The party has rarely allowed internal challenges to threaten the authority of its central leadership
A cabinet reshuffle is the prerogative of the elected leader of the ruling party, who, in the present case, is the Chief Minister. Therefore, the recent expansion of Omar Abdullah’s cabinet falls well within his powers. It is for him to decide the shape and composition of his cabinet. As leader of the National Conference Legislature Party, he enjoys the confidence of his party legislators. These are established norms of parliamentary democracy, and there is little room to question the authority of the leader in this regard.
It is also important to remember that Jammu and Kashmir is presently a Union Territory and not a state. The rules governing the size and composition of the cabinet are different in a Union Territory. The popular idiom, “Ek Anaar, Sau Bimaar”, aptly describes the situation in UT cabinet formations. There is a limit on the number of ministers, based on a prescribed percentage of the total strength of the legislature. Therefore, the grievances of NC legislators cannot be entertained merely because they were not accommodated in the expansion. The only reasonable ground for complaint, though even that may be difficult to establish, would be that seniority or merit was ignored while making the selections.
The much-hyped meeting of around twenty NC legislators, described by sections of the Kashmir press as dissidents or potential dissidents, does not carry much political significance when viewed against the established norms and the peculiar political history of the National Conference.
Like legislators of other parties, NC members owe much of their political standing to the party that brought them into the Assembly. Few can claim that they won solely on the strength of their personal image or individual performance. It is the NC’s political agenda, its policies and, above all, the continuing influence of its founder leader that have shaped its electoral strength. In my opinion, this legacy may continue to influence Kashmir’s politics for another half a decade. By then, a large section of our population and opinion-makers will belong to Generations Y and Z, many of whom may know very little about Sheikh Abdullah and his politics.
The disgruntled MLAs are fully aware of their political standing. Their leaders, too, particularly the Sheikh family, understand the strength of the political legacy and following they have inherited. This game of political posturing and hide-and-seek may continue for some time, but it is likely to subside once these legislators realise the limits of their political influence. After all, political ambitions have to be weighed against the ground realities of electoral politics.
Obviously, a few overambitious members within this group may be hoping for a Ghulam Mohammad Shah-type coup, looking for political support from other groups, both inside and outside the Assembly. However, such a possibility appears remote because of the regional political divide and the lack of political compatibility among potential partners.
A similar experiment in the past not only failed but also proved disastrous for the political future of the People’s Democratic Party. The party continues to face the consequences of that political misadventure. The present political situation in the country is also not favourable for such an operation, even if it may be technically possible within parliamentary rules and conventions. Political consequences are often more important than immediate political gains. A government may be formed or destabilised through numbers, but sustaining such an arrangement is an entirely different matter.
In the 90-member Assembly, the NC has 41 members, followed by the BJP with 29. Interestingly, both parties have strong regional bases: the BJP is concentrated largely in the Jammu region, while the NC enjoys its main support in Kashmir, with some presence in the Jammu province as well. This regional divide works in favour of the NC in the present political situation. Several other parties and independent members, who do not share the BJP’s political ideology, are more likely to support the NC or remain neutral if its government faces any challenge. This makes any attempt to dislodge the present government politically difficult, even if some disgruntled legislators decide to explore such possibilities.
Those who are now up in arms against the NC leadership over cabinet expansion would do well to revisit the party’s history and recall the firm hand with which its leadership has dealt with dissent within its own ranks from time to time. The party has rarely allowed internal challenges to threaten the authority of its central leadership.
The status and importance of the National Conference in Kashmir politics must be viewed in the context of its nearly century-old history and the lasting impression its founder, Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah, left on the people of Kashmir. I do not subscribe to the view that the NC and its policies have always been right or necessarily in the best interests of the people of Kashmir. However, no one can deny the enormous political influence and importance that this old political party, and particularly its founder, enjoyed over the decades.
The NC has traditionally been a grassroots, cadre-based party, but it has also revolved around the personality and legacy of Sheikh Abdullah. His personality and influence over the party remain so strong, even decades after his death, that very few political personalities or parties have been able to dent its standing in Kashmir politics.
History offers several examples. What happened to the political fortunes of Sheikh Abdullah’s fellow leaders after the winding up of the Muslim Conference? How did Maulvi Yousuf Shah disappear from the leadership landscape of Kashmir? What became of Bakshi Ghulam Mohammad’s party and his political colleagues after he ruled the state for a considerable period? What remained of Mirza Afzal Beg’s political future, despite once being Sheikh Abdullah’s most trusted confidant? And, more recently, the political fate of the heirs of late Ghulam Mohammad Shah, Sheikh Abdullah’s son-in-law, is known to everyone.
These examples show how difficult it has been for individual leaders to build an independent political identity within the National Conference or to survive politically after falling out with its central leadership. The party’s history is, in many ways, a history of the extraordinary hold of one political legacy over its organisation and supporters.
The present resentment over cabinet expansion, therefore, should not be mistaken for a serious threat to the National Conference or its leadership. It may make some political noise for a while, but the larger political realities are unlikely to change. In Kashmir’s political landscape, the National Conference continues to enjoy an influence that cannot be measured merely by the number of ministers accommodated in its cabinet.
In the end, what appears to be a political storm may well turn out to be nothing more than a storm in a cup of tea!
Leave a Reply