Saga of Repeated Failures

It’s unfortunate but true that regional political parties in Kashmir have repeatedly failed —and, in many ways, collapsed at crucial junctures. The story of political failures is not a sudden event, but a result of decades-long negligence, misplaced priorities, and dangerous narratives pushed by vested interests to remain relevant.

While the country surged ahead in development, healthcare, education, and economic transformation, Kashmir remained trapped in a vicious cycle of instability, misplaced slogans, and political opportunism.

The most basic responsibility of any political leadership is to ensure the safety, security, and well-being of its people. However, the political elite in Kashmir repeatedly failed in this primary duty.

Approach of politicians has consistently revolved around gains rather than public welfare. When lives were lost in terror attacks like Baisaran, Pulwama, or Uri, the response from Kashmir’s mainstream political class was either silence or deflection. Rather than aligning with the national sentiment, their positions often appeared ambiguous and hesitant — raising serious questions about their priorities.

Since 1953, political rhetoric in Kashmir has often been at odds with the spirit of integration. From late Sheikh Abdullah’s “Plebiscite” slogan to Mehbooba Mufti’s “Self-Rule” and Sajad Lone’s “Achievable Nationhood,” these narratives sowed confusion, created unrealistic aspirations, and distanced the people from the national mainstream.

These ideas were not only politically unviable but also deeply damaging, creating an impression that Kashmir was not a part of India — a narrative that directly contradicted the Indian Constitution and national interest.

The decision of late Sheikh Abdullah to call for a plebiscite in 1953 laid the foundation for decades of distrust. It created a political culture where leaders focused more on emotional manipulation than practical governance. Instead of moving forward with development and integration, the region was dragged into an ideological deadlock that harmed generations of Kashmiris.

From the slogans of Self-Rule and Nationhood, to photo-ops with global dignitaries, Kashmir’s mainstream leaders have excelled in theatrics but failed in delivery.

The Baisaran terror attack symbolized the end result of their policies — a region vulnerable to external manipulation and internal decay. Political leaders made grand promises during elections but disappeared during times of crisis, leaving the public disillusioned and leaderless.

Perhaps the most alarming failure has been the dangerous narrative that these parties have allowed, even encouraged. The statements of their workers, speeches at public rallies, and social media posts have often reflected sentiments that go against the unity and sovereignty of India.

These narratives, echoed by party cadres, have at times created fertile ground for separatism and radicalization — making them a threat to national security rather than its safeguard.

Despite being in power for decades, these political outfits have little to show in terms of real development. They have not played any meaningful role in uplifting the Kashmiri people through education, employment generation, or industrial growth. There has been no effort to bridge the developmental gap between Kashmir and the rest of India.

The absence of major universities, healthcare institutions, or industries in the Valley is a direct indictment of their governance. Instead of taking ownership, local politicians have conveniently offloaded every responsibility onto the Central Government. From basic civic maintenance to recruitment drives and even animal welfare, everything is expected to be handled by New Delhi.

When everything is done by the Centre, these parties wash their hands of any accountability, all while continuing to blame the Centre for every shortcoming.

Why are the elected MLAs, who have well-established political units in every nook and corner of the Valley, never held accountable for withholding information about terrorists and miscreants operating in their respective areas? Everyone is aware that these local political representatives and their cadres possess deep knowledge of the daily life in their constituencies — they know exactly what is cooked for breakfast, lunch, and dinner in every household. Their grassroots presence is unmatched. Yet, despite this intimate awareness, they are conspicuously silent when it comes to identifying and reporting the presence of terrorists. There is never any evidence of proactive, preventive action taken by them to protect lives or uphold national security. This silence and inaction raise serious concerns about their intent, priorities, and complicity. Instead of being the first line of defense against terrorism, they have become silent spectators sometimes even sympathizers.

When Kashmir witnessed thousands of terrorist attacks, mainstream parties responded with muted statements or calls for dialogue. Yet, the same leaders express passionate outrage over issues in Palestine and Gaza. This hypocrisy reveals a troubling lack of empathy for their own people and an alarming disregard for national interest. Their activism appears more performative than principled.

Look at the transformation of other regions — from IT hubs in the South to industrial growth in the West and Northeast. Political leaders in those areas invited investment, created jobs, improved education, and empowered their citizens. In contrast, Kashmiri leaders pushed anti-investment rhetoric. The message was clear: We won’t allow outsiders to invest here. The result? A complete absence of multinational companies and economic stagnation in the Valley.

Every time tragedy struck — be it Pathankot, Pulwama, or Baisaran — these leaders were quick to tweet, not to condemn the terrorists, but to criticize New Delhi for not doing enough. Their public meetings were rarely about solutions, and more about creating anti-Centre sentiments among the population. This opportunistic behaviour only widened the gap between Kashmir and the rest of India. From centrally sponsored schemes to local development funds, everything was seen as a source for loot. The ground reality stands testimony to this corruption — broken roads, non-functional hospitals, empty skill centers, and ghost schools. Funds were sanctioned in crores, but delivery on the ground was negligible.

The collapse of political parties in Kashmir is not because of external pressures, but due to their internal failures. Their betrayal of the people’s trust, their dangerous narratives, and their lack of commitment to development have made them irrelevant. If Kashmir is to move forward, it needs a new political culture — one based on accountability, national integration, and people-centric governance. Until then, the mainstream political class will remain discredited, distrusted, and dismissed by the very people they claim to represent.

Sheikh Khalid writes for GK on Politics, Terrorism, Education & Strategic affairs and is presently heading International Centre for Peace Studies (ICPS).