New Delhi: Chief Minister Omar Abdullah on Saturday termed his first year in office “a difficult one” due to major terror attacks, while sharply criticising the Union territory model for creating a “silo” in security decision making.
Speaking at the Hindustan Times Leadership Summit here, Abdullah rejected the notion of a “return” of “homegrown terrorism”, arguing that it had never truly disappeared.
He also warned that those who believed the post-2019 constitutional changes were a “miraculous cure” for terror were the ones who were surprised by incidents such as the (April 22) attack in Baisaran (Pahalgam) and the (November 10) blast in Delhi.
“Why do you use the word return? When did it ever go away? It was there…,” Abdullah said, adding, “The changes that you made to the constitutional relationship between Jammu and Kashmir and the rest of India are not going to miraculously result in an end to terror.”
Abdullah said he was “actually surprised” that it took this long for people outside Jammu and Kashmir to realise that perhaps things were not as great as they were sold to the rest of the country.
He expressed hope that what happened in Baisaran and in Delhi was a sufficient wake-up call “that we will realise the gravity of what we’re dealing with…”
Warning about the potential of a heightened response, Abdullah said the recent terror incidents have effectively led the country to draw a “line in the sand”, declaring that any similar attack in the future “will be considered an act of war”.
Abdullah suggested that this sharp escalation makes it even more critical to ensure such attacks do not happen again, adding that the Delhi blast’s apparent domestic origin was the only “saving grace”, as it prevented the government from having to immediately enact what he termed the “Modi doctrine on internal security”, a response that was narrowly avoided due to the lack of a visibly “external hand”.
The chief minister also suggested that one “can’t operate governments in silos” where an elected government is completely removed from any security-related decisions.
He wondered how do they expect a proper flow of information if the elected representatives “play no part whatsoever in decisions affecting the security”, and compared his present tenure to his first stint as the chief minister of the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir.
“I can tell you without the fear of contradiction that the Union territory model does not work,” he said.
Giving an example of his “limited” authority under the Union territory model, Abdullah said he has been kept out of crucial security meetings in Jammu and Kashmir which he is governing.
“I read about the Delhi blast in the newspaper. I did not know who carried out the attack… (or) how the investigation is proceeding,” the chief minister said.
He compared the situation with his first term as chief minister, when the DGP would have instantly informed him about the developments.
Abdullah also cited a striking, unofficial anecdote, heard only through “chatter on the streets”, about how the Delhi plot was uncovered because a jilted young girl complained to the police about her former boyfriend, leading them to a network that culminated in tracking a doctor involved in the conspiracy.
“This is the sort of thing that any other chief minister would hear officially. I hear it because there is sort of chatter on the streets. The Union territory model does not work,” he said.
Abdullah also expressed concern that a unified public stance against violence, which emerged following the Baisaran attack, is being undermined by the discriminatory treatment of people outside Jammu and Kashmir, and cited orders of some state governments asking “all foreign nationals and Kashmiri Muslims to register in their nearest police station”.
“You are effectively saying that Kashmiri Muslims and foreigners are the same to you,” Abdullah said, warning that this “othering” makes it “very difficult to convince youngsters” to leave Jammu and Kashmir to pursue better educational and economic opportunities across the country, as they find themselves being treated as “untrustworthy”.
If one asks whether all Kashmiris are accepting violence, the answer is “no” because they are as disturbed by what happened in Pahalgam as they are by what happened in Delhi, Abdullah said.
“Do they make that feeling more public? Perhaps not. But that doesn’t mean that it doesn’t continue to disturb us. That doesn’t mean that we don’t find it abhorrent. We continue to. That said, we are also equally concerned when an attempt is made to paint the entire community with one brush,” Abdullah said, reiterating that not all Kashmiri Muslims are terrorists, and not all Kashmiri Muslims support terrorism.
“In fact, it is a minuscule minority that do. The overwhelming majority of people are the ones you saw on the streets after the attack in Baisaran. They are the ones who are in colleges and universities in different parts of the country. They are the ones who are trying to earn an honest day’s living in various parts,” he asserted.
