I.N.D.I Alliance – A divided house
The Kashmir-based constituents of the fast-crumbling Congress-led I.N.D.I Alliance in J&K, all Muslim parties, like other states of the country, are a divided house. The pro-separatist and an ardent believer in the concept of semi-independent status National Conference (NC), which at present represents all the three Lok Sabha (LS) constituencies in Kashmir and which also heads the hardcore separatist Gupkar gang, has, as per reports, decided to field candidates in Srinagar-Ganderbal and Baramulla-Kupwara constituencies in Kashmir and the newly-created Rajouri (Jammu)-Anantnag (Kashmir) constituency (all Muslim-dominated seats). The candidates could be the NC chief and sitting LS MP Farooq Abdullah in the Srinagar-Ganderbal constituency, his son and former J&K CM Omar Abdullah in the Baramulla-Kupwara constituency, and a female member of the Abdullah family in the Rajouri-Anantnag constituency. In other words, all three candidates will be from the Abdullah family. Another report in this regard said that while Farooq Abdullah and Omar Abdullah would be the candidates for the Srinagar-Ganderbal and Baramulla-Kupwara constituencies, a former minister and Gujjar leader Mian Altaf would be the candidate for the Rajouri-Anantnag constituency. Reports suggest that the owners of the NC, the Abdullahs, are not prepared to leave any of these three seats for other I.N.D.I Alliance’s constituents, including the ultra-separatist People’s Democratic Party (PDP) of Mehbooba Mufti and fundamentally separatist Sonia Congress. The proprietors of the NC argue that they won the general election in Kashmir in 2019 and they alone could defeat Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the BJP[1].
What has Omar Abdullah said in this regard? He has said: “There has been no talks on seat-sharing within the I.N.D.I.A bloc so far. Congress is interested in dialogue. In the coming days, there will be a discussion, especially about the three seats- Jammu, Udhampur, and Ladakh, which are with the BJP…The NC has also fought elections from the Jammu, Udhampur, and Ladakh constituencies in the past.
We have won the Jammu seat once and Ladakh more than once. We will sit and discuss which formula we should adopt so that we are able to get back the seats that are with BJP at present…The seats won by NC in 2019 are I.N.D.I.A bloc seats. What do I have to talk about with the I.N.D.I.A bloc on these seats? The fight is not within the I.N.D.I.A bloc. The fight is to take those seats back which are with the BJP. Since three seats are with the I.N.D.I.A bloc, I do not need to discuss those with them…The I.N.D.I.A bloc has three seats, leave them. We will talk about the three seats which are with the BJP”[2].
The attitude of the Congress is no different from that of the NC. It has made it loud and clear that it would field two candidates, one each in the Jammu province’s Jammu constituency and Kathua-Udhampur-Doda constituency. It has also said that it would also test the political waters in the Rajouri-Anantnag constituency. Its argument is that it contested the LS election in the Jammu-Poonch and Kathua-Udhampur-Doda constituencies in 2014 and 2019 that it was the runners up both times and that it has ample support-base in the Rajouri-Anantnag constituency.
In 2014 and 2019, the Congress and the NC forged a pre-poll alliance under the premise that such an alliance alone could help them defeat the BJP in Jammu. While the NC fielded three candidates in Kashmir’s three LS constituencies, the Congress fielded two candidates in the Jammu province’s two LS constituencies. The Congress suffered humiliating defeats both in 2014 and 2019 at the hands of the BJP. Both the BJP candidates, who at present represent Jammu province in the LS, won the election hands down, or with a huge, huge margin as both the constituencies were, and are, Hindu-dominated. The BJP had also won the lone LS seat in the trans-Himalayan Ladakh in 2014 and 2019. As for the NC, its candidates, including three-time CM Farooq Abdullah, suffered ignominious defeat in 2014 at the hands of the PDP but emerged victorious in 2019 by defeating all three PDP candidates, including Mehbooba Mufti, a candidate in the Anantnag constituency.
