Advertisement

We need your help now

Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.

You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.

If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.

Army troops are deployed to the region as tensions rise. SIPA USA/PA Images

Explainer: Why has Kashmir lost its special status and what now for the contested Indian region?

Once a territory of the British empire, Jammu and Kashmir chose to join India over Pakistan in 1947.

INDIA’S GOVERNMENT OVERTURNED a 70-year-old law which governed the special administrative region of Jammu and Kashmir since it was returned by the British Empire. 

Article 370 was introduced following the liberation of the region from British rule in 1947 and made a number of provisions that governed its laws and land for 72 years. 

It gave it special status and allowed it to make its own laws as an Indian-administered region. 

The current government, led by the Hindu-nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party abolished this yesterday, and put forward a new bill dividing the region into two territories – Jammu and Kashmir, and Ladakh. 

The former will have its own assembly while the latter territory, with a sizeable Muslim population will not. 

Both territories will now be governed by the Union of India’s federal government. 

So, just one day after the law was removed from the constitution, why has Kashmir’s special status been removed and what happens now for the contested Indian territory?

What is Article 370?

In 1947, Jammu and Kashmir, which was at the time a princely state of the British empire, became an independent state of India.

Following independence from British colonial rule, Jammu and Kashmir had a choice to join either Pakistan or India, and it opted for India on the terms outlined in Article 370.

This gave the region the autonomy to make its own laws, separate to India’s constitution, except in the areas of defence, finance, foreign affairs and communications, and also allowing it to establish its own flag. 

A northern part of Kashmir, however, is governed by Pakistan which sits to the east, while the Chinese-administered Aksai Chin sits to the west of the region. 

What is Article 35A?

This was a piece of legislation – known as permanent residents law – introduced in 1954, eight years after Article 370 was established. 

It protected land and property for Jammu and Kashmir residents, preventing it being sold to outsiders and also denying people from outside to settle there. 

Much speculation in the lead up to yesterday’s announcement had pointed to this piece of legislation being scrapped, not the whole of Article 370. 

Why has the Government of India abolished it? 

In an unexpected move, the government, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu-nationalist party vowed to scrap the laws, and bring the region into the Union of India, after previously winning a majority of support from parliament. 

This means it is now governed directly by the federal government of India, instead of having its own legislative autonomy. 

The governing party, a Hindu nationalist party. has targeted Muslim populations during previous campaigns, and more recently included it in the party’s manifesto for the 2019 elections. 

The Jammu and Kashmir region has a large Muslim population and now that Article 370 has been overturned, it is thought Hindu people will settle in the region, acquiring property, and potentially turning it into a majority-Hindu population. 

So what happens now?

Jammu and Kashmir has had a difficult relationship with India and insurgents have been making waves for years now. 

Tensions are expected to escalate further as protesters mobilise and take to the streets in protest. 

Schools have shut and tourists have been asked to leave as Indian troops in their tens of thousands have landed. 

Some politicians and activists are set to mount a legal challenge to Modi’s move to abolish Article 370, and with divided opinions on the legality of it, it wouldn’t be a surprise if the battle makes its way to the highest Supreme Court. 

Either way, it looks set to be a long road ahead as the contentious issue continues to threaten peace in the region. 

Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
Our Explainer articles bring context and explanations in plain language to help make sense of complex issues. We're asking readers like you to support us so we can continue to provide helpful context to everyone, regardless of their ability to pay.

Close
18 Comments
This is YOUR comments community. Stay civil, stay constructive, stay on topic. Please familiarise yourself with our comments policy here before taking part.
Leave a Comment
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Cheeky Charlie
    Favourite Cheeky Charlie
    Report
    Aug 7th 2019, 7:23 AM

    It will take centuries to undo the mess left after the British Empire … as well we know

    122
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute De20
    Favourite De20
    Report
    Aug 7th 2019, 8:49 AM

    It’s a bit of a stretch to Jammu and Kashmir chose to join India. The Maharajah decided to join India, the population had no choice in the matter

    36
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute thephantomshit
    Favourite thephantomshit
    Report
    Aug 7th 2019, 10:10 AM

    @De20: lots of counties do things because their leaders decide to. Referendums are actually very unusual. Even when they occur it isn’t very clear what the population decided to do.
    And even dictators often (not always) do what the “population” wants. They tend to get overthrown otherwise.

    5
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Cormac Ó Braonáin
    Favourite Cormac Ó Braonáin
    Report
    Aug 7th 2019, 9:43 AM

    ‘Jammu and Kashmir chose to join India over Pakistan’

    Wow, what a claim! Makes it all the more cringe worthy to see that it’s coming from an Irishman. Mr McCrave must believe Ireland chose to join England in personal union in 1542 and the UK in 1801.

    21
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute thephantomshit
    Favourite thephantomshit
    Report
    Aug 7th 2019, 10:11 AM

    @Cormac Ó Braonáin: Pakistan supported militants invaded kashmir so they opted to join India.

    15
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute jackbello
    Favourite jackbello
    Report
    Aug 7th 2019, 10:13 AM

    @Cormac Ó Braonáin: “”"”liberation”"”"” of the region from the British ????
    Slighted loaded , perhaps negative description ?

    How about something less perjorative /negative ?- liberation would suggest the British had somehow enslaved the princely state which patently it had not .

    In any case , what’s worse ? To be ruled by some local maharaja fabulously rich at the expense of the ruled , a prince with unlimited power , or be ensconced in the civilising embrace of the British empire???? The absolute power of a prince -but tempered with the guidance and restraint of London , for your average subject that was hardly seemed a bad deal…

    When it came to independence in 1947 the last maharaja was sad to see the British go – to then be forced to chose between India or Pakistan must have been awful.

