Siege, Resistance, and Politics in 'New Kashmir'

Abstract

In August 2019, the populist Modi government, after getting re-elected in a massive landslide, rescinded the semi-autonomous status (constitutionally guaranteed under Article 370) of the disputed Muslim-majority region of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) by putting its 12 million residents under an unprecedented lockdown. This article will examine the ramifications of this decision, which earned praise in mainland India but generated anger and fear among the people of J&K, especially in the Kashmir Valley, the epicenter of the Kashmiri self-determination movement? It situates the prior measures Indian government took to impose its decision on the population which strongly opposed it and assesses the human cost of this imposition. It looks at the international community’s response to the political and human rights crisis obtained due to the siege imposed on the people of the contested Himalayan region. And, finally, the article indicates that the political future of Kashmir, which has been the main source of intense geopolitical rivalry between two nuclear-armed South Asian neighbors (India and Pakistan), and a site of protracted armed conflict and unarmed anti-India resistance, is likely to remain caught in a cycle o

Beyond ethnonationalism: Transnational mobilisation and framing in Kashmir's freedom movement

“…For Kashmir specifically, there has been a purported attempt at demographic manipulation since the Amarnath land dispute of 2008 led to the transfer of Kashmir lands to a shrine board in order to facilitate a Hindu pilgrimage, despite the fact that it had been handled successfully without this transfer of lands for many years without incident (see Tremblay, 2009). Although the act was rescinded, the Hindu government under Narendra Modi did not pass up the opportunity to eliminate Articles 370 and 35A, which stripped any autonomy from Kashmir and their privileged status (Ganie, 2020). With the elimination of these articles, it was a way for the Indian government to purport that Kashmir was no longer a disputed territory and becoming part of India proper would permit outsiders to buy land in Kashmir, which was something previously prohibited.…”

“…Being outside of India gives these two groups an opportunity to support one another in a safer environment than if they were raising dissent within Indian borders. Scholars have highlighted the significance of oppression by the Indian state that responded to non-violent protests with violence, silencing of free speech and, more recently, the abrogation of the articles that provide for whatever remained of the State's autonomy from the remainder of the Indian Union (see Duschinski, 2009;Ganie, 2020;Kak, 2013;Kaul, 2011Kaul, , 2013Kaul, , 2018Malik, 2019;Misri, 2019;Van der Molen & Bal, 2011). It is this predominately non-violent struggle against an oppressive Indian state that the contemporary azadi movement activists focus on.…”

“…The adaptation of the hashtag to #kashmirlivesmatter was an effort at raising international alarm to the historic and continued injustices to Kashmiri lives. More recently, the abrogation of Articles 370 and 35a in August 2019—which previously gave IAK autonomous status within India—led to an increased lockdown in the Valley, which cut off communications such as Internet and phone services for months (Ganie, 2020). As Internet access is one of the greatest tools for mobilising Kashmiris domestically and abroad, this was a direct hit on their capacity for organising as well as for leaking news of the lockdown to the outside world.…”