Shadab Peerzada
The Jammu and Kashmir National Conference (JKNC) has long been a cornerstone of Jammu and Kashmir’s political landscape. Its roots trace back to 1932, when it was established under the leadership of Sheikh Abdullah to champion the rights of the oppressed against the Dogra monarchy. From those early days of activism, the JKNC emerged as a dominant force, steering Jammu and Kashmir’s integration into the Indian Union. However, its journey has been fraught with contradictions, policy reversals, and failures that continue to shape its perception among the people. While the party enjoyed significant success in the 2024 assembly elections, its historical baggage and contemporary challenges present a complex picture. Although, the Jammu and Kashmir National Conference (JKNC) under the leadership of Omar Abdullah was able to achieve a dominant success in the previous assembly election but it should not be presumed that people are completely behind him, any mistake will be fatal to the party as people have expressed their anger against PDP.
The NC’s early commitment to the idea of a plebiscite and its opposition to Jammu and Kashmir’s complete assimilation into India gave it a unique identity, aligning it with the broader Kashmiri aspirations for self-rule. Sheikh Abdullah’s leadership, marked by his charismatic appeal, promised autonomy and self-determination for the people of the region, particularly through the vision of Naya Kashmir, which sought social, economic, and political reform. This vision emphasized land reforms, equal rights, and economic justice, resonating with the working class and marginalized communities in the region. However, his arrest in 1953 by the Indian government, following accusations of conspiring against the state, marked a significant turning point in the political trajectory of both Abdullah and the National Conference. This event was deeply controversial, with critics alleging that his removal was orchestrated to suppress his growing influence and autonomy demands, which were seen as a challenge to the central government. The dismissal of Abdullah and his replacement with Bakshi Ghulam Mohammad, viewed by many as more pliable to New Delhi, signaled a dramatic shift in Kashmir’s political landscape. It is necessary to be reminded that leadership change didn’t end the party. Following Abdullah’s arrest, a split emerged within the National Conference. Key leaders who had once stood by him began to distance themselves, either due to ideological differences or political ambitions. Mirza Afzal Beg, once a close confidant of Abdullah, initially joined him in forming the Plebiscite Front in 1955 to continue the demand for self-determination. However, the relationship between Abdullah and Beg became strained over time, particularly after the Indira-Sheikh Accord of 1975, which many saw as a betrayal of the plebiscite cause.
Following his release in 1964, Sheikh Abdullah gradually shifted the NC’s stance, pivoting from its demand for a plebiscite to advocating for integration within the Indian framework. This shift, finalized with the Indira-Sheikh Accord of 1975, wherein Abdullah accepted the post of Chief Minister under the Indian Constitution, marked the end of the plebiscite movement. Critics argue that this transformation was less about ideological evolution and more about political survival in the face of dwindling options. Historian A.G. Noorani describes this move as the “betrayal of the plebiscite movement,” a sentiment echoed by many who viewed autonomy as non-negotiable. This period also saw growing disenchantment among sections of the population, who felt that Abdullah’s compromises undermined the promises of autonomy and self-determination. The alienation of these groups set the stage for future political unrest in the region, as questions of identity, autonomy, and the validity of Kashmir’s accession to India remained unresolved. Abdullah’s legacy, therefore, remains a subject of intense debate—hailed by some as a pragmatic leader who worked within the constraints of his time and criticized by others as a leader who abandoned the aspirations of his people.
Subsequent decades saw further erosion of the NC’s credibility. Under Farooq Abdullah, the party faced allegations of cronyism, corruption, and administrative failure. The 1987 elections, marred by allegations of massive rigging, are often cited as a trigger for the insurgency that engulfed the state in the 1990s. Critics like journalist Prem Shankar Jha have argued that the NC’s inability to address the grievances of the people or provide good governance deepened public disillusionment. The NC’s overwhelming success in the 2024 assembly elections has been interpreted in various ways. On one hand, it marks a remarkable comeback for a party that had been sidelined during the abrogation of Article 370 in 2019 and the subsequent bifurcation of the state into Union Territories. On the other hand, commentators like Anuradha Bhasin argue that the victory reflects voter disenchantment with the BJP’s policies rather than an outright endorsement of the NC. The people of Jammu and Kashmir, reeling from years of political instability and economic stagnation, voted for change. While the NC capitalised on the BJP’s unpopularity and the lack of a credible alternative, its victory also brought enormous expectations.
