Part 6: Hindutva and Modi (2019 to present)

---

Article 370 of the Indian constitution, which was supposed to grant Jammu and Kashmir de jure internal political autonomy, had existed since the questionable integration of Kashmir into India in 1947. However, this autonomy was de facto challenged as early as the overthrow of the Kashmiri leader Sheikh Abdullah in 1953, when the puppet minister Bakshi Ghulam Mohammad de facto subordinated Kashmir’s autonomy to New Delhi.

“Bakshi Ghulam Mohammed worked to enable the ‘integration’ of Jammu and Kashmir (IJK) according to New Delhi’s terms. The result was twofold: a breakdown of the rule of law and democratic institutions in Kashmir, as well as an erosion of Kashmir’s autonomy, which (as required by Article 370) was achieved with the ‘consent’ of the Jammu and Kashmir government – a motley clique of client politicians of New Delhi” (A.G. Noorani).

After Bakshi’s term in office, a total of 47 presidential orders were issued by 1994, which de facto suspended Kashmir’s formal special status. These included Article 249 (1960), which allowed the Indian central government to enact laws for Kashmir, and Article 312 (1958), which allowed the deployment of Indian security forces in Kashmir.

Nevertheless, this special status continued to exist on paper and formally granted Jammu and Kashmir certain special rights that other Indian states did not have. The most significant of these rights was the special citizenship regulation, which only allowed so-called “permanent residents” – persons who could prove that before May 14, 1954, they themselves or through family descent had permanently lived in the region and owned property there. This regulation gave “permanent residents” the right to own land in Jammu and Kashmir, participate in elections, enter the civil service, or use state educational facilities.

The “permanent residents” regulation dated back to Maharaja Hari Singh, who used it to achieve a compromise between the Indian central government and the Kashmiri population striving for autonomy.

Immediately after the repeal of Article 370 and the division of the region into the Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh in August 2019, India imposed a months-long communication blockade that severely restricted people’s lives. As a result of this decision, numerous arrests of politicians, activists, and young people followed, many under the controversial “Public Safety Act.”

“The Indian government had revoked Article 370 without the consent of the (former) government of Kashmir, which is illegal. There were massive protests, even pro-Indian politicians were arrested. Thereupon, India imposed a communication blockade for over nine months, which frightened many Kashmiris – which is why they are ‘braver’ or less outspoken today,” a Kashmiri comrade tells us.

Modi and Hindutva

In May 2019, the BJP under Narendra Modi became the strongest force in India for the second time in a row, with a gain of 6.5% (37.8% of the votes). In its election program, the BJP explicitly stated that in the future it should be possible for Indians from other parts of the country to also acquire land in Kashmir and work there: “The BJP based its election campaign entirely on the person of the Prime Minister. Modi focused less on economic successes, but rather on nationalist issues. After the terrorist attack in Kashmir and the air strikes against Pakistan in the spring of 2019, Modi presented himself as a strong leader who is determined to take action against terrorism.” [3]

The promised repeal of Kashmir’s special status was then also the first election promise that Modi kept after his re-election.

The policy of the Indian government under Modi is by no means accidental or purely motivated by security policy – it stands in the context of an ideological project rooted in the thinking of the Hindutva movement, which aims to reorganize India as a consistently Hindu-defined nation-state. This project has serious consequences for Muslim population groups and minority regions like Kashmir.

In this ideology, which is represented by the RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh) and its political offshoots such as the BJP, Hinduism is not only considered the majority religion, but as the constitutive element of the nation. Minorities such as Muslims, especially those with special territorial rights or a different historical identity as in Kashmir, are perceived as a threat. The ideological pioneer V.D. Savarkar already formulated in 1923 that “only those who consider India as their fatherland and at the same time as their holy land truly belong to India” (Hindutva: Who is a Hindu?). Kashmir, with its Muslim majority population and its established autonomy, represents an anomalous element from this perspective, which must either be integrated or marginalized.

“Modi is the textbook definition of a fascist – he belongs to an ethno-religious fascist ideology (Hindutva) that demands a purely Hindu state. He has undermined the secular constitution without any consequences, intensified the repression and mistreatment not only in Kashmir, but also in every region that openly opposes him. And not only against civilians, but also against journalists, activists, NGOs and protest movements. He exerts control over the media and spreads propaganda among the broad Indian population – he is nothing less than a fascist, I think the term ‘fascist’ is even too weak,” Kashmiri Fatima W. tells Kritikpunkt.

