August 5, 2019, will be marked as a red letter day in Indian history as Government of India repealed Article 370 to integrate Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh completely with the state of India.However, many leaders from opposition parties and left leaning so-called intellectuals are vehemently opposing this move, citing three main reasons. Let us analyse all these three issues and see how valid opposition’s arguments are.

“The Abrogation of Article 370 is unconstitutional as people of the state were not consulted with”

Many opposition leaders, including leaders from Congress, communist parties and DMK, have mainly argued that abrogation of article 370 is unconstitutional since the people of the state of Jammu and Kashmir were not consulted before such a decision. However, such arguments do not hold any valid ground as in any democracy, Governments-elected by people, are considered as decision makers. Abrogation of article 370 has always been in the election manifesto of Bharatiya Janata Party and the same was there during the 2019 election campaign too. Based on their election manifesto BJP managed to win overwhelming majority in the last general election conducted in April-May this year. Even in Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh, BJP managed to win 3 out of total 5 seats. Thus it will be unwise to say that people did not support abrogation of article 370, specially, if you consider public sentiment and reactions from general people once the news broke out.

Also what amazes us is that Congress leaders claiming abrogation of article 370 unconstitutional. When article 370 was presented first, there was a huge uproar in the parliament against the bill. However finally the bill was passed because of Nehru’s insistence as in the post-independence era, it was difficult for any leader to challenge Nehru’s stature. Article 35A, which talked about special residency status for people of Kashmir, did not even take Parliament’s nod and issued directly as presidential decree. So when both article 370 and article 35A were brought into life so surreptitiously, one wonders how Government of India decided the fate of the state of our country, without consulting Indian citizens. If the counter argument is that people’s mandate was with Nehru, then the same argument would be applicable for Narendra Modi as there is no ground on which one can say that abolition of article 370 was anyway unconstitutional.

In this regard, one should also remember the most traumatic event in the history of pre and post independent India— partition and subsequent communal riots. The partition was the most traumatic event that still haunts millions of people on both sides of the border. It was a decision that was taken to satisfy the greed of handful of leaders, which resulted into some of the worst communal riots in the history of not only India but world. Millions of people lost their lives, women were raped and tens of millions of people had become refugees, leaving behind all the wealth and glorious pasts. The obvious question is, who did the leaders consult before taking such a dreadful step? The answer is— no one. And that is why it looks like hypocrisy at its worst, when leaders from the same party on one hand worship those who divided the country, and on the other hand blame the current government for ensuring that all the citizens of India are governed by the same set of rules.

Even in recent past, when Supreme Court ordered for compensation to the claimant in historic Shah Bano case, Rajiv Gandhi, the then Prime Minister of India, in a brazen display of minority appeasement, overruled Supreme Court’s decision, using his majority in both lower and upper houses , thus violating equal rights for women, one of the basic rights as per our constitution. So it sounds quite absurd when leaders from the same party raise the issue of constitutional and judicial sanctity.

“Article 370 was the only bridge between India and Kashmir”

 This very statement goes against India’s stand on Kashmir on International arena as all the previous Governments have always categorically mentioned that Kashmir is an integral part of our country and therefore cannot be subjected to any foreign intervention. How can be an integral part of our country have any requirement for a bridge to connect with the other parts of the country? Did you need any special status for Maharashtra to connect with rest of India? Do we need it for Punjab or Rajasthan or Uttar Pradesh? The answer is no. Rather, a special status for the state of Jammu and Kashmir kept on confirming that the state and its people were somewhat different from rest of India and therefore it never been completely integrated to India and its development path. 

In a democracy, the role of opposition is extremely important as they need to act as a guardian of the system of checks and balances for constitution and democracy. However, in order to do so, they need to maintain the credibility by opposing Government’s moves that are against the interest of its citizens, and supporting the government where country needs to show its unified face to International community, while facing cross-border adversaries. In the case of article 370, some of the opposition parties like BSP and AAP, who were vocal critics of Narendra Modi and NDA, realised the public sentiment and supported the bill. 

However, Congress and left parties, hell-bent on opposing NDA and any of its deed, chose to follow their anti BJP sentiment over the national sentiments. By doing so, they are not only supporting anti India sentiments that is prevailing in Pakistan, but also allowing International communities a chance to meddle with our internal affairs, which is the last thing we need as a country from our leaders. The leader of opposition, Adhir Ranjan Choudhary went to the extent of saying that Kashmir is not an internal matter of India, rather needs UN intervention— a long standing claim by Pakistan, which we continued to refute. And more surprisingly, there was no official statement from Congress leadership refuting what Mr Chaudhary said earlier. This makes one wonder, whether these opposition leaders representing India or Pakistan.

“Basic Human rights are violated in Kashmir by suspending communications and putting its leaders under house arrest”

There is a hue and cry among opposition leaders and so called liberal intellectuals about suspension of communication channels such as internet and telecommunications in the valley and house arrests of local political leaders. 

However, the hypocrisy of the opposition is again bewildering. when Shyama Prasad Mukherjee, the founder of BJP, wanted to enter Kashmir, he was placed under house arrest by these parties only, and subsequently died there during his imprisonment. It was alleged that he was deprived of any medical treatment and suffered major pain before he died. His only crime- he wanted to enter a city which was supposed to be a part of the same country he belonged to. In spite of repeated requests by his family members, Mr. Nehru, the then Prime Minister of India, refused to carry out any investigation about alleged murder of Mr. Mukherjee, leading to widespread speculations as Mr Mukherjee was spearheading the campaign against incorporation of Article 370. 

On the other hand, local political leaders are the biggest losers of abrogation of article 370, as they are going to lose monopoly over local politics, business and industries. Now state will be under RTI and Central Government’s scrutiny. Thus all these local leaders were continuously issuing provocative statements, warning dire consequences in the valley if article 370 was repealed, and clearly instigating violence. In such cases, it was imperative that the government takes precautionary measures to ensure peace in the valley and maintain law and order situation in the state. 

We are already witnessing a lot of propaganda and instigating videos being circulated by Pakistan’s state machineries. in such scenarios, the first priority for the government should be to avoid any untoward incident and bring normalcy in the valley as quickly as possible without having any major conflict. That is why deployment of additional forces and temporary suspension of communication services to maintain peace in the valley is quite a logical step. We’ve already seen that such restrictions are lifted in Ladakh and Jammu after the ground reality was assessed and found satisfactory by local administration. It is also expected that such decisions to lift restrictions will also be taken in Kashmir Valley in near future.

The situation in Kashmir is nothing compared to what we witnessed earlier during emergency in 1977. Unabashedly abusing her power, Indira Gandhi declared state of emergency in India. Opposition leaders were arrested, media houses were silenced and Judiciary’s power was curtailed. And the state of emergency went on for 2 years. So when supporters of such a “legacy” question the current government for only curtailing the communication systems, that too only for a limited period, their ideological bankruptcy gets exposed. 

The abolition of article 370 is a bold step by government of India and is the first step towards finding a permanent solution of Kashmir problem. This step has the potential to bring unprecedented development and prosperity for the people of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh. However, the success of this initiative would largely depend on Government’s ability to win confidence of local people and providing them security from external disturbances. 

On the other hand, reactions of some of the opposition parties are not only disturbing but detrimental for our national interest. It raises many questions about their stands on Kashmir issue, the answers of which need to be given by their leaders, sooner or later, to people of India, not Pakistan.

Author’s Note: All Views expressed on this site are my own and do not represent the opinions of any entity whosoever with which I have been, am now or will be affiliated.