As for the PDP, the third constituent of the anti-Sanatan and ultra-secular I.N.D.I Alliance has repeatedly said that it would field at least two candidates. It wants to test the political waters in the Rajouri-Anantnag constituency and one of the two LS constituencies in Kashmir, namely Srinagar-Ganderbal and Baramulla-Kupwara. According to reports, the PDP leadership, which has lost its sheen and appeal, is adamant about trying its luck in at least two of the five Lok Sabha constituencies in the Union Territory of J&K[3].
In 2019, 35,52,622 out of 72,02,163 eligible voters (49.3%) had exercised their right to franchise in J&K and Ladakh. The vote share of the BJP was 46.7%. As for the Congress, it got 28.6% votes. And, the vote share of the NC and the PDP was 7.9% and 2.4%, respectively.
What does all this suggest? It suggests that all the I.N.D.I Alliance’s constituents in J&K are pulling in different directions. There are reasons to believe that the NC, the Congress, and the PDP could contest elections against each other in three Lok Sabha constituencies, two in Kashmir and one in Jammu.
ST Status to non-existent Pahari Ethnic Tribe
On February 6, 2024, the LS passed three bills pertaining to J&K, including the one granting Scheduled Tribe (ST) status to (non-existent) Pahari Ethnic Group (read Pathowari-speaking people, over 90% Muslims) and Paddari tribes, Koli and Gadda Brahmins (all Hindus). An official statement issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) said: “The Lok Sabha today passed the Constitution (Jammu and Kashmir) Scheduled Tribes Order (Amendment) Bill, 2024.
The historic bill aims at empowering the Pahari Ethnic Group, Padari Tribes, Koli, and Gadda Brahmins by providing them with Scheduled Tribe status. This has been a long pending demand of these communities…Reservation to the newly listed Scheduled Tribes will be provided in such a manner that it does not cause any harm to the communities (read Gujjars and Bakerwals, 100% Sunni Muslims) that are already listed as Scheduled Tribes. After the Bill is passed by the Parliament, the Government of Union Territory of J&K will issue necessary notifications on the reservation, which will ensure that the people included in the existing list of Scheduled Tribes continue to get the same level of reservation”[4].
According to the so-called Pahadi leaders, “there are 17 lakh Pahadis – 65% in Rajouri and Poonch districts of Jammu province and 26% in Kashmir province, including Baramulla and Kupwara districts”[5].
Trouble in Rajouri-Poonch
The grant of ST status to the Pathowari-speaking people has created a volcanic situation in the Rajouri-Poonch area of Jammu province with the Gujjars and Bakerwals, who got ST status way back on April 19, 1991, during the regime of Chandra Shekhar, up in arms against the decision and chairman of the Gujjar United Front (GUF) and Congress leader Advocate Shah Mohammad Chowdhary announcing that his organization would challenge the government decision in the court of law. In fact, the situation climaxed to the point that the authorities had to suspend the internet services[6]. Besides, the Jammu administration had also to impose “restrictions on the irresponsible use of social media under Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code in view of the likelihood of a serious breach of peace and order in the district. The order said: “The order shall come into force with immediate effect and any violation of this order shall invite punitive action under Section 188 of the IPC, 1860”[7].
Are “Paharis” a Tribal Community?
It needs to be noted that the Gujjars and Bakerwals are opposing the grant of ST status to the Pathowari-speaking people on the grounds that they are not a tribal community, that ST status cannot be granted on the basis of language, and that the grant of ST status to them would jeopardize their socio-economic and political interests. They appear right. A study of seminal works like T Graham Bailey’s Linguistic Studies from the Himalayas and George Grierson’s Linguistic Survey of India, Vol. V, Part IV, and Census of India, XII, Part I, 1941 clearly suggests that there exists no such tribe as the Pahari tribe anywhere in the country and that those who inhabit the hilly and mountainous areas are generally called “Pahadis”.
It should also be underlined that the entire J&K, barring small plains in Jammu’s Kathua, Samba, and Jammu districts and the tiny Kashmir Valley, is hilly and mountainous and all the people it houses are Paharis like the people of the adjoining Himachal Pradesh. No wonder then that the people in the Jammu province’s Doda district and other parts of the province have also started demanding ST status, saying if the “Paharis of Rajouri-Poonch could be granted ST status, why can’t they be declared Paharis so that they also enjoy ST status.”
What about Hindu-Sikh refugees from PoJK?
