As Kashmir enters a new phase in its relationship with Delhi, Omar Abdullah’s political future – and that of his party, the National Conference – will remain in sharp focus, writes Muhammad Nadeem
Omar Abdullah’s political journey is inextricably linked to the complex history of Kashmir. Born into Kashmir’s most prominent political dynasty, his life has been shaped by the region’s tumultuous politics from the very beginning.
The family’s political legacy dates back to the accession of Kashmir to India in 1947. Omar’s grandfather, Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah, became Prime Minister of Kashmir in 1948 and later Chief Minister in 1975. His father, Farooq Abdullah has been the Chief Minister five times, the first in 1982. Omar became Chief Minister in 2009 at the age of 38.
However, as Omar noted, “The rather storied careers of the Abdullah family belie the tension and turmoil that has been a constant feature of the politics in the valley.” The family’s political journey has been fraught with challenges. Sheikh Abdullah spent over a decade in jail, while Farooq Abdullah faced widespread criticism for the Rajiv-Farooq accord with the Congress that many blame for the rise of militancy in Kashmir.
An Inheritance
Omar’s entry into politics was not without its own challenges. “I grew up not expecting to join politics,” he is quoted saying in India Tomorrow: Conversations with the Next Generation of Political Leaders (Oxford, 2020). “But obviously, the family that I grew up in, it was part and parcel of everyday life, first with my grandfather and then with my father.” His decision to enter politics was met with resistance from his mother.
A series of high-profile positions and alliances have marked Omar’s political career. He was elected to the Lok Sabha at the age of 29 and became the youngest minister in Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s government shortly after. He later became the president of his party, the Jammu and Kashmir National Conference (JKNC), and eventually Chief Minister in alliance with the Congress party.
One of the defining characteristics of Omar’s political career has been his attempt to balance the competing demands of Kashmiri autonomy and Indian nationalism. “I will never be Indian enough for that extreme right-wing nationalist politician,” he has said. “But then I’ll also not be Kashmiri enough for those who don’t see Kashmir’s future as part of India.” This delicate balancing act has been a constant challenge throughout his career.
A Tumultuous Tenure
During his tenure as Chief Minister from 2009 to 2015, Omar faced several situations that tested his leadership and decision-making abilities. It was a bad start. As the investigations and the rumours about the sleaze racket that dominated the latter part of the Ghulam Nabi Azad era spilt over Omar’s initial days as Chief Minister and one day he was accused of being part of it in the house, he announced his resignation. It took lot of time for his family and party to convince him that resignation is not a response to every allegation. Soon came the Asiya-Nilofar case from Shopian that snowballed into a major crisis.
One of the most significant challenges came in 2010 when Kashmir erupted in widespread protests. The government’s response to these protests, which resulted in the deaths of more than 120 civilians and firearm injuries to 2600 civilians, has been a source of ongoing regret for Omar. Reflecting on this period, he has said, “The 2010 summer agitation that we had to deal with which resulted in more than a hundred people dying… That continues to haunt me and always will.”
Another crucial decision during Omar’s tenure was his handling of the execution of Afzal Guru, a Kashmiri man convicted for his alleged role in the 2001 Parliament attack. Omar opposed the execution, arguing that it would inflame tensions in Kashmir. “My failure was in not being able to convince the government of India that hanging Afzal Guru is not going to win them any votes in the general election and, in fact, would push Jammu and Kashmir back to the fringes.”
These incidents highlight the challenges Omar faced in balancing the demands of his role as Chief Minister with his desire to represent Kashmiri interests. His inability to prevent Guru’s execution or to manage the 2010 protests effectively underscored the limitations of his power and influence within the broader political system.
Credit goes to him for not interrupting a chain of policies and interventions which his predecessors had initiated. He, in fact, added to them by, for instance, permitting the Jammu and Kashmir Entrepreneurship Development Institute (JKEDI) to emerge as a model institute with perhaps the highest rate of start-up success in the region. His efforts, however, were often overshadowed by security concerns and political instability.
One of the most controversial aspects of Omar’s tenure was the continued use of the Public Safety Act (PSA), a law that allows for detention without trial. Given the massive criticism, there were some minor amendments but the abuse of the law continued.
His government sank with the devastating September 2014 floods. His defeat in elections marked a significant shift in Kashmiri politics, with the rise of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and its subsequent alliance with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
The 2019 Interventions
Post-2014, Omar emerged as a vocal critic of the BJPDP alliance and the central government’s handling of Kashmir. He has consistently argued for greater autonomy for Kashmir and the preservation of its special status under Article 370 of the Indian Constitution.
The watershed moment in Omar’s political career came on August 5, 2019, when the government of India read down Article 370, stripping Kashmir of its special status. Omar, along with many other Kashmiri politicians, was placed under detention. This 232-day detention period has had a profound impact on Omar’s political outlook and personal life.
“The overwhelming feeling that I have come out of detention with is a whole lot of bitterness and anger, which I’m trying to come to terms with,” he later said. “But I think it will be a while until I do.” This experience has not only shaped Omar’s personal views but also his understanding of the relationship between Jammu and Kashmir and the Indian state.
