Jammu and Kashmir: Has BJP closed doors on all dialogues?

In a heated session of the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly, a recent resolution calling for a dialogue on the region’s special status and identity has sparked a significant political debate. This controversy comes amid rising tensions over the legacy of Article 370 and the future of Jammu and Kashmir’s unique constitutional protections.

The discussions centred around two resolutions: one introduced and passed by the National Conference, calling for dialogue with the central government, and a second, more strongly-worded proposal from the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) that demands the restoration of Article 370 and Article 35A in their original forms.

Also Read: Ruckus in Jammu & Kashmir Assembly again; BJP MLAs marshalled out

In a recent episode of The Federal's exclusive YouTube programme Capital Beat, a panel of experts discussed the evolving situation in Jammu and Kashmir and the BJP's political strