Srinagar: Chief Minister Omar Abdullah expressed deep frustration over the delayed restoration of statehood to Jammu and Kashmir, stating his approach will now be to assess matters on a case-by-case basis.Reflecting on the past year, Abdullah referenced the commitments made by the BJP to the Parliament, which outlined a three-step process delimitation, elections, and the restoration of statehood.
He also pointed to the Supreme Court’s emphasis that statehood should be restored “at the earliest.””However you look at it, this is definitely not the ‘earliest’,” Abdullah remarked. “While the Supreme Court has consistently advocated for a prompt restoration, a significant amount of time has passed. I believe the Court should have come down heavily on the government for this delay.”
He voiced regret over his decision to participate in the elections, revealing a broken personal pledge. “I had promised not to contest until statehood was restored. However, my party pushed me to do so. While I knew restoration would be difficult, I did not anticipate it would be this challenging.”
The Chief Minister asserted that he has been unwavering in his stance, stating, “I have begun every single meeting with the Home Minister by raising the issue of statehood. There has not been any occasion where I have been soft on the BJP regarding this matter.”
Abdullah clarified his position, saying, “I stand for its restoration. Unfortunately, the power to restore it does not lie with us; we can only agitate for it, which is what we are doing.” He firmly rejected violent methods, adding, “Setting Jammu and Kashmir on fire and having innocent young people killed in street protests is absolutely not our way.”
He issued a stark warning about his political future, stating, “If things continue this way, it is unlikely I will be in this office when this government’s term ends. I think that is as clear as I can be.”On the future of Article 370, Abdullah affirmed his party’s commitment to keeping the issue alive, citing a passed resolution that remains undiscarded. “We are hopeful because the BJP government will not remain in power forever,” he said. “Whatever government comes next will have to address Article 370.”
He concluded by stating that any progress on the issue is impossible with the current administration.Chief Minister Omar Abdullah has also issued a robust defense of his party’s political stance, clearly differentiating between a necessary administrative relationship with the central government and a ideological alignment with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
His comments come amid political scrutiny following recent Rajya Sabha elections in Jammu and Kashmir.Addressing criticisms, Abdullah detailed his party, the National Conference’s (NC), decision to directly challenge the BJP in the Nagrota seat in an interview with national TV as per The Independent.
He revealed that an alternative, back-channel arrangement was possible to avoid a contest, but his party consciously chose an electoral battle.”We could have easily sent an emissary to the Government of India to propose a mutual withdrawal of candidates,” Abdullah stated.
“However, we fought the election whatever the outcome. We did not want to give the BJP a walkover.”He said that the NC entered the fray only after the Congress party refused to contest the seat. “We had to step in. We fielded a candidate to ensure the BJP was contested, not because we sought the fight initially,” he added, dismissing allegations of political inconsistency as “unfounded.”
In a sharp rebuke to fellow politician Sajad Lone, Abdullah questioned his credibility. He targeted Lone’s recent abstention from a vote, asserting that it had the direct effect of benefiting the BJP.”How can you take seriously a man who abstains from voting to benefit the BJP?” Abdullah asked. “If you were willing to take a step against the BJP, you would have voted against them, not abstained. Not a single National Conference member voted in favour of the BJP.”The Chief Minister culminated his argument by drawing a critical political boundary.
He cited the former alliance between the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and the BJP as a cautionary tale that “caused suffering” for the region.”What you see today is simply a working relationship between an elected government in Jammu and Kashmir and the Union government,” he clarified. “There is a fundamental difference between that and a political alliance. Let me be clear: there is absolutely no question of the National Conference joining the NDA.”
Omar Abdullah has also broken his silence on the deeply controversial 1987 Jammu and Kashmir elections, arguing that blame for the alleged rigging should be shared by all parties in the ruling alliance at the time, not just his father.The 1987 state assembly elections are widely regarded as a pivotal and contentious moment in the Jammu and Kashmir’s history, with widespread accusations that they were systematically rigged by the incumbent government.
Omar Abdullah addressed the enduring controversy. He began by reflecting on his personal distance from the events, stating, “I was 17, I was in school.” However, drawing on his 25 years of political experience, he acknowledged the persistent allegations, “I will say only this, there is no smoke without fire.”
He suggested that the political climate of the era was a factor, adding that his understanding is that “you could only rig elections in the Jammu and Kashmir trend which was going on at the time.”Chief minister Omar Abdullah emphasized that the 1987 government was formed by an alliance between the National Conference, then led by his father Farooq Abdullah, and the Jammu & Kashmir Congress, headed by the late Late Mufti Muhammad Sayeed.He directly challenged the historical narrative that often singles out his father for criticism. “If Farooq Abdullah is responsible for what happened in 1987,” he questioned, “why is the late Mufti Muhammad Sayeed, who was the head of the J&K Congress, also not held responsible?”
Using a vivid analogy, he argued for a more balanced accountability, asking, “How is it that blame is only apportioned to one individual in this alliance and the other individual is almost as if he has taken a dip in the Ganga and has emerged totally blameless?”His further said that “If 1987 was wrong, then please, opposition, blame in proportion.”
