Biggest Surprises in Jammu Kashmir and Haryana Elections 2024

Jammu & Kashmir Election Results — Courtesy: ECI Website

While reading today’s newspapers, an interesting trend caught my eye. Most newspapers in India are left-leaning, so election results are primarily presented in a way that props up the left-leaning parties. For example, “NC got a thumping victory,” in contrast to a more subdued “BJP earned a hat-trick in Haryana.” No fancy adjectives. Another example is “J&K has rejected BJP’s politics” while failing to report that BJP’s vote share has been increasing in J&K with every passing election. In some newspapers, Vinesh Phogat’s win was highlighted more than the overall performances of individual parties.

The election results declared on 8^th October have been filled with surprises. However, due to the media’s own biased leanings, not every fact made it to the papers. Here are some of the top surprises from the Haryana and J&K Elections 2024.

BJP getting more seats than Mehbooba Mufti’s PDP in J&K

From a party that used to get single-digit votes in Kashmir, BJP’s vote count has now risen to four digits. The party came second in J&K, beating Mehbooba Mufti’s PDP.

PDP is an indigenous Kashmiri political party. The party has been on the political scene in Kashmir for ages. This time, most of the PDP’s votes went to NC in the Kashmir region. PDP’s association with the BJP in the recent past proved to be its undoing. Interestingly, this camaraderie did not have the same effect on the BJP, as its vote share increased from the 2014 elections.

Jammu & Kashmir Seats and Vote Share — Courtesy: The Hindu

No one, including BJP members, ever countered the fact that BJP would not win a single seat in Kashmir. It was reported that even the people of Jammu, along with Kashmiri Pandits, BJP’s primary vote base, were dissatisfied with the saffron party as their demands were left unaddressed.

Considering that politicians like Omar Abdullah were saying there was intense anger brewing in the valley beneath the surface of peace and tranquility, it was surprising to see the BJP not only increase its number of seats without an alliance but also its overall vote share in J&K albeit marginally, as compared to the 2014 elections.

If we were to analyze just Kashmir alone, the BJP neither lost nor gained its vote share (2.2%) in the region. So, in summary, the BJP increased its seats/vote share in Jammu while maintaining its vote share in Kashmir. If the Abrogation of Section 370 was indeed a major point of discontent for J&K locals, we should have seen a drastic decrease in BJP’s seat count/vote share. But that’s not what happened.

Jammu & Kashmir Region-wise Vote Share — Courtesy: The Hindu

The media and politicians might paint the Kashmir election results as a big loss for the BJP and a “befitting reply to BJP by the people for the Abrogation of 370”, but the data seems to indicate otherwise. Yes, they did not win a seat, but the fact that in many seats of Muslim-dominated Kashmir, BJP came second, beating Congress and PDP, implies there’s far more to the story than what meets the eye.

BJP losing Gurez in Baramulla by a mere 1132 votes

Gurez is a seat that is 98% Muslim and where the BJP did not have any presence till now. Faqeer Mohammad Khan from the BJP lost by a mere 1132 votes to NC’s Nazir Ahmad Khan.

This close contest has been the biggest shocker from the Kashmir region, considering the BJP is always portrayed as an “anti-Muslim” party.

BJP’s Shagun Parihar winning Muslim-dominated Kishtwar seat

There is a misconception that Jammu is a “Hindu-only” area and Kashmir is a “Muslim-only” area. Jammu has areas with a significant Muslim population. One such area is Kishtwar, a district that has long been a hotbed of militant activities.

Shagun’s father and uncle were murdered by Hizbul Mujahideen terrorists in 2018. She initially had no plan to join politics, but after the murder of her father and uncle, she felt the need to bring about a change. Her victory, albeit by a small margin, proved to be sweet revenge.

Speaking to the media after the verdict, she said: “We have lost a large number of our soldiers. I have lost my father, and some have lost their brothers and sons. My first effort will be to ensure that every child here has the shadow of a father over his head and that there is peace and prosperity in the area. My efforts will be to bring happiness to every home.”

Jamaat-e-Islami and former separatists faced a big loss in J&K

When members from banned radical groups like Jamaat-e-Islami and former separatists were allowed to contest this election individually, many were worried.

