According to media report, Omar had made it clear immediately after winning the election“We need to work in coordination with the Centre. Many issues of Jammu and Kashmir cannot be resolved by fighting with the Centre….” It will be interesting to see to what extent Chief Minister Omar stays true to his words.?
Omar Abdullah has been sworn in as the first Chief Minister of Union Territory Jammu and Kashmir. Lieutenant Governor (LG) Manoj Sinha administered the oath of office to five ministers along with Omar at a program organized in Srinagar. Surinder Chaudhary from Omar’s party has been made the Deputy Chief Minister, while independent Satish Sharma has been made the minister. This is a good start. But the question arises that why a Hindu cannot become the Chief Minister in a Muslim majority state? This is the situation when there are many such examples in the country, where the Chief Ministers of Hindu dominated states – Kerala, Maharashtra, Assam, Rajasthan, Bihar, Manipur, Puducherry and Andhra Pradesh have also been from Muslim and Christian communities. Not only this, many non-Hindus have also become President, Vice-President and Governor in Hindu majority India.
The 12 promises made by the ruling National Conference (NC) in its manifesto include the restoration of Article 370-35A and statehood in the state along with the promise of a dignified return of Kashmiri Pandits to the valley. The Modi government has reiterated many times that it is committed to restoring the statehood of Jammu and Kashmir. Omar is also aware of the fact that L.G. It has many administrative powers and without the support of the Centre, many tasks (including statehood) cannot be accomplished.
Apart from Jammu and Kashmir, seven more states in the country—Andaman-Nicobar, Chandigarh, Dadra-Nagar Haveli Daman-Diu, Delhi, Ladakh, Lakshadweep and Puducherry are union territories. At present, Delhi is probably the only Union Territory where there is an elected government and L.G. The relationship between is strained. In this context, can the situation in Jammu and Kashmir be like that of Delhi?
Late Congress leader Sheila Dikshit was the Chief Minister of Delhi from 1998-2013. Leaving aside her party’s leadership in the central government, Sheila Dikshit as Chief Minister during the period 1998-2004 had no tension with the BJP-led central government led by the then Prime Minister Atal Bihari government, despite political differences. This changed after the formation of the Arvind Kejriwal-led Aam Aadmi Party (‘AAP’) government (from 2013 till now), which is running the government in the country’s capital through confrontation instead of coordination. This type of anarchist politics is the gift of top Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, who in 2013, without any ministerial berth, tore up an ordinance of his own government in a press conference and now uses indecent words for Prime Minister Modi. .
It is not that L.G. in Delhi. The tension between AAP and Modi government started after May 2014. The Congress led central government led by L.G. The attitude of the AAP government towards Najeeb Jung (2013-16) was also bitter. Former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal has directly or indirectly advised Omar Abdullah to adopt the conduct of his party. According to media reports, immediately after winning the elections, Omar had made it clear, “We need to work in coordination with the Centre. “Many issues of Jammu and Kashmir cannot be resolved by fighting with the Centre….” It will be interesting to see how much Chief Minister Omar lives up to his words?
There is an old proverb – “Elephant’s teeth are more to eat and more to show”. Is it really true that the ruling N.C. Want return of temporary section 370-35A? Abdullah family (Farooq-Omar) is mature in politics. Firstly, they know that no matter which party is in power at the Centre, the return of these two streams is almost impossible. The constitutional bench of the Supreme Court has also given green signal to the constitutional amendment of Section 370-35A after a long hearing. Secondly, did these two provisions really do any good to Jammu and Kashmir? The truth is that Article 370-35A not only halted the progress of Kashmir, but with the cooperation and funding of Pakistan, the valley started returning to the medieval era.
Is it not true that had Article 370-35A been active, all economic activities in the valley were curtailed, there was almost an unannounced ban on development work, there was continuous stone pelting on army and police forces, tourists were reluctant to come to the valley, separatists called bandh arbitrarily. were taken, theaters were locked, religious terrorism along with Pakistan-backed separatism was dominant, the environment was tainted with anti-India slogans like ‘Pakistan Zindabad’ and like the rest of the country, the constitutional rights given to the tribals along with the Dalits and the underprivileged were violated. (including reservation)?
After honest analysis, even the supporters of Article 370-35A cannot deny the fact that after the abolition of these two sections, Jammu and Kashmir, like the rest of India, has been buzzing for the last five years. This column has mentioned the changed situation and positivity of Kashmir on several occasions recently. These include the increasing splendor of Lal Chowk, operation of new and old cinemas, holding of a big global conference like G-20, investment proposals worth about Rs. 1.25 lakh crore coming from India and abroad and creation of thousands of employment opportunities etc.
The Abdullah family’s promise in their party’s manifesto to restore Article 370-35A and the dignified return of Kashmiri Pandits—contradict each other. Section 370-35A was the same poison which contributed significantly to the creation of the eco-system of ‘kafir-kufr’ in Kashmir. The termination of these clauses in 2019 was an important first step towards returning the valley to its original pluralistic form.
The complete destruction of the separatism, religious fanaticism and hatred that has been nurtured here for decades, due to which Kashmiri Pandits were forced to flee after the bloody jihad of the 1980-90s, is not possible suddenly in five years. The safe return of Kashmiri Pandits, who are the flag bearers of the original Sanatan culture of this region, to their valley is possible only in an environment free from the same poisonous religious eco-system. Can any cooperation be expected from the new Omar Abdullah government in this context?