Chakar The Great
SENIOR MEMBER
- Apr 25, 2018
- 5,614
- 0
- Country
- Location
Source: Washignton Post
Modi had risen through the ranks of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a controversial Hindu nationalist paramilitary volunteer organization, as he went on to become the leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). During the George W. Bush administration, he was denied a U.S. visa on grounds pertaining to religious freedom over allegations that he tacitly supported Hindu extremists during anti-Muslim riots in 2002 in his home state of Gujarat.
Modi played down these worries after he won in 2014, focusing on economic redevelopment rather than sectarian division. “India’s social differences will come together and make a flag, just like different threads come together to weave a cloth,” he said after winning his first term. He soon become known better for his awkward handshakes than his Hindu nationalism.
This week, however, many of Modi’s critics seemed to get some vindication. Months after his unprecedented reelection, Modi’s government announced that it would strip statehood from the Indian-administered portion of Kashmir, the country’s only Muslim-majority state known officially as Jammu and Kashmir. The move prompted an immediate backlash from Pakistan, which has long viewed itself as the protector of the region’s Muslims.
The stakes are incredibly high: Pakistan and India have fought several wars over Kashmir, and the region remains restive at the best of times. On Tuesday, Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan suggested war was still a possibility. “They may strike us again, and we will strike back,” Khan said. “Who will win that war? No one will win it, and it will have grievous consequences for the entire world.”
Agence France-Presse reported Wednesday that a protester died and more than 100 people were arrested for being out after curfew in Srinagar, Kashmir’s main city.
Things could get worse, especially as the practical effects of Modi’s reforms — specifically, the scrapping of Article 35-A — go into effect, allowing nonresidents to move to Kashmir and buy land. Such a move would allow outsiders to change the demographics of India’s only Muslim-majority state, an idea that has been compared to Israeli settlers in the West Bank or the Han Chinese moving to Xinjiang.
“This is going to be an extremely unpopular decision in Kashmir, not just among those whose sympathies lie toward a more independent Kashmir but also among those who see themselves as fully part of the Indian union but for whom the special status of Kashmir is an important political principle,” Irfan Nooruddin, a professor of Indian politics at Georgetown University, told Foreign Policy this week.
Mehbooba Mufti, former chief minister of Jammu and Kashmir who worked in coalition with the BJP, wrote on Twitter that the move shows that the Indian government had “chosen territory” over the interests of its people.
Mehbooba Mufti
✔@MehboobaMufti
https://twitter.com/MehboobaMufti/status/1157268362205917184
You failed to win over the love of a single Muslim majority state which rejected division on religious grounds & chose secular India. The gloves are finally off & India has chosen territory over people.
Why did Modi make this risky move? It’s true that in some ways, he’s just doing what he said he would. The BJP ran on a platform of revoking Kashmir’s special status, portraying it as an administrative move rather than a change to the country’s basic fabric. Modi’s landslide win in May suggests that the idea had the backing of many Indians. Indeed, it wasn’t just BJP supporters who backed the move.
The timing of the decision may have been influenced by other factors, too. President Trump’s curious claim that Modi had asked him to “mediate” on Kashmir, announced during a White House visit by Khan last month, provoked a furious response in India. The United States on Wednesday issued its own denial that it had been forewarned of Modi’s plans.
But perhaps one of the simplest reasons for Modi’s shift on Kashmir may be the most cynical: It’s a political distraction. Modi’s bold plans for economic redevelopment across India have largely failed to come to fruition. Major policy moves such as abruptly invalidating the two most popular bank notesin circulation in 2016 were carried out in a chaotic, disruptive way with little obvious economic benefit.
These economic concerns haven’t gone away. Aarefa Johari of the online publication Scroll.in found that among stock traders on Mumbai’s Dalal Street, although many supported Modi’s decision on Kashmir, they still worried about the economy. “But why should we care what they have done in Kashmir? How does it affect us?” one said. “What matters is that we are facing a recession, and that this government is trying to kill the middle-class.”
Modi once cloaked his Hindu nationalist views with ideas of economic reform and revitalization. But as the latter has stalled, he’s fallen back on an easier option. It’s a short-term gamble for political popularity, but the effects will last a while.