As Kashmir continues to be a sensitive zone, analysts questioned the motive behind this move and the consequences of having radical elements elected into power. However, the people of J&K answered this pressing question through their votes, resoundingly rejecting the radicals and choosing a party like the National Conference instead, which believes in working democratically within the rules of the Indian constitution. This has come as a relief for many, especially since Engineer Rashid was elected as MP in the Lok Sabha elections.

The loss of Engineer Rashid’s party in the J&K election has provided ample proof that his victory in the Lok Sabha elections was a case of sympathy voting. His sons had extensively campaigned for him before general elections, saying the only way their father could escape jail was if he became an MP. However, in the case of the J&K elections, Kashmiris seemed to have drawn a line, and Rashid was unable to replicate his victorious stint in the general elections.

Congress in a way lost both Haryana and J&K

Even though Congress is an ally of the NC in J&K, their standalone performance proved to be lackluster. Congress managed to earn only 6 seats in J&K, compared to BJP’s 29. This cannot be considered a victory for Congress. In Jammu, too, an area where they were stationed to put up a strong fight against the BJP, they managed to win only one seat.

NC leader Omar Abdullah admitted post-election that, in hindsight, the alliance was unnecessary as they would have won the election anyway without the help of Congress.

Haryana outcome

Haryana’s election results came as a shock to everyone, including right-wingers. The trend was overwhelmingly leaning towards anti-incumbency in the state. BJP has been ruling Haryana for over a decade, and there were a plethora of issues surrounding “farmers, soldiers, and wrestlers” plaguing the state.

However, around a month back, it was reported that the non-Jats were having second thoughts about Jats supporting Congress and gaining power. This led to a consolidation of non-Jat votes against Congress. It is a simple case of caste-based politics gone wrong for the party.

Haryana Election Results — Courtesy: The Hindu

RSS played a huge role in BJP’s victory

Reportedly, RSS went above and beyond in Haryana, campaigning door to door, distributing pamphlets that highlighted the dangers of caste-based divisive politics, ensuring everyone got their voter slips on time, and organizing outreach programs.

In the Lok Sabha Elections, it was reported that there had been a fallout between the BJP and RSS, which led to RSS members not making any effort to help the BJP. BJP seems to have realized its blunder post-election and made a conscious effort to re-establish connection with RSS, which is undeniably its backbone. Several changes were made in Haryana based on RSS’ recommendations. It ended up proving effective.

Conclusion

Yet again, Exit polls in India have turned out to be a disaster. You never know what the janta is thinking. There are silent voters who make their stance known only through their votes. Exit polls have been unable to infiltrate that section.

One thing is clear: this election has been a big win for democracy, especially in the Kashmir valley. The turnout was impressive. The trust they placed in the Indian democratic process is noteworthy. As Modi mentioned, the peaceful conduct of the J&K election has proven to be a victory in itself.

The Most Intriguing Fact in “Kashmir Narratives” by Colonel Ajay Raina

I recently bought a book titled Kashmir Narratives. It is authored by Colonel Ajay Raina, a retired Indian Army officer. To quote his bio on Amazon, “I am the only son of refugee parents who were young kids when the 1947 bloodied partition saw the creation of two new States of India and Pakistan and when the biggest ever migration of humans took place on this earth. Post my education, I got commissioned into the Indian Army as an officer in 1990 and served till the end of 2017.“

I happened to see his interview somewhere and decided to buy the book. It has a lot of information on Kashmir, focusing on its history, but what I found particularly interesting was the information on the condition of the plebiscite in Kashmir. Before we get to that, let’s understand what a plebiscite is.

What is a plebiscite?

A plebiscite is a direct vote by the people of a region (in this case, Kashmir) on an important public issue. In simpler words, in relation to Kashmir, a plebiscite allows Kashmiris to vote for its future – specifically, whether the region would join India or Pakistan. Interestingly, only these two options were presented, with no option explicitly listed of allowing Kashmir to function as an independent state.

How did the idea of a plebiscite in Kashmir emerge?

The idea of a plebiscite came into effect following the partition of British India in 1947 when the princely states were given the option to join either India or Pakistan.

Jammu and Kashmir initially chose to remain independent. However, after an invasion by tribal forces from Pakistan, Maharaja Hari Singh sought military assistance from India and signed the Instrument of Accession, formally acceding to India. This led to the first Indo-Pakistani war in 1947-48.

