Kashmir was stripped of its statehood following the abrogation of Article 370 earlier this year. The gross violations of human rights that are occurring are being justified under the garb of national security, and mainstream media outlets seem to be lauding the government for their move and reporting false stories of normalcy in the area. Arguments in favour of scrapping Article 370 mainly include tired terms like development, access to property, and a prosperous future, and are heavily underpinned with territorialism and hypernationalism. Yet, there seems to be little to no consideration by the ruling government or the general Indian public for the present lives of the Kashmiri populace in terms of citizenship, which was earlier safeguarded by Article 370. The overnight removal of the Article and the imposition of the most militarized lockdown in Indian history are proof that the current administration is fearful of a loss of citizenry and views the desire for freedom as a threat to its own national identity. If Kashmir really “belongs” to India and is a part of the sovereign state, why are Kashmiris being systemically disallowed from realizing their citizenship? If Kashmiris are to consider themselves as Indian first, why are their democratically elected leaders being gagged and excluded from conversations regarding their own future as a Union Territory? In this case, it is evident that not even one of the notions of citizenship is being followed: neither are Kashmiris being awarded their rights, nor are they being allowed to exercise their duties, and authority to question and participate in the political process has become a distant dream.
Hana Masood, 'Whose India is it Anyway?', Young Bharatiya