At the beginning of Modi’s term in office, he commanded the deployment of 250,000 extra soldiers in Jammu and Kashmir.
With a total of about 750,000 stationed Indian soldiers and security forces for 16 million inhabitants, Kashmir is today the most militarized region in the world – even compared to the ongoing genocide region of Gaza.

In a report from August 2020, a correspondent from Kashmir describes the catastrophic consequences of the repressive state of emergency: “Economic activity has been stopped, school and university students have been excluded from schools and universities, and people have been locked in their homes for a year. The situation is frightening. Economically, most people here depend on tourism, but for a year not a single tourist has visited this place. Drivers have been off the streets for a year and have started begging. Journalists, who are denied access to resources such as the internet and mobile services, have given up their jobs and started doing manual labor.”

When asked what has changed since 2019, a Kashmiri comrade replies: “Everything; repression has turned Kashmiris into silent mice. Even the slightest hint of loyalty to the freedom movement leads to arrest and enforced disappearance. More and more non-Kashmiris are now slowly moving away, more and more troops are being stationed as we speak. It no longer feels like home. It’s a prison where you can’t speak your mind.”

Pahalgam Attack

On April 22, 2025, three perpetrators deliberately opened fire on visitors in the Baisaran meadows, a popular tourist spot, specifically targeting men. At least 26 people, mostly Indian tourists as well as one visitor each from the United Arab Emirates and Nepal, were killed, and over 20 others sustained injuries. The “Resistance Front” (TRF) claimed responsibility for the attack.

The TRF, a militant group, was founded immediately after the revocation of Jammu and Kashmir’s autonomous status in 2019. It sees itself as a secular resistance movement against Indian control, especially against the targeted settlement of non-Kashmiris in the majority Muslim region, which is perceived by many as an attempt at demographic change and the beginning of an Israel-like settler colonialism.

The TRF is classified by Indian authorities as an offshoot of the Pakistani terrorist organization Lashkar-e-Taiba and is considered a terrorist association:

“Indian officials have repeatedly stressed that the TRF is in reality an offshoot – or just a front organization – of the Pakistan-based armed group Lashkar-e-Taiba. India claims Pakistan supports the armed insurgency in Kashmir, an accusation denied by Islamabad. Pakistan says it only provides diplomatic and moral support to the Kashmiri people. It also condemned the attack on tourists in Pahalgam.”[5]

However, in a letter published three days after the attack, the TRF denies any involvement in the Pahalgam attack:
“The Resistance Front (TRF) unequivocally denies any involvement in the Pahalgam incident. Any attribution of this act to the TRF is false, premature and part of an orchestrated campaign to defame the Kashmiri resistance.”
Their original claim of responsibility, the TRF claims to suspect, may have been “the result of a coordinated cyberattack”:
“We are conducting a thorough investigation to understand the security breach, and initial indications point towards the fingerprints of Indian cyber intelligence operatives.
This is not the first time India has orchestrated chaos for political purposes.”

After questioning several Kashmiris and those with connections to the resistance movements, several tell us that the attack was ‘a setup’ for the purpose of delegitimizing the Kashmiri resistance and legitimizing a war against Pakistan.

Following the attack, police and military cordoned off the area and launched a large-scale manhunt for the perpetrators.
Within the first two days, around 1,500 people were arrested, numerous raids were carried out, and new checkpoints were established to prevent further attacks. The Indian government reacted with drastic political measures, including the expulsion of all Pakistani citizens by April 29, the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty, and the closure of important land borders with Pakistan. Pakistan immediately responded by expelling Indian citizens, closing its airspace to Indian airlines, and suspending trade.

The rapid deterioration of the security situation, mass arrests, and the expulsion of Pakistani citizens follow.
The suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty between Pakistan and India, as well as the border closures, represent foreign policy escalation steps that primarily burden the civilian population and increase the risk of further destabilization of the region.

Scientific analyses clarify that India is increasingly using the Kashmir issue as a domestic political instrument, especially in the context of growing Hindu nationalism, which is based, among other things, on the exclusion and repression of the population of Kashmir.

