By Advocate Nazir Ah Baba
The debate around the division of Jammu & Kashmir has resurfaced in recent months, accompanied by persistent rumour-mongering regarding statehood for Jammu, a re-organised administrative map, and even an enlargement of cantonment jurisdictions in Kashmir. Yet amid the noise, one fundamental question remains unanswered: Will division lead to progress, prosperity, and dignity for the ordinary citizen? The answer, on closer examination, appears to be no.
For any society aspiring toward economic growth and social upliftment, the key lies in integration rather than disintegration. Fragmentation has never served as a viable pathway to prosperity. History offers valuable lessons. At one time, African Americans in the United States demanded separate buses, trains, schools, and neighbourhoods. That struggle—rooted in forced disintegration—eventually evolved into a demand for equal access and coexistence: the same schools, same buses, same localities. Progress came not from separation but from integration.
Jammu & Kashmir too must view its future through a similar lens. Economic advancement requires pooling resources, building productive assets, creating enterprise, raising per capita income, and providing employment to the unemployed and underemployed. None of these goals can be meaningfully achieved by chopping the region horizontally or vertically “like an onion” into ever smaller compartments.
It is worth noting that Jammu & Kashmir has already lost more than 60% of its territory in the past century. The separation of those areas yielded no economic development for us, nor did it bring prosperity to those who parted ways. In this context, renewed advocacy for division raises suspicion. It would be naïve to discount the possibility of a larger geopolitical or ideological agenda at play—one that has little to do with public welfare.
The real drivers behind such demands are seldom developmental in nature. Instead, they are rooted in communal bias, power ambitions, and deep-seated prejudice. Had religion been the supreme unifying force, Pakistan would never have split into Pakistan and Bangladesh. Had language alone been sufficient, West Bengal and Bangladesh would have been a single entity. Likewise, Pakistan and Afghanistan—sharing cultural and religious overlaps—remain deeply fractured.
Jammu & Kashmir’s strength historically rests in its composite culture—a shared tapestry of religion, language, custom, and heritage. Even Jammu, contrary to simplistic characterisations, is far from homogeneous; only two-and-a-half districts are Hindu-majority, while the rest are mixed.
Geographically and demographically, division makes even less sense. Only around 20% of J&K’s land is usable for agriculture, horticulture, residential expansion, or industry. The rest is mountainous terrain. Further subdivision of an already resource-limited region would sentence future generations to scarcity, conflict over resources, and a shrinking economic base.
Those who argue for division must therefore answer a more consequential question: What will be the fate of our progeny? Fragmentation may please certain political constituencies in the short term, but it will impoverish the larger population in the long run. History suggests that integration—not separation—forms the bedrock of resilient societies, prosperous economies, and dignified citizenship.
Jammu & Kashmir must not be reduced to a laboratory for territorial experiments. Its future demands cohesion, economic cooperation, and a united approach to development. The people deserve nothing less.
