engage in terrorist activities? If they possess a ‘normal’ life, why would they feel the need to achieve azaadi?
However, it is imperative to realize that this solution will not be successful instantly- the establishment of industry will take time. Perhaps, there are more steps, in addition to the abrogation of the articles, that need to be taken to completely solve the conflict. Moreover, the desire for freedom won’t fade away suddenly- the youth will gain trust in the Indian government gradually. So yes, this step will take time and it may take a few years. But it is the step in the right direction and a step away from the bloodbath that religious radicalization and territorial ambitions have created in Kashmir.