    12
    See 4 more replies ▾
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Cormac Ó Braonáin
    Favourite Cormac Ó Braonáin
    Report
    Aug 7th 2019, 11:21 AM

    @thephantomshit:’they opted to join India’? did ‘they’ now? Maybe you can tell me when this vote took place.

    3
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Thomas Devlin
    Favourite Thomas Devlin
    Report
    Aug 7th 2019, 2:53 PM

    @jackbello: the civilizing British?as in Bloody Sunday?the many massacres of civilians in India the Irish famine,Cromwell,the paras,the glennane gang I could go on and on but I’d rather stay uncivilized thank you

    7
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Amod Gokhale
    Favourite Amod Gokhale
    Report
    Aug 7th 2019, 2:57 PM

    @Cormac Ó Braonáin: When did NI vote to join UK ? or for that matter when did Germany vote to end World War II. You will be surprised to know that till 1950s,many countries were ruled by kings and kings took the decision for the local populace.
    In case of Kashmir, King decided to join neither India or Pakistan when asked in 1947 after British left.
    But Pakistan became impatient and attacked a sovereign state of Kashmir which meant the king had to decide. Either surrender or join India to allow India to sent defence forces. He chose to join India.
    That’s how ‘they’ opted for India

    5
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Ashish Uday Lal
    Favourite Ashish Uday Lal
    Report
    Aug 7th 2019, 3:17 PM

    @jackbello: Yes, liberated from the occupying British who entered a country producing 25% of the worlds GDP and left with a country producing 3%. Plundered resources, added value and sold them exclusively back at extortionate rates. Millions killed in famine like the Bengal famine. Oh well they got the railways and ‘civilisation’…rule Britannia and all that old chum…

    10
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Tim Pot
    Favourite Tim Pot
    Report
    Aug 7th 2019, 11:48 AM

    not much of an international response which has been strange.

    6
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Amod Gokhale
    Favourite Amod Gokhale
    Report
    Aug 7th 2019, 3:00 PM

    @Tim Pot: I didn’t see any international response when NI assembly was dissolved either. It was an internal matter for UK. Similarly this is an internal matter for India. India is not changing the demographic in any way, shape or form.

    6
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Ashish Uday Lal
    Favourite Ashish Uday Lal
    Report
    Aug 7th 2019, 3:11 PM

    @Amod Gokhale: An internal matter where the President in a highly questionable move passed a law in the middle of the night while putting the Kashmiri parliament under house arrest, shutting down the internet, and putting the entire population under curfew. Not particularly democratic of the world’s largest democracy and most certainly questionable by the outside.

    8
    See 1 more reply ▾
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Amod Gokhale
    Favourite Amod Gokhale
    Report
    Aug 7th 2019, 8:26 PM

    @Ashish Uday Lal: There was no parliament in Kashmir for over a year. It was dissolved as the ruling coalition broke up and no party formed majority.
    The handful of leaders who are supposed to be jailed have been periodically tweeting and talking to reporters in total Internet blackout and under arrest. How is that??
    There were months of large scale demostrations and stone pelting when a militant died about 2yrs. Its only natural for federal govt to take drastic measures before aborating 370 when main local parties had warned of death and destruction if it happens.
    There is an important Muslim festival next week. Let’s see if there is a let up in lock down or not.

    4
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Amod Gokhale
    Favourite Amod Gokhale
    Report
    Aug 7th 2019, 2:45 PM

    “while the latter territory, with a sizeable Muslim population will not”. Are you kidding me ? Ladakh (the latter in the sentence) is predominantly Buddhist. Infact they were above 90% Buddhist in 1970s when muslims from Kasmir started to settle there.
    Historically (last seven decades) the Buddhist and Muslims in Ladakh were demanding separation from Kashmir anyway.
    This current decision to split is old demand met by federal government.

    4
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Ashish Uday Lal
    Favourite Ashish Uday Lal
    Report
    Aug 7th 2019, 4:02 PM

    @Amod Gokhale: So in a democracy someone ‘demands’ something and the federal government does it? Where’s the debate, the vote? What evidence do you have of large scale Kashmiri migration to Ladakh? It would be difficult to find as there is none.

    3
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Amod Gokhale
    Favourite Amod Gokhale
    Report
    Aug 7th 2019, 8:11 PM

    @Ashish Uday Lal: Well actually, yes. In democracy the govt heeds demand of Common population and reacts accordingly. Ladakh currently is ruled by two hill councils and both passed resolutions demanding UT status. The current curfew status is not valid in Leh and Kargil. On Monday, there were pictures in many Indian news channels about normalcy in Ladakh. About 4-5 yrs back, J&K govt split Ladakh into two districts. A Muslim dominated Kargil and Buddhist dominated Leh. If muslim migration wasn’t happening, where did the Muslim population came from. As outsiders cannot come and buy land in J&K under article 370, the population has to from the state i.e. Migration.

    2
    See 1 more reply ▾
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Amod Gokhale
    Favourite Amod Gokhale
    Report
    Aug 7th 2019, 8:39 PM

    @Amod Gokhale: a correction : the districts were formed in 1980s not 4-5 as I said previously.

    1
Submit a report
Please help us understand how this comment violates our community guidelines.
Thank you for the feedback
Your feedback has been sent to our team for review.

Leave a commentcancel

 
JournalTv
News in 60 seconds