One of the most significant challenges facing the current NC government under Chief Minister Omar Abdullah is the uneasy relationship between the Chief Minister’s office and the Lieutenant Governor (LG). The constitutional arrangement in Jammu and Kashmir post-2019 ensures that the LG wields significant authority, often overshadowing the elected government. This power imbalance has created friction, with Omar Abdullah’s government accusing the LG of undermining its authority. Key policy areas, including law and order, continue to be controlled by the central government, leaving little room for the state government to assert itself. Political analyst Siddiq Wahid argues that this discord not only hampers governance but also deepens the public’s distrust in the political process. Despite its electoral promises, the NC government has struggled to deliver. Unemployment remains a pressing issue, with educated youth increasingly disillusioned. Infrastructure projects, particularly in remote areas, have seen little progress, and the administration has been criticized for its failure to attract investment. While the NC has spoken about the restoration of Article 370 and statehood, its inability to secure any concrete assurances from the central government has been viewed as a major failure. The public also expects the NC to address issues like human rights violations, political detentions, and the misuse of anti-terror laws. However, the party has been accused of maintaining a cautious stance to avoid antagonizing New Delhi. This balancing act, critics argue, has left the government paralyzed, unable to either fulfill the aspirations of its people or satisfy the central government.
Omar Abdullah faces the unenviable task of balancing the expectations of the people with the pressures of the central government. His efforts to engage with New Delhi on contentious issues like statehood and Article 370 have been met with skepticism. While his government has initiated some welfare schemes, these have been overshadowed by the larger issues of political dignity and autonomy. The NC’s attempts to portray itself as a champion of Jammu and Kashmir’s unique identity are undermined by its history of compromises. As journalist Barkha Dutt observes, the NC cannot simply rely on its past rhetoric; it must take decisive action to address the region’s pressing issues. If the present NC government fails to deliver on its promises, particularly regarding the restoration of statehood and Article 370, it risks political extinction. Today’s voters are far more discerning than the party’s traditional support base. Unlike older generations, who were loyal to the NC due to its historical significance, the current electorate demands tangible results. The failure to restore dignity and autonomy would be seen as a betrayal, leading to a further erosion of the NC’s credibility. In such a scenario, the party might lose its status as a political force in Jammu and Kashmir, with newer parties or movements stepping in to fill the void. This generation of voters is not bound by nostalgia; their expectations are shaped by contemporary realities, including better governance, economic opportunities, and political stability.
The National Conference stands at a critical juncture. Its 2024 election victory has given it an opportunity to reclaim its position as a leading voice for the people of Jammu and Kashmir. However, the challenges it faces are immense. From its uneasy relationship with the LG’s office to its failure to deliver on key promises, the party’s performance in the coming years will determine its political future. As political commentator Zafar Choudhary aptly puts it, the NC must redefine itself as a party of action rather than rhetoric. If it succeeds, it can restore faith in Jammu and Kashmir’s democratic processes and offer a credible alternative to central dominance. If it fails, the curious case of the National Conference may well end as a cautionary tale of how political complacency and compromises can lead to irrelevance in an ever-changing democratic landscape. Once must realise that people are cautious and desperately waiting for change, development and dignity that Jammu and Kashmir National Conference have promised in their manifesto and any lethargic or ill intention to be in power will not only be judged but will be dealt with appropriate response from the politically mature people of Jammu and Kashmir.
Shadab Peerzada, Politician, Writer and Technologist can be reached at Twitter/X: @ShadabPeerzada