Modi had risen through the ranks of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a controversial Hindu nationalist paramilitary volunteer organization, as he went on to become the leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). During the George W. Bush administration, he was denied a U.S. visa on grounds pertaining to religious freedom over allegations that he tacitly supported Hindu extremists during anti-Muslim riots in 2002 in his home state of Gujarat.
Modi played down these worries after he won in 2014, focusing on economic redevelopment rather than sectarian division. “India’s social differences will come together and make a flag, just like different threads come together to weave a cloth,” he said after winning his first term. He soon become known better for his awkward handshakes than his Hindu nationalism.
This week, however, many of Modi’s critics seemed to get some vindication. Months after his unprecedented reelection, Modi’s government announced that it would strip statehood from the Indian-administered portion of Kashmir, the country’s only Muslim-majority state known officially as Jammu and Kashmir. The move prompted an immediate backlash from Pakistan, which has long viewed itself as the protector of the region’s Muslims.
The stakes are incredibly high: Pakistan and India have fought several wars over Kashmir, and the region remains restive at the best of times. On Tuesday, Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan suggested war was still a possibility. “They may strike us again, and we will strike back,” Khan said. “Who will win that war? No one will win it, and it will have grievous consequences for the entire world.”
Agence France-Presse reported Wednesday that a protester died and more than 100 people were arrested for being out after curfew in Srinagar, Kashmir’s main city.
Things could get worse, especially as the practical effects of Modi’s reforms — specifically, the scrapping of Article 35-A — go into effect, allowing nonresidents to move to Kashmir and buy land. Such a move would allow outsiders to change the demographics of India’s only Muslim-majority state, an idea that has been compared to Israeli settlers in the West Bank or the Han Chinese moving to Xinjiang.
“This is going to be an extremely unpopular decision in Kashmir, not just among those whose sympathies lie toward a more independent Kashmir but also among those who see themselves as fully part of the Indian union but for whom the special status of Kashmir is an important political principle,” Irfan Nooruddin, a professor of Indian politics at Georgetown University, told Foreign Policy this week.
Mehbooba Mufti, former chief minister of Jammu and Kashmir who worked in coalition with the BJP, wrote on Twitter that the move shows that the Indian government had “chosen territory” over the interests of its people.
Mehbooba Mufti
✔@MehboobaMufti
https://twitter.com/MehboobaMufti/status/1157268362205917184
You failed to win over the love of a single Muslim majority state which rejected division on religious grounds & chose secular India. The gloves are finally off & India has chosen territory over people.
Why did Modi make this risky move? It’s true that in some ways, he’s just doing what he said he would. The BJP ran on a platform of revoking Kashmir’s special status, portraying it as an administrative move rather than a change to the country’s basic fabric. Modi’s landslide win in May suggests that the idea had the backing of many Indians. Indeed, it wasn’t just BJP supporters who backed the move.
The timing of the decision may have been influenced by other factors, too. President Trump’s curious claim that Modi had asked him to “mediate” on Kashmir, announced during a White House visit by Khan last month, provoked a furious response in India. The United States on Wednesday issued its own denial that it had been forewarned of Modi’s plans.
But perhaps one of the simplest reasons for Modi’s shift on Kashmir may be the most cynical: It’s a political distraction. Modi’s bold plans for economic redevelopment across India have largely failed to come to fruition. Major policy moves such as abruptly invalidating the two most popular bank notesin circulation in 2016 were carried out in a chaotic, disruptive way with little obvious economic benefit.
These economic concerns haven’t gone away. Aarefa Johari of the online publication Scroll.in found that among stock traders on Mumbai’s Dalal Street, although many supported Modi’s decision on Kashmir, they still worried about the economy. “But why should we care what they have done in Kashmir? How does it affect us?” one said. “What matters is that we are facing a recession, and that this government is trying to kill the middle-class.”
Modi once cloaked his Hindu nationalist views with ideas of economic reform and revitalization. But as the latter has stalled, he’s fallen back on an easier option. It’s a short-term gamble for political popularity, but the effects will last a while.
