While it is premature to speculate on future developments in Jammu and Kashmir, it is too late in the day to bemoan the bitter electoral battle between the Congress(I) and the National Conference. The battle is a fact. It has taken place. It has produced certain consequences which can be coped with but not obliterated. But what precisely are these consequences? It is true that while Muslim-majority constituencies have invariably returned National Conference nominees, Hindu-majority seats have gone to the Congress (I). This “polarization” is new and not new at the same time. It is not new in that support for the National Conference has always been limited to the Muslim-majority Kashmir valley and parts of Jammu. It is new in that Hindu-majority constituencies in Jammu have never before given such a complete victory to one party as they have done this time to the Congress (I). This new element in the situation raises certain questions about which there is apparently a great deal of confusion.
This confusion arises from a failure to recognise that in the process of supplanting the former Jana Sangh, now called the Bharatiya Janata Party, the Congress has not become another Jana Sangh under a different name. Indeed, Dr. Farooq Abdullah and his supporters would have had no cause for concern if that had happened or could happen. It is precisely because the Congress (I) is unquestionably a secular party that they have reason to be worried. It has, of course, been trounced in the valley and Muslim-majority constituencies in Jammu. But it has made inroads in both and is, therefore, in a position to try to expand its popular base there. This makes politics in the valley far more competitive than it has ever been since the accession of the state to the Indian Union. This puts Dr. Abdullah and his close associates on the spot. They must perform and give the state at least a less corrupt government than it has had all these years if they are not to face Congress (I)-led agitations and a possible erosion of their support. Competitive politics is inherently risky. If the Congress (I) pursues Dr Abdullah too hard, he may well be tempted to resort to a communalist platform. And it need hardly be emphasized that he does not have the stature of his father which could have enabled him to use this kind of platform without having to surrender to it.
Whether or not she should pursue the logic of her party’s present performance in the state is, however, only one of the problems Mrs Gandhi is bound to face. What does she do if the National Conference splits, as it might if only because Mr. GM Shah is by no means reconciled to the political ascendancy of his brother-in-law? Sit back with folded hands and not side with any faction? Would that be consistent with her role as Prime Minister? With whom does she side if she decides to do so? On the one hand, the Congress (I) is now a major factor in the politics of Jammu and Kashmir and as such it cannot accept a passive role. On the other, it has to tread warily lest its actions create too much disturbance in the state. Mrs. Gandhi will not be able to ignore either the dynamics of party politics or the peculiar nature of the problems in Jammu and Kashmir. The people in the state and the country as a whole will watch with interest the way she copes with these contradictory demands on her.
It is generally not recognised that political life in Jammu and Kashmir has, in a profound sense, been insulated from the politics of the rest of the country. The Centre was, of course, party to the dismissal of Sheikh Abdullah in 1953 and to the rise and fall of subsequent chief ministers. But it did all that principally with the help of the state apparatus and such individuals as were willing to cooperate with it. No national party has so far been in a position to intervene directly and effectively in the affairs of the state from within. The Congress (I) is now in such a position. If this fact puts Jammu and Kashmir on a par with Tamil Nadu or Andhra or West Bengal (states where regional parties are in power) despite the obvious differences, it is an indication of its true integration. Seen from this perspective, it is as well that Mrs. Gandhi decided to abandon the policy of keeping out of the valley and to join the battle with the National Conference. This represents a dramatic break with past policies. It is, therefore, not surprising that many of us are not able to see this development in its proper perspective. We are also not able to recognise that communalism can take many forms, one of the subtlest being to leave Muslim-majority areas and constituencies to a party with support only among them. No one has ever applied this doctrine to Sikh-majority areas or distinct linguistic entities such as Tamil Nadu, or Andhra, or West Bengal. In any case, Kashmir has finally joined the rest of India in respect of competitive politics. It cannot go back to the status quo ante.