<p>Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah has reiterated the demand for restoration of statehood for the union territory, and said the ‘’conversation around statehood hasn’t died down.” </p><p>He also said that “a recent Niti Aayog document, shared with the PM and members of Aayog, categorically mentioned restoring statehood.’’ He did not agree with the suggestion to convene a special Assembly session to push the demand, but his position is clear. Abdullah has made the demand a few times after he became chief minister. </p><p>The Supreme Court directed the Central government in 2023 to restore Kashmir’s statehood “at the earliest.” Both Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah have promised restoration without committing to a timeline. Serious doubts are being expressed about whether their assurances are backed by any intent. </p>.<p>The ‘conversation’ about statehood was mentioned because of the terrorist attack in Pahalgam in April. The view that the attack has made the grant of statehood difficult is wrong. T</p><p>he case for statehood is stronger because of the attack. In the present dispensation, the elected government has very few powers. Powers and responsibilities with respect to law and order, which would include security and administration involving the posting and transfer of senior officers, are now with the non-elected lieutenant-governor, and the state government has no role in these matters. </p><p>One major requirement for ensuring security is to involve the people, represented by the government. The people of the state at present have no stake or involvement in its security system. The elected government is an outsider on these matters. Chief Minister Omar Abdullah was not invited to the meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Security convened after the Pahalgam attack. </p>.<p>The Central government, the armed forces, the intelligence set-up and the Lt Governor should not be the only players in Kashmir’s security system. The people of the state are key stakeholders, and it is debatable whether atrocities like the one in Pahalgam would take place if the people were given responsibility for their affairs. The trust between the Centre and the people of Kashmir is important. It sends out a message of distrust when an elected government is not given the powers it should have, and repeated promises are not followed by action. Terrorism is also a political problem, and should be tackled politically. Statehood would make Kashmir’s democracy more real and its governance more people-centric and participatory. It should be seen as part of the compact between the nation and its people. It needs to be respected for the good of Kashmir and the nation. </p>
<p>Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah has reiterated the demand for restoration of statehood for the union territory, and said the ‘’conversation around statehood hasn’t died down.” </p><p>He also said that “a recent Niti Aayog document, shared with the PM and members of Aayog, categorically mentioned restoring statehood.’’ He did not agree with the suggestion to convene a special Assembly session to push the demand, but his position is clear. Abdullah has made the demand a few times after he became chief minister. </p><p>The Supreme Court directed the Central government in 2023 to restore Kashmir’s statehood “at the earliest.” Both Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah have promised restoration without committing to a timeline. Serious doubts are being expressed about whether their assurances are backed by any intent. </p>.<p>The ‘conversation’ about statehood was mentioned because of the terrorist attack in Pahalgam in April. The view that the attack has made the grant of statehood difficult is wrong. T</p><p>he case for statehood is stronger because of the attack. In the present dispensation, the elected government has very few powers. Powers and responsibilities with respect to law and order, which would include security and administration involving the posting and transfer of senior officers, are now with the non-elected lieutenant-governor, and the state government has no role in these matters. </p><p>One major requirement for ensuring security is to involve the people, represented by the government. The people of the state at present have no stake or involvement in its security system. The elected government is an outsider on these matters. Chief Minister Omar Abdullah was not invited to the meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Security convened after the Pahalgam attack. </p>.<p>The Central government, the armed forces, the intelligence set-up and the Lt Governor should not be the only players in Kashmir’s security system. The people of the state are key stakeholders, and it is debatable whether atrocities like the one in Pahalgam would take place if the people were given responsibility for their affairs. The trust between the Centre and the people of Kashmir is important. It sends out a message of distrust when an elected government is not given the powers it should have, and repeated promises are not followed by action. Terrorism is also a political problem, and should be tackled politically. Statehood would make Kashmir’s democracy more real and its governance more people-centric and participatory. It should be seen as part of the compact between the nation and its people. It needs to be respected for the good of Kashmir and the nation. </p>