And what about over 10 lakh Hindu-Sikh Pathowari-speaking people from Pakistan-occupied J&K living in different parts of Jammu province since their migration in 1947-1948? They have criticized the Union Government for excluding them from the Constitution (Jammu and Kashmir) Scheduled Tribes Order (Amendment) Bill, 2024.
It would be only desirable to quote verbatim what the All J&K 1947 PoJK Sharnarthi Intellectual Forum said on February 8. It said: “All J&K 1947 PoJK Sharnarthi Intellectual Forum has expressed strong resentment against the exclusion of PoJK DPs from the bill for Pahari status. In a meeting held by its Core Committee members under the presidentship of Amrik Singh, the Forum welcomed the bill granting Pahari status to ethnic people which paves the way to 10% reservation in Assembly, Municipalities, Panchayats along with other benefits, but at the same time, the Forum strongly condemned the exclusion of PoJK displaced persons from this bill which is the great injustice to the people who virtually belongs to the Pahari Tribal areas. The Forum reiterated that people residing in urban areas who never built their houses in Pahari areas benefitted by virtue of this bill and the people who are original residents of Tribal mountains are deliberately ignored and kept out from this bill. The Forum further expressed that the DPs of 1947 did not leave on their own but they were uprooted by the external aggression by the Pak army and all our moveable and immoveable property is still lying in PoJK then how could they be rejected from the Pahari Status and this is the great injustice meted out to the PoJK DPs. The Forum further resented that there are some black sheep in the bureaucracy and political level who give false data to the Union government. The Forum urged upon Prime Minister Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah to rethink and Constitute a Commission of Retd Judicial Members who visit the J&K and verify the ground situation of the Pahari-speaking people areas”[8].
There are reasons to believe that their exclusion would mar the poll prospects of the BJP in Jammu province to an extent.
BJP’s Poll Prospectus
Will the divided I.N.D.I Alliance and grant of ST status to the non-existent “Pahari ethnic tribe” help the BJP win any of the three — Srinagar-Ganderbal, Baramulla-Kupwara, and Rajouri-Anantnag LS constituencies? The answer is a big NO. These are 99.99% Muslim-dominated seats and these would be won by the Kashmiri parties. The reasons are obvious. The electorate in these constituencies may vote for the NC. The Gujjars and Bakerwals, who are already up in arms, would surely vote against the BJP as before. As for the “Paharis” in the Rajouri-Poonch belt, they are unlikely to vote for the BJP for reasons not really difficult to fathom, notwithstanding the fact that the Narendra Modi Government, unlike the Narasimha Rao, Vajpayee, and Manmohan Singh Governments, granted ST status to them. The truth is that the BJP will win only two LS seats in Jammu province and may repeat its 2014 and 2019 performance in Ladakh provided the MHA is able to conciliate the protesting Buddhists by considering their demands, including the demand seeking full state status for the region and implementation of the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution.
Note:
1. Text in Blue points to additional data on the topic.
2. The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of PGurus.
References:
[1] BJP-dominant seats to be focus of I.N.D.I.A. bloc talks in J-K, Ladakh: Omar Abdullah – Feb 07, 2024, Indian Today
[2] Seat sharing talks only for 3 LS segments held by BJP in J&K, Ladakh: Omar Daily Excelsior – Feb 08, 2024, Daily Excelsior
[3] BJP hits campaign trail in Jammu & Kashmir, eyes all five Lok Sabha seats – Jan 27, 2024, DH
[4] LS nod to bills granting ST status to Paharis, Paddaries, others; inclusion of Valmikis as SCs – Feb 7, 2024, Daily Excelsior
[5] Paharis of J&K deserve ST status – Dec 04, 2023, Daily Excelsior
[6] Seat sharing talks only for 3 LS segments held by BJP in J&K, Ladakh: Omar Daily Excelsior – Feb 08, 2024, Daily Excelsior
[7] Authorities suspend internet services in Rajouri-Poonch – Feb 8, 2024, Daily Excelsior
[8] PoJK Forum resents exclusion of DPs from Bill for Pahari status – Feb 9, 2024, Daily Excelsior
For all the latest updates, download PGurus App.
