Sunil Sethi
For more than two decades, the Peoples Democratic Party has attempted an extraordinary political balancing act in Jammu & Kashmir—speaking one language while exercising power and another when sitting in opposition.
Its politics has repeatedly moved between constitutional mainstream, soft-separatist rhetoric, reconciliation with Pakistan and aggressive criticism of New Delhi, depending upon the political circumstances of the moment.
This is not ideological consistency. It is politics of convenience.
The 2014 contradiction
The clearest example remains 2014.
PDP sought votes in Kashmir by positioning itself strongly against BJP. Yet after the election it entered into an alliance with the very party it had opposed and formed the Government.
BJP’s ideological position was never concealed. Its views on nationalism, Article 370 and complete integration of J&K with India were known for decades.
PDP nevertheless shared power with BJP.
If BJP was politically acceptable when ministerial offices were available, how did it suddenly become ideologically unacceptable when PDP lost power?
Principles cannot change according to one’s distance from the Chief Minister’s chair.
2016 exposed the contradiction
The unrest following the killing of Hizbul Mujahideen commander Burhan Wani in July 2016 provides an even more telling example.
When Mehbooba Mufti was Chief Minister and responsible for maintaining law and order, her language was very different from the rhetoric PDP frequently employs from the opposition benches.
In August 2016, she said a small percentage was creating havoc and questioned those attacking police stations and security camps. Later that year, she urged security forces to exercise restraint and avoid pellet guns where possible.
The important point is not to reopen the tragedy of 2016. It is to ask a question of political consistency.
When responsible for government, PDP understood the compulsions of maintaining public order. Outside government, why does its political narrative so frequently sound as though those compulsions never existed?
Kashmir deserves honesty about this contradiction.
Jamaat-e-Islami: Why this political priority?
The contradiction continues today.
In July 2026, Mehbooba Mufti said PDP would join the proposed opposition protest in Delhi only if its agenda included restoration of Article 370, release of political prisoners and lifting the ban on Jamaat-e-Islami.
BJP is entitled to ask: why should lifting the ban on Jamaat become such an important political priority?
Every organisation is entitled to whatever legal remedies are available to it. But political parties seeking to govern J&K must make their priorities equally clear.
At a time when young Kashmiris want jobs, investment, modern universities, technology, tourism and entrepreneurship, politics should concentrate upon connecting them with India’s enormous opportunities rather than constantly returning them to old ideological battlegrounds.
Pakistan again and again
PDP’s 2024 manifesto once again placed considerable emphasis upon the Kashmir issue, India-Pakistan engagement, restoration of constitutional guarantees and cross-LoC economic connectivity.
Dialogue between countries is ultimately a matter for the Union Government, determined by national interest and security circumstances.
But Kashmir’s people must ask what decades of Pakistan-centred political discourse actually delivered to their families.
Did it create jobs?
Did it bring industries?
Did it protect tourism from instability?
Did it give Kashmir’s children uninterrupted education?
The ordinary Kashmiri paid the greatest price whenever terrorism, street violence and instability overwhelmed normal life.
The children of Kashmir need laptops, not another generation of conflict.
Article 370 and political convenience
PDP’s politics around Article 370 presents another contradiction.
Its 2014 manifesto called Article 370 essential and advocated using it to restore J&K’s original special status.
Yet PDP subsequently governed in coalition with BJP despite knowing BJP’s decades-old ideological position on Article 370.
Today PDP again projects restoration of constitutional guarantees as central to its politics.
It is perfectly entitled to advocate its constitutional position democratically.
But voters are equally entitled to ask:
If these ideological differences were so fundamental, how did they become manageable while governmental power was being shared?
BJP’s position has never been hidden
This is where BJP offers a fundamental contrast.
One may support or oppose BJP, but its position has been consistent.
BJP opposed Article 370 for decades. When it acquired the parliamentary and constitutional capacity, Article 370 was rendered inoperative.
There was no separate position in Jammu, another in Srinagar and a third in Delhi.
Political clarity is healthier than calculated ambiguity.
Kashmir’s youth deserve better
The biggest victims of emotional politics have always been ordinary young Kashmiris.
Political families survived every turmoil. Ordinary families bore the consequences.
When schools closed, ordinary children lost education.
When tourism collapsed, ordinary workers lost income.
When markets shut, ordinary traders suffered.
When violence erupted, ordinary families lived in fear.
J&K cannot afford another generation trapped in grievance politics.
Its youth want careers, startups, artificial intelligence, tourism, world-class infrastructure, sports, universities and opportunities across India and the world.
They should not become raw material for anybody’s political revival.
Politics must move forward
PDP must decide what it ultimately wants to represent: a modern democratic party competing on development and governance, or a political formation repeatedly returning to emotionally charged issues whenever it needs to recover electoral space.
Jammu & Kashmir has changed
The old political formulas cannot indefinitely be repackaged and sold to new generations.
Kashmir’s pain cannot become anybody’s permanent political business model.
People deserve consistency. They deserve accountability. Above all, they deserve leaders who say the same thing whether they are in Government or opposition.
PDP’s record raises a question it cannot escape:
Why do its political principles appear strongest when it is out of power and most flexible when power is within reach?
The people of Jammu & Kashmir have seen this politics before.
They should not be deceived by it again.
(The author is Senior Advocate & Chief Spokesperson, BJP, J&K)