India considers the region an integral part of its own state territory and rejects international mediation. This stance, combined with a massive military presence and restrictive domestic measures, intensifies the alienation of the local population and significantly increases the potential for escalation between the two nuclear powers.

The attack, staged or not, thus served to legitimize the beginning of the final subjugation and exclusion of the people of Kashmir.

An End

Kashmiri activist and resistance fighter Hamid Bashani, who died of cancer in the spring of 2025, described a sustainable solution to the Kashmir issue as follows:

“If both India and Pakistan fully recognized Kashmir’s right to self-determination, including a limited right to secession, the people of Kashmir could in return agree to a united, democratic, secular and autonomous Kashmir under the joint sovereignty of India and Pakistan.
For us progressives, the solution is then clear: First, there should be free and fair elections in all three parts of Kashmir – especially for the election of representatives who will be entrusted with resolving the issue.
These elected representatives could draft a secular and democratic constitution in a joint assembly to govern a united autonomous state of Kashmir under the joint sovereignty of India and Pakistan.
In this phase, India and Pakistan would have to demilitarize the entire territory of Jammu and Kashmir and withdraw their troops to the positions before the partition. They should conclude an agreement on the joint defense of the state of Jammu and Kashmir.
This agreement should be followed by free trade and the free movement of people and goods.
Andorra is a good example of this: it is under the joint sovereignty of France and Spain.
This would save the people of Kashmir from massacres, bloodshed and fighting. There would also be no problem for minorities such as Hindus, Pandits, Sikhs, Buddhists and Christians – they would not have to fear for their rights, as both India and Pakistan would be important guarantors of these rights.” [6]

What stands in the way of the self-determination of the people of Kashmir is nothing more than the geopolitical power play over the region:

Yesterday evening, May 6, 2025, India, in a retaliatory strike regarding the attack in Pahalgam, attacked alleged “terrorist infrastructure” in Pakistani Kashmir – these infrastructures exist solely because of the occupation and repression against the people of Kashmir, from which India and Pakistan can each create their own geo- and domestic political advantages.
Parts of Fatima W.’s family, who helped us in the course of this elaboration, were injured in the process and are currently in the hospital.

The radicalization of many Kashmiri youth is, as in Gaza, a consequence of the systematic suppression of all non-militant alternatives.
A life in Kashmir means a life without self-determination, in poverty and without prospects; what follows from this is the desire to change the existing conditions – through the Indian undermining of the secular and political opposition, the radical Islamist alternative remains.
Hindutva follows the same principle; the unequal development of India and the development of drastic contradictions between the federal states helped the BJP achieve massive successes early on, especially in the poor, structurally disadvantaged Hindu belt, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar – Hindu nationalism, like any other ethno-nationalism, is a consequence of unequal development that cannot be overcome in capitalist relations of production.

Thus, even supposed opposition parties, such as the Communist Party of India (Marxist), have long subordinated themselves to the interests of the Indian state to such an extent that they fully align themselves with the genocidal nationalism against the people of Kashmir.
Regarding the retaliatory strikes against Pakistan, i.e., direct hostilities between two nuclear powers, it writes:
“In addition to these measures, pressure should be maintained on Pakistan to hand over those responsible for the massacre of innocent people in Pahalgam and to ensure that no terrorist camps are operated from its territory. The Indian government should ensure that the unity of the people and the integrity of the country are preserved.”

An end to this conflict between two nuclear powers can only be achieved through the self-determination of the people of Kashmir.

---

[1] Sumantra Bose, Kashmir: Roots of Conflict, Paths to Peace (p. 68, translated by Kritikpunkt)

[2] https://www.iaaw.hu-berlin.de/de/region/suedasien/seminar/publikationen/sachronik/04-focus-slathia-marvi-a-history-of-special-status.pdf

[3] https://www.swp-berlin.org/publications/products/aktuell/2019A33_wgn.pdf

[4] https://marxist.com/one-year-after-modi-s-draconian-measures-imposed-on-Kaschmir.htm (Translated by Kritikpunkt)

[5] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/4/23/what-is-the-resistance-front-the-group-behind-the-deadly-kashmir-attack

[6] https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/newspape/atc/707.html