J&K finally gets a govt, but Sayeed's BJP alliance won't solve things

Mufti Mohammad Sayed-the patriarch of the People’s Democratic Party- has just become the Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir. He will be heading a rather unusual coalition with the Bhartiya Janata Party. The unusual or even imponderable coalition was preceded by a huge voter turnout in the state of Jammu and Kashmir. This was followed by a period wherein the state lapsed into Governor’s rule. The state now finally has a government. Will this be the turning point for the state and its politics? Will the state be finally ‘integrated’ into the Indian Union? Or will this turn out to be a chimera? Will the reduction of the conflict in and over Kashmir to governance and development, be the solvent of the conflict? Or is the state headed towards what has historically has been the theme that defined Jammu and Kashmir’s politics or what the Harvard academic, albeit in a different context, called ‘deep uncertainties with different horizons? [caption id=“attachment_2129511” align=“alignleft” width=“380”]  PTI[/caption] First, elections , while a tool of conflict resolution, have historically not been the solvent to conflicts. They can be a useful instrument in a post conflict condition when a society is on the path towards reconciliation and dialogue with various stakeholders. The conflict that has defined and marked the state of Jammu and Kashmir demonstrates no signs of either. There is every possibility of recurrence of conflict in the state. The relative peace that currently prevails in the state owes itself to containment of insurgency and militancy, attrition and a generational shift where the state is on the cusp of a demographic transition. A new generation is getting incubated in the state. The direction this generation takes falls in the realm of the ‘unknown unknown’. Elections and government formation are then in the nature of a palliative that do not address the multifarious roots and dimensions of the conflict over and in Jammu and Kashmir. Or , in other words, superficial remedy. This then will naturally militate against the ‘integration’ as defined by the BJP and its allied parties of the state with the broader Union. The Idea of India promulgated by the BJP goes against the essence of the nature , identity and nature of integration of the state with the Indian Union. The ‘general Will’, in Rousseau’s conceptualization of the state and the social contract suggests if stretched to notions of integration suggests that unless these ‘Will’s are not harmoniously aligned; estrangement and alienation are the natural concomitants. The corollary is conflict and in the context of Jammu and Kashmir, functional integration. Reducing these organic themes and processes to developmentalism and governance lends itself to the same dynamic. The human species is not, as a certain branch of economics, leads us to believe, not homo economicus- a creature animated merely by self interest, rationality and utility but a complex creature where abstractions and emotions play a very important role in the psychological makeup of individuals. One of these is nationalism- a construct that however has been the motor of modern history. Bread and butter issues may generate a voter turn out and a demand for ‘goof governance’ but the nationalist instinct remains. Reductionism may then be gratifying for powers that be but is not the panacea that will resolve the conflict. Historically and contemporarily, the condition that has defined the state has been that of relative peace and calm punctuated by spasms of violence and instability. This condition largely obtains from political manoeuvrings and manipulations that have been in the nature of fixes. Fixes, by their very nature are temporary and premised on expediency. The real problem has not been really addressed. This, in turn, has fostered and bred Pritchett’s, ‘deep uncertainties with differing horizons in Jammu and Kashmir’. Will the new government formation and its consequences be any different? Not if history is any guide. What is required is a paradigm shift in terms of policy, politics and economics-that includes all stakeholders to the conflict in an idiom that is a departure from the past. Will the new government be able to institute a paradigm shift of this nature? Not unless the forces of inertia and path dependence are addressed and dealt with. Will this happen? Inertia stems from status quoism. To thwart it and institute a new paradigm, requires smashing long standing customs and disturbing the status quo- a scenario that is likely to be hamstrung by coalitional politics and the different and differing ideologies of the coalition partners. The prognosis, as with everything about and related to Jammu and Kashmir is bleak. All we can do is keep our fingers crossed.