The BJP-PDP sarkar in J&K: The 'sellout' alliance has a potential silver lining for voters

On paper, the new government in Kashmir represents the mother of all U-turns for Narendra Modi and Mufti Mohammed Sayeed.

During the campaign, Modi had railed against the musical chair in Srinagar, saying “Kabhi Baap-Bete ki sarkar, Kabhi Baap-Beti Ki sarkar.” On the other side of Banihal Pass, the aforementioned Papa- Daughter Party had rallied voters, citing the spectre of a BJP government in the Valley.

Now, the twain have sealed a deal, with a hug.

The unexpected alliance between a nationalist party and a regional party that practices soft separatism has begun on a cautious, even pessimistic, note. On the social media, the reaction is caustic. ‘Sell-out, opportunism, back-stabbers’ are some of the trending phrases. Only those outside the state, cut away from the realities of its politics and the extent of the Jammu-Kashmir divide, are optimistic.

“The people of Kashmir have become indifferent. They do not know what to make of this alliance,” says Hilal Mir, a senior journalist based in Srinagar. The consternation is justified: In the Valley the buzz was that voters want to keep the BJP out; in Jammu voters wanted to keep the Kashmiri parties out. Now, the voters do not know whether to rejoice or mourn.

Yet, in spite of the acerbic reactions and predictions of gloom and doom, the alliance between the BJP and the PDP could bridge the divide between its Hindus and Muslims and bring Jammu and Kashmir closer.

Many of Kashmir’s problems in the past have had their genesis in the rivalry between the people of Jammu and those in the Valley. This divide has in the past been fomented by the regional parties and the BJP.

The BJP’s rise in Jammu, for instance, was primarily because of the role it played during the dispute over the Amarnath land transfer dispute and converted it into a communal issue.

“The 2002 elections, possibly the first entirely free elections in the Valley, ousted the National Conference but the fragility of the PDP-Congress alliance showed how deep the divide had grown. For, as the 2008 elections approached, then Chief Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad was forced to attach greater importance to fending off the BJP’s challenge in Jammu than preserving the autonomy of Kashmir. The conflict finally came to a head with the Amarnath land scam of 2008, when the BJP in Jammu blockaded the Kashmir Valley and prevented most of its fruit harvest from reaching the Indian market,” writes Prem Shankar Jha in _The Indian Expres_s.

On several occasions in the past, the BJP raised the temperature in the Valley with its politics of ultra nationalism on Kashmir. Some years ago, Murli Manohar Joshi had insisted on unfurling the Tricolor at Lal Chowk even though the only people who were watching were from the security forces and the entire city was shut down. Such misplaced machismo and rabble-rousing only contributed the mistrust of the Indian state among Kashmiris.

Now, however, the problem has become part of the solution. It is, therefore, unlikely that the BJP will do anything to undermine its own government, especially when it has made huge ideological compromises to fulfil its dream of being part of the Kashmir government.

That said, the challenges for both the alliance partners are undoubtedly huge.

“The BJP will find it difficult to explain to voters in Jammu why it gave up its stand on Article-370. Jammu has been solidly behind the BJP only because it has always talked of giving equal status to people of the two regions. Its supporters will be disillusioned,” says Manoj Kaul, bureau chief of the Srinagar based ETV Urdu.

The PDP stand on Article-370 is clear. It is non-negotiable. “The PDP wanted a written assurance that the special constitutional status of Jammu & Kashmir will not be tampered with. As I told you earlier that Kashmir acceded to India under special circumstances. We have a special position in the Indian constitution. We have a separate constitution, separate state subject law. We take oath of allegiance to both the state of Jammu & Kashmir and India,” Sayeed said in an interview to Pakistan daily Dawn .

Considering that Jansangh leader Syama Prasad Mukherjee died in Kashmir fighting for the abolition of Article-370, the BJP will have a lot of explaining to do about its written assurance.

The other contentious issue between the two partners is that of the rehabilitation of refugees from Pakistan. While the BJP wants the state government to give them citizenship and equal rights, people in the Valley are against it. Since the refugees are mostly Hindus, people of the Valley believe that giving them citizenship will alter the demography of the state, an idea they summarily reject.

Mufti is also keen on talks with Pakistan and opening a line of dialogue with separatists and the Hurriyat.

“Let me tell you that as Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi has to talk to everyone and all stakeholders. And he has himself said on record that he will carry forward Vajpayee’s legacy and address Kashmir from the perspective of ‘Insaaniyat, Jamhooriyat and Kashmiriyat’ (humanism, democracy and Kashmiriyat),” Sayeed told Dawn.

It will be interesting to see how the alliance partners manage these contradictions. But the buzz within the state is that these issues will be put on the backburner and the government will initially focus solely on development and their common minimum programme.

Perhaps, they can both learn from the tenure of Jagmohan, who was the governor of the state in the Rajiv Gandhi and VP Singh governments. Jagmohan is still disliked by the people of Kashmir (and revered by the people of Jammu) because of allegations of extra-constitutional crackdowns engineered allegedly by Mufti, who was then the Union home minister. But Jagmohan’s tenure is still remembered for his focus on development and infrastructure, especially for building the boulevard on the Dal Lake.

If the PDP and the BJP can leverage the development plant to build a solid bridge between Jammu and Kashmir, the alliance would will made a lasting contribution to the state.