Making J&K polls credible

There was a great deal on the Kashmir elections Vajpayee would have wished to say but could not because, to some extent, the situation had spun out of New Delhi’s control. Surely, both the prime minister and the deputy minister had said that elections in Kashmir would be held under President’s rule.

First, Farooq Abdullah had agreed to descend from the Valley and occupy the vice presidential gaddi. But once A.J.P. Abdul Kalam became president, one would have been stretching Indian secularism to have another Muslim as the vice president. Thereafter, Farooq was persuaded to accept the post in the union government as minister without portfolio. Contrary to political gossip both Vajpayee and Advani were involved in this bit of ‘persuasion’. But habits die hard. It must have caused considerable discomfort to Farooq Abdullah, the very thought of relinquishing the chief ministership. There were many ‘afterthoughts’. At one stage, he thought the slot of external affairs minister would suit his profile. He was told that there was no certainty that Jaswant Singh would be shifted from that slot.

It was then decided that Farooq would hand over leadership of the National Conference to Omar Abdullah, come to New Delhi as minister without portfolio and play a national role. Considering that there is no Muslim with a national stature in the stables of any one of the political parties, Farooq Abdullah joining the national mainstream would have been a terrific idea — for him and national politics.

Omar Abdullah was to see through the first few days of the state assembly and then dissolve the House and seek elections. This was the script agreed upon by the Centre and the two Abdullahs. Why, then, did Farooq Abdullah change his mind? I doubt if such backtracking on the part of any other chief minister would have been tolerated, particularly when the stakes were so high nationally, regionally and internationally. Basically, Farooq was able to change the script because he sensed differences of opinion within the ruling party at the Centre. There were some who thought that it may not be worthwhile taking risks in Kashmir when the nation is inching towards national elections depending which way Gujarat goes. So far Farooq has managed the state ‘somehow’. Why take risks at this juncture?

But once Farooq revised his stand, what about the credibility of the prime minister and the deputy prime minister who had stated publicity that, for the Kashmir elections to be free and fair and with the widest possible participation, there would be a different dispensation at the helm in Srinagar. If Farooq could not be persuaded, surely New Delhi could have forced his hand? This was inadvisable because National Conference votes were needed for the election of the Vice President Bhairon Singh Shekhawat. Now the vice presidential election is over, is it possible that the Centre will make another effort at twisting Farooq Abdullah’s arm?

One of the arguments against holding elections in Kashmir under governor’s rule was this: how can you hold elections in Kashmir under governor’s rule when elections in Gujarat were being held under Narendra Modi? But when will the Gujarat elections take place? The chief election commissioner has not shown his hand as yet. In which case will the Gujarat elections be held in December? But if elections are not held within six months of the last Assembly session, would President’s rule have to be enforced?

If elections in Gujarat are eventually to be held under President’s rule, that opens up the case for Governor’s rule in Kashmir as well. Surely, Farooq Abdullah will have so much more credibility if he returns to power in an election he did not supervise. An election under President’s rule would be a fitting response to those who, in a state of funk, are describing the Kashmir poll as a ‘farce’ weeks before the event.