To resolve the conflict, the UN intervened, and the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) passed Resolution 47 in 1948. This resolution called for a ceasefire, the withdrawal of Pakistani forces from the region, and a significant reduction of Indian army officers. This was to allow for a free and fair plebiscite under UN supervision without any sort of intimidation. The plebiscite was supposed to let the people of Jammu and Kashmir decide their allegiance to either India or Pakistan. The result of the plebiscite would have depended on the majority vote.

However, the plebiscite was never conducted due to several reasons, including disagreements between India and Pakistan over the conditions set by the UN.

Clause (a) in Resolution 47

Most of us aren’t aware of Clause (a) in Resolution 47 passed by the UNSC. It states the condition of a plebiscite in Kashmir. Refer to UN Digital Library – Resolution 47 (1948) – Page 4:

To secure the withdrawal from the State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistani nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purpose of fighting, and to prevent any intrusion into the State of such elements and any furnishing of material aid to those fighting in the State.

The clause requires the complete withdrawal of Pakistani forces from the region. However, this condition remains unfulfilled as militants keep infiltrating the area.

Interestingly, India keeps getting the majority of the blame for not allowing a plebiscite, while it’s clear that Pakistan hasn’t fulfilled its part of the resolution. The resolution placed initial responsibility on Pakistan to withdraw its forces from the region. Only after this withdrawal was India supposed to reduce its military presence. This was then to be followed by a plebiscite. Because neither side fully complied with the conditions set out in the resolution, the situation has remained unresolved.

Final thoughts

I can’t help but wonder, had the “freedom seekers” in Kashmir known about this condition for a plebiscite, would they have applied more force on Pakistani militants to move out of the region? As stated, the first step toward a plebiscite is to ensure the Pakistani militants have withdrawn completely.

The UN has not formally retracted Resolution 47. It is currently in a dormant state. However, there is a possibility of Resolution 47 being re-invoked if the UNSC decides to revisit it.

An Ode to Seeking Justice By Exercising Your Power to Vote

In Kerala, recently, CPM faced a sharp setback. A state known to be deeply faithful to its comrades turned its back on the communist party in the Lok Sabha Elections. CPM could secure only one seat. This was a big shocker for the party when the results were announced. It wasn’t for the people, however. The grievances were such.

What went wrong? Plenty. Fund mismanagement, corruption, hooliganism, dictatorial tendencies, lack of acknowledgment of mistakes, farmer deaths, pension delays, etc. The list seems endless. A sort of arrogance had crept in after CPM’s second consecutive term. It was reflected in their attitude towards commoners and overall leadership. People started catching on to their lies and false promises.

How did Malayalees react? Through their votes. CPM could secure only one seat in Kerala in the recent Lok Sabha Elections 2024, facing an overall 2-4% dip in vote share. They suffered a severe blow even in their strongholds like Kasaragod, Kannur, Vadakara, and Palakkad.

Kerala is a prime example of how to get your revenge against political parties if they fail to meet your standards. No freebies were promised in the state, so the votes were cast purely on the basis of the political party’s performance.

The only way a common man in India can express his disappointment towards political parties is through his votes. Yet, Indians do not show up when the time comes. Excuses pop up, “We have work,” “We don’t want to travel,” “What’s going to happen, anyway?” Due to this, the parties that were a disappointment continue to be in power.

The point I am trying to make is concerning West Bengal. The government had already shown its true colors before the election. They tried to cover up the Sandeshkali rapes and protected the party member from arrest. Police officers were attacked when they went to arrest the party member. Hooliganism was its max. Everyone witnessed it. Yet, the party won again.

Someone said if an election were to be held tomorrow in West Bengal, TMC would again win. This is unfortunate. In such cases, is the government alone to blame? Aren’t we the citizens enabling such a behavior, too? TMC’s supporters turned up en masse to save and vote for the party while the others relaxed at home in the sweltering heat. There was post-poll violence in the state because TMC members were furious they did not secure enough votes as before. Yet, somehow, we refused to acknowledge what we saw. We continued to believe the words of the party who was placing the blame on everyone else except itself. We celebrated the “saving” of democracy, unaware that the party we voted for was no better.

Indians are expressing their anger on social media and the streets now, but they forget they can do it the Kerala way too. When the time comes, hit where it hurts – through your votes. This is the only way to get a political party to introspect and correct themselves. It is a powerful tool. Use it.

***

Photo Courtesy: PTI Photo/Swapan Mahapatra

An Indian’s Concern for Bangladeshi Hindus

It is with utter dismay I am reading the news about the attack on Hindus in Bangladesh. Secular Muslims in the country are trying to protect the Hindus. This is positive news, and you can’t help but feel grateful for such people in the community. However, radicals are still deliberately targeting the houses and religious places of Hindus. How can they be stopped?

Often, we have seen that in the struggle between radicals and seculars, the radicals emerge victorious. This has happened previously in Iran. A student uprising in Iran in 1979 played a significant role in the downfall of secularism and the emergence of the Islamic regime.

Student Protestors in Iran 1979 — Student protestors climbing the gate of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran on November 4, 1979 / Wikimedia Commons

The reasons for the uprising back then were quite similar:

Widespread discontent with the Shah’s authoritarian rule, political repression, and economic issues.
Iranian students, both domestically and abroad, were active in organizing protests, disseminating anti-Shah literature, and galvanizing public opinion against the regime. They played a crucial role in spreading revolutionary ideas and mobilizing the masses.

A simple act of protesting an “authoritarian” rule in Iran brought in a more religious regime that was dictatorial in its tendencies. So how successful would one consider this student uprising, unless the original intention of the riots was not social justice, but a religious takeover? Shah, considered secular in nature, fled the country never to return, which in all probability will be Sheikh Hasina’s trajectory too. Comparisons are inevitable. Iran is still struggling to bring back its golden days of secularism. Will Bangladesh end up being the same? Only time will tell.

I saw Bangladeshi residents expressing their joy over Sheikh Hasina’s ouster, which is valid, as she was unnecessarily brutal in her approach. But I also saw them in private groups worrying about the future of the country and whether they will fall into the hands of radical Islamists. Some even said they would leave the country if it came to that.

What does this mean for India? Sheikh Hasina was considered pro-India in her approach. She kept the fundamentalists like the Jamaat-e-Islami and anti-India elements under check. This is of significance as India shares a long border with Bangladesh and any sort of instability has the potential to spill over to neighboring regions.

The new leader, Muhammad Yunus, is a Nobel Laureate. He has proven himself an intellectual, but how effective would he be as a politician and a peace-keeper? Will he be pro-India and continue to maintain peaceful relations with our country, promising to secure the borders and protect the minority community in Bangladesh? Or will he be a puppet for the radicals? Questions only time can answer.

As usual, the leftist ecosystem in India is working overtime to convince us that the Hindus in Bangladesh are not in trouble. This is not surprising. It is a standard approach when minorities in Pakistan, Bangladesh, and even within India (Kashmiri Pandits) are attacked. The events are quickly negated or justified and brushed under the carpet. A close observation of their responses provides enough proof of their bias. In my 40+ years, I have never seen them acknowledge attacks against Hindus. There is always a “reason” for it.

If by chance you point out the attacks, you are labeled a right-wing communal Sanghi (a BJP supporter). However, if you support any other community, you are a social justice warrior, an activist, and a secular. This double standard is difficult to fathom, and I have seen many becoming BJP supporters because of this hypocrisy.

In India, I am witnessing more secular Muslims openly supporting Bangladeshi Hindus than the so-called secular Hindus. Due to the indifference of left-leaning Indian Hindus, the community will continue to suffer persecution at the hands of radicals. There is not enough support. For the support to pour in, people need to first acknowledge the fact that there is an issue.

It is with some relief I read that all political parties in India are on the same page regarding the Bangladesh issue. The opposition hasn’t yet negated the Bangladeshi Hindu’s plight. They voiced concern for the minorities in Bangladesh and said they would work in unity with the central government. A nuanced approach their supporters need to learn.

Hopefully, peace will soon be restored in Bangladesh, rendering my concerns unnecessary. Until that day arrives, my worries persist.

Quick Bytes: Different Perspectives on the Abrogation of Section 370

It’s the fifth anniversary of the Abrogation of Section 370. I couldn’t help but reflect on differing opinions about this watershed moment in the nation’s history. There are politicians like Omar Abdullah and Mehbooba Mufti who consider it a disaster. Then, there are BJP supporters who think it’s the best thing that happened to Kashmir.

How do you know who is right?

It’s a given that our biases influence the sides we choose. When we believe something is unjust, we tend to seek out information that aligns with that perspective. Conversely, when we aim to be more optimistic, we focus on positive news.

