The political history of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) reflects a complex interplay between democratic governance, constitutional change, security concerns, and central intervention. From its accession to India in 1947 until the constitutional changes of 2019, it alternated between elected governments and periods of direct central rule, largely shaped by political instability and cross-border security challenges. The present debate over the restoration of statehood remains central to the future political and administrative stability of the region.Following the Delhi Agreement of 1952 and the adoption of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir, the state enjoyed a unique constitutional position under Article 370, which granted it substantial autonomy. During the early decades, political leadership was dominated by the Jammu & Kashmir National Conference (JKNC) under Sheikh Abdullah and, later, by Congress. Until 1965, the head of government was designated as the Prime Minister and the constitutional head of state as the Sadr-e-Riyasat, titles that underscored the state’s distinctive status within the Union. These were subsequently replaced by the chief minister and governor, bringing the state closer to the administrative structure of other states.AdvertisementAlso Read | Seven years after August 5: Delaying J&K statehood any longer would be a breach of trustPolitical stability, however, remained fragile. Whenever elected governments lost legitimacy or strategic concerns intensified, the Centre imposed Governor’s Rule under the J&K Constitution or President’s Rule under Article 356 of the Indian Constitution. A notable early crisis followed the theft of the Moi-e-Muqaddas (the sacred relic believed to be the hair of the Prophet Muhammad) in December 1963. The incident triggered widespread public unrest across the Kashmir Valley, seriously weakened the Khwaja Shamsuddin government, and required intervention by PM Jawaharlal Nehru and national intelligence agencies before the relic was recovered in January next year.Between 1964 and the mid-1980s, J&K witnessed alternating governments led by Congress and JKNC. Although political tensions persisted, governance remained broadly functional. This changed dramatically after the controversial 1987 Assembly elections, widely perceived as manipulated, which led to deep public disillusionment. By 1989, Pakistan-backed militancy had escalated into a full-scale insurgency across the Valley.The collapse of civil administration marked the beginning of the most turbulent period in the state’s history. Farooq Abdullah’s coalition government resigned in January 1990, leading to Governor’s Rule with governance becoming focused primarily on restoring law and order rather than development. The period witnessed the tragic exodus of the Kashmiri Pandit community following targeted violence, severe disruption of public services, closure of educational institutions, collapse of tourism and economic activity, and the imposition of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA). While sustained counter-insurgency operations eventually weakened militant networks and enabled the restoration of Assembly elections in 1996, the decade left lasting political, social, and psychological scars.AdvertisementA new phase began on August 5, 2019, when the Government of India revoked Articles 370 and 35A and enacted the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act. The former state was bifurcated into two Union Territories — Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. The Centre argued that the move would strengthen national integration, improve governance, curb terrorism, reduce corruption, and encourage investment.Following the reorganisation, executive authority shifted largely to the Lieutenant Governor and the civil administration. Several governance initiatives gathered pace, including digitisation of public services, improved infrastructure, expansion of road and railway connectivity, and strengthening of Panchayati Raj institutions. However, many political leaders argued that such reforms could have been implemented through an elected state government. The immediate aftermath of the constitutional changes also saw the detention of several mainstream political leaders and temporary disruptions to economic activity, particularly tourism. Nevertheless, tourism recovered strongly from 2021 onwards, supported by government initiatives such as the Khelo India Winter Games in Gulmarg.Following a Supreme Court directive and completion of the delimitation process, Assembly elections were held in 2024. The National Conference-led alliance, headed by Omar Abdullah, formed the government, restoring an elected administration after several years. However, J&K continues to function as a Union Territory rather than a full-fledged state.This has created an unusual governance structure. While an elected CM and Legislative Assembly are in place, key subjects — including public order, police, land administration, and significant bureaucratic authority — remain under the control of the LG, who represents the Union government. The elected government exercises limited executive authority, leading to frequent tensions over administrative powers and accountability.The central political issue today is the restoration of statehood. Although the Centre has repeatedly stated that statehood will be restored at an “appropriate time,” no definite timeline has been announced. Regional political parties argue that prolonged uncertainty weakens democratic governance and limits the effectiveness of elected institutions. In response, several non-BJP parties, led by the NC and supported by opposition groups, have intensified their demand for the immediate restoration of full statehood.you may likeSeveral scenarios are possible. Sustained public mobilisation could increase pressure on the Centre through repeated Assembly resolutions and political negotiations. Alternatively, the Centre may adopt a phased approach to restoring statehood while retaining control over selected security-related functions. The continuing debate may also reinforce regional political differences between the Kashmir Valley, where demand for immediate statehood is strongest, and parts of Jammu, where greater support exists for the present constitutional arrangement.The political evolution of J&K illustrates the continuing tension between national security priorities and the aspirations for democratic self-governance. The restoration of statehood, accompanied by a balanced distribution of powers between elected representatives and the Centre, remains central to achieving durable political stability, effective administration, and long-term public confidence in the region.The writer is a cardiologist and founder director of Gauri Kaul Foundation