The anti-India uprising has reached a plateau phase. From here, it will gradually settle down in the memories of people as one more attempt to topple the ugly status quo. Much of the talk will now veer around why the resistance leadership could not translate it into something concrete because the upheaval was unlike anything in the past so much so that it disturbed the cognitive faculties of the rulers. Example? The chief minister dismissed the uprising as the mischief of a handful of people and, the next day, her party spokesman begged the padre of the resistance to treat her as his own daughter and give her a chance. Example number two: the government requests parents to send children to school, warns teachers and officials of punitive measures, while paramilitary troopers build makeshift camps in schools and requisition spools of razor wire and sandbags. Example number three: the chief minister repeatedly laments the discomfort people have been subjected to by strikes and “senseless violence” but her government imposes curfew and stops fuel supplies at exactly the same moment the resistance announces relaxation in strike.
What about the Indian state and the government in Jammu and Kashmir whose leader went out of her way to defeat and defame this uprising? Since the uprising once again proved them as not more than merely the monstrous machines blocking the way to liberation, any talk about them would appear superfluous. For people, they exist merely as spurious presences that have to vanish somehow, someday. But still, once pro-India politicians have been again proved as an impediment to the people’s repeated attempts to alter the status quo, would people continue to burden themselves with this brotherhood of treachery? This will remain one of the most important questions post uprising. Do people have to shuttle between an Omar Abdullah and a Mehbooba Mufti alternatively exchanging political legacies that now appear nothing more than a hoax and which can be pawned to New Delhi in all seasons? People cannot go on voting for sadak, paani and bijli and elect a bunch of opportunists who would shun all semblance of morality and defend cold-blooded murders of school going children and murderous attempts on 80-year-old men. Although they never deserve it, the uprising was also an opportunity for pro-India politicians to push decisively for an end to the status quo. However, 2008 and 2010 convincingly demonstrated they will rather side with power than people. They are programmed for such posturing. Hoping otherwise is a folly.