In the context of Kashmir, you see different types of YouTube videos. If a vlogger or YouTuber seeks to demonstrate that the Abrogation of Article 370 was misguided, they will seek out discontented Kashmiri locals who share that viewpoint. On the other hand, those looking to justify the decision would seek out locals who support it. No matter one’s perspective, there will always be individuals who support each side of the story. Both sides are also convinced that only their version is the correct one.

However, it’s important to consider the facts.

As per Firstpost’s new article, “The incidents of organized stone pelting, connected with terrorist-separatist agendas, went from a staggering 1,767 in 2018 to zero in 2023“. More facts are provided in the article, which is worth a read.

The writer poses a valid question to Omar Abdullah, who keeps talking about how nothing has changed in Kashmir:

The question arises now that, for the first time in two decades, since four years, which is 1460 days and counting, not one youth has died, but you are saying that the situation overall is terrible. Are we then to assume that normalcy is stone-pelting and youngsters dying every week? The end of stone-pelting and no civilians dying is actually a terrible development for your politics.

Ultimately, your perception of a situation is influenced by your bias. But I can’t help but wonder with all the discontent over the Abrogation of 370: Is the prevention of youth fatalities from stone-pelting incidents of less importance than advocating a political agenda?

***

Photo by Imad Clicks

An Ode to Unrestricted Quality Education for Indian Muslim Women

I came across this news today. It is comforting to know that there are members of the Muslim community in India who are fighting for unrestricted women’s education.

Samastha earlier had conveyed that a Muslim woman’s education should be encouraged but within religious restrictions. This became a point of debate across the state of Kerala, with many progressives calling it problematic. However, the most striking response came from a group within the community – the KNM. The organization is demanding that Samastha apologize for its take. KNM is not without its faults, but the stand they took on this particular issue is noteworthy.

Samastha and KNM

To the uninitiated, the “Samastha” group in Kerala refers to “Samastha Kerala Jamiyyathul Ulama,” an influential Sunni Muslim scholarly body in the state. Samastha plays a significant role in managing religious and educational institutions, including madrasas and mosques, and often issues guidelines on religious matters.

The term “Mujahids” in the context of Kerala typically refers to the Kerala Nadvathul Mujahideen (KNM), a prominent Islamic reformist organization in the state. The KNM often contrasts with traditionalist groups like Samastha, promoting a more modern interpretation of Islam, such as advocating the opening of the doors of mosques for Muslim women to enable them to offer Friday juma prayers.

Restricting Women’s Education on Religious Lines

If we connect religion with education, the progress of women in our country will be hindered. Afghanistan is a live example of this. Currently, girls in Afghanistan are generally allowed to attend school only up to the sixth grade. The Taliban, who regained control of the country in August 2021, have imposed severe restrictions on girls’ education beyond this level. Secondary education for girls (grades 7-12) has been largely suspended, and there have also been significant restrictions on female university students, including the closure of universities to women in late 2022. These measures have been widely condemned by international organizations and human rights groups. The global campaign #LetHerLearn, which advocates for Afghan women’s right to education, is gaining traction.

India is no Afghanistan. Here, women are allowed to study without restrictions regardless of religion. Women who are limited to religious studies may face challenges in the corporate world. It would severely restrict their job opportunities in a secular country like India, where well-paid corporate jobs often require you to engage with a global audience and follow strict academic and professional protocols that might not always adhere to religious lines.

Jobs cannot be built around religion in a democracy. Corporate jobs often require specific skills such as critical thinking, teamwork, leadership, and digital literacy. Religious studies may not always focus on developing these skills, which can impact the ability to perform effectively in a corporate setting.

Unfortunate Consequences

What happens when there are limited job opportunities for women due to religious restrictions? They will end up staying at home. Marriage becomes the only option. Financial independence becomes a distant dream.

It is ultimately up to the Indian Muslim woman to decide. If she wishes to pursue further studies, she should not be shamed.

Indian Muslim women deserve quality education, just like anyone else in India. We should have more Indian Muslim women in top positions in the corporate world. Currently, they are practically non-existent outside of Muslim countries. However, to make this happen, there need to be some reforms within the community that will help the women integrate more seamlessly into the existing corporate structure.

***

Picture Courtesy: The New Indian Express (July 2^nd 2024, Kerala Edition)