The revocation of Article 370 and the subsequent actions have led Omar to question the very foundations of Kashmir’s relationship with India. “Every single promise made to Jammu and Kashmir has been broken. And it’s going to be very difficult for people like me to continue to justify why I believe Jammu and Kashmir must be a part of India. Delhi hasn’t left us with much to talk about.”
His disillusionment, however, did not push him to question the past as he maintains that Jammu and Kashmir’s future lies within India. However, he is grappling with how to reconcile this belief with Delhi’s actions. “Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India. As much as I would like to say that my detention and the circumstances of the 5th of August have caused me to shift my thinking on that, it hasn’t. Because the position I’ve taken takes into account all sorts of factors, and I do not believe that Jammu and Kashmir has a future for itself outside of its relationship with India.”
Omar’s critique of the government of India’s actions extends beyond the revocation of Article 370. He is particularly critical of the decision to downgrade Jammu and Kashmir from a state to a union territory, seeing it as a humiliation and punishment of the Kashmiri people. He argued, “If all this time, you have been telling the world that terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir is the product of Pakistan, that fundamentalism is the product of Pakistani involvement, that separatism exists because Pakistan has injected separatism into Jammu and Kashmir, then go and punish Pakistan. Why did you punish Jammu and Kashmir?”
An Altered State
The political landscape in Kashmir has been dramatically altered by these events, and Omar was seen grappling with how to move forward. He expresses uncertainty about his own political future. “Personally, I see very little chance for myself to participate in any sort of electoral politics in the union territory of Jammu and Kashmir the way things stand, and I don’t know how long that will last.”
Omar’s disillusionment extends to the broader Indian political landscape. He expressed disappointment with political parties and leaders who supported or remained silent on the government’s actions in Kashmir. He singles out leaders like Arvind Kejriwal and parties like the Telangana Rashtra Samithi (TRS) for criticism, arguing that they betrayed their own principles of state autonomy and identity by supporting the central government’s actions in Kashmir.
Given the fact that most of the Indian states have been consistently insisting on improving the federalism, Omar was at loss to understand why these states were so supportive of the centralisation of governance in India.
This would lead him to believe that the repercussions of the decision-making will be long-lasting. He warned of increased separatist sentiment: “If anything, those who are sitting on the fence are probably feeling more isolated and more separatist than they were before the 5th of August, 2019.” He also expresses concern about the erosion of trust between Kashmiris and the Indian state, noting, “It was a relationship full of mistrust, which has been multiplied many, many times over. There is no reason why anyone, particularly in Kashmir, but also in large parts of Jammu, will trust what they hear from any government at the centre.”
A critical examination of Omar’s political career reveals a leader who has often struggled to effectively navigate the complex and often contradictory demands of Kashmiri and Indian politics. While he has consistently advocated for Kashmir’s place within India, his ability to deliver on promises of greater autonomy and development has been limited by both internal and external factors.
Omar’s political legacy is further complicated by his legacy, which has made it difficult for Omar to present himself as a truly transformative figure in Kashmiri politics.
At Crossroads
In the aftermath of the revocation of Article 370, Omar found himself at a crossroads. His continued belief in Kashmir’s future as part of India, despite his deep disillusionment with the actions by Delhi, reflects the complex and often contradictory nature of Kashmiri politics. It also highlights the challenges faced by mainstream Kashmiri politicians in maintaining credibility with both their local constituents and the central government.
As Kashmir enters a new phase in its relationship with the government of India, Omar’s political future – and that of his party, the National Conference – remains in sharp focus. His experiences and perspectives offer dubious insights into the complexities of Kashmiri politics and the challenges of reconciling regional aspirations with national imperatives.
Omar’s story raises profound questions about the nature of democracy, federalism, and minority rights in India. It challenges us to consider how a diverse and complex nation can accommodate regional identities and aspirations. As Omar himself noted, “Unfortunately, today I have more questions than I have answers.”
His party eventually succeeded in getting him to contest the assembly elections – after losing big time in Lok Sabha from north Kashmir, it fetched the grand old party a historic mandate. In a recast assembly, he has 46 berths of his own. He can support a garner of 10 more berths if he requires. That is outstanding. As Omar is readying to take over as the hugely dwarfed chief executive of a powerless assembly, he deserves credit that he is not starting as an angry man. He is seeking cooperation and not confrontation from the central government. He does not want governance tensions are added to the problems of a beleaguered space that was torn by the election outcomes on communal lines. Indications suggest the centre is not so unwilling to work with him. But it is too early to make a sweeping comment.
Omar’s story will remain a crucial chapter in the unfolding narrative of Kashmir. His journey embodies the contradictions, and challenges of a generation of Kashmiri politicians who have sought to bridge the gap between Kashmiri aspirations and Indian nationalism. As Kashmir grapples with its new reality, Omar Abdullah’s voice – with its mix of disillusionment, and pragmatism, – will undoubtedly continue to shape the discourse on Kashmir’s future.
