It is the unlikeliest of alliances. The BJP, led by Narendra Modi, is forming a government in partnership with the People’s Democratic Party led by Mufti Mohammad Sayeed in the state of Jammu and Kashmir, where a separatist insurgency against India has raged on with varying intensities since 1989.
The BJP and its ideological mentor, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), have long campaigned for abrogation of Article 370 of the Indian constitution that grants special autonomous status to the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir.
Under Article 370, Indian laws on subjects other than defence, finance, foreign affairs and communications do not apply in J&K except with the approval of the state government. The state also had its own prime minister until 1965, and still has its own penal code.
The PDP, meanwhile, promised in its 2014 campaign that it would “use Article 370 to restore original special status.” Their position has been that the autonomy promised in the Article has been chipped away, while BJP’s, traditionally, was that the constitution clearly said the special status was meant to be temporary.
Another point of contention was the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. This law gives emergency powers to the army that enable them to arrest without warrant and shoot to kill. Stories of excesses abound, particularly from the early years of the Kashmir insurgency.
Kashmiris recall horror stories of rape and murder committed by the armed forces, and the forced disappearance of thousands of people. The army on its part is reluctant to operate without cover of the special law, with generals arguing -- with good reason -- that foreign powers and imported fighters are involved in the conflict.
They suspect that soldiers would be trapped in false court cases if the law didn’t exist. Their position is that internal security is not their job, but if they’re going to be stuck doing it, they want some legal cover. The BJP, usually described by the foreign media as “Hindu nationalist,” has always been on the side of the army.
Yet, somehow, the PDP and BJP managed to find enough common ground to stand together. This is historic. Mufti Mohammad Sayeed, who will be chief minister, compared it to a coming together of the North and South poles.
For decades now, the conversation about Kashmir has been a conversation on righting historical wrongs. In the Kashmir valley’s dominant narrative, it was a tale of invasions and deceit stretching from the days of the Mughals to the infamous plebiscite that never happened, and extending to the militarisation that followed the advent of armed insurgency.
Ancient grouses were nursed along with more recent ones, and fuelled a demand for freedom from India. I recall Kashmiri friends chanting slogans for freedom would be raised even if there was a power cut. In the popular imagination, freedom was the cure for all ills.
This was not a narrative many Kashmiri Hindus shared. They had been persecuted as a community during the early days of the Kashmir militancy and had become refugees from their beloved homes. Their narrative went back to times predating the advent of Islam in the valley. In the Hindu Right’s version of the story, the Muslims were descendants of the first invaders, or of converts who had changed faith out of fear or for favour.
In the 2014 state assembly elections, the BJP won 25 seats, all from the predominantly Hindu Jammu region. The PDP won 28 seats, mainly from the Muslim majority Kashmir valley. Both fell short of the halfway mark of 44 in the house of 87.
Political exigency got them to start exploring the possibility of forming a coalition government. They have now managed this feat, and for this, they should be complimented. This is an example of democracy working towards a bridging of difficult political and social divides.
To be sure, the job is going to be hard for both the BJP and the PDP. Their deal will be viewed as betrayal by many of their own supporters. The habit of hatred for the other, developed over years, will resist change.
Opponents to the deal -- and there would be many -- will try to scuttle it. This lot would include political rivals of the two parties within India, hardliners inside both camps, terrorists and militants of all hues, and elements of the Pakistan security establishment.
One problem with a conflict like Kashmir is that entrenched positions become comfort zones of a sort. A war economy develops, many people become rich and powerful from endless conflict, responses become automatic after a time, and all fresh thinking becomes a threat to somebody’s worldview.
People don’t like having to alter their worldviews.
And yet, rare as it is, individuals and organisations do change their worldviews. Around 250 years before the birth of Christ, a cruel warrior king named Asoka fought and won a bloody war. The reason we remember him to this day is that after his victory, he became a man of peace.
A symbol of four lions and a dharma chakra taken from pillars that he had erected in his time is India’s national emblem. Without allowing for the possibility of positive change in ourselves and others, this world will remain trapped forever in the endless cycle of eye for eye that is making us all blind.
