The Urdu row in J&K is no longer just about language—it’s about identity, politics, and perception, MUSHTAQ BALA
MUSHTAQ BALA
The renewed controversy over Urdu in Jammu & Kashmir is both unfortunate and revealing. Unfortunate—because language, which should unite, is being drawn into the arena of political contestation. Revealing—because it exposes how fragile our understanding of cultural legacy has become.
Recent statements by political leaders, including those from the Jammu & Kashmir National Conference, have attempted to reaffirm Urdu’s historical and administrative importance. Their position underscores a reality that cannot be easily dismissed: Urdu is not an imposed construct in J&K—it is an evolved medium of governance, literature, and shared expression.
However, the debate has quickly moved beyond facts into the realm of perception.
There is a growing tendency to frame Urdu as being in competition with regional languages like Kashmiri, Dogri, or Gojri. This framing is fundamentally flawed. The rise of one language need not signal the decline of another. If anything, a culturally rich society is defined by its ability to nurture multiple languages simultaneously.
The real concern, therefore, is not linguistic policy—it is political narrative.
When language becomes a tool for mobilization, it risks losing its essence. Urdu, in the context of Jammu & Kashmir, has historically functioned as a bridge language—cutting across ethnic, regional, and linguistic divides. It enabled administration, facilitated literature, and enriched journalism. To reduce it now to a subject of controversy is to ignore that legacy.
At the same time, the argument for strengthening regional languages is both valid and necessary. Kashmiri, in particular, carries the emotional and cultural heartbeat of the Valley. Dogri, Gojri, Pahari, and others represent equally significant identities. Their promotion is not a political favor—it is a cultural responsibility.
But here lies the critical distinction: promotion must not turn into polarization.
The danger of the current discourse is that it creates a false choice. It suggests that one must either stand with Urdu or with regional languages. This binary thinking is not only intellectually weak but socially damaging.
Jammu & Kashmir does not need a language hierarchy—it needs a language harmony.
Policy frameworks must reflect this balance. Urdu can continue to serve as a functional and connective language, while regional languages receive institutional support in education, media, and public life. This is not a contradiction; it is a necessity.
Equally, political leadership must exercise restraint. Statements made for immediate resonance often have long-term consequences. Language, once politicized, is difficult to depoliticize.
The larger question we must ask ourselves is simple:
Are we preserving identity—or manufacturing division?
Urdu is part of Jammu & Kashmir’s historical memory. Regional languages are its living soul. To pit one against the other is to weaken both.
As this debate unfolds, it is imperative to return to first principles. Language is not merely a medium of communication—it is a vessel of culture, history, and collective consciousness.
Mushtaq Bala is Editor-in-Chief of Kashmir Pen, an award-winning filmmaker, cultural commentator, and advocate for peace through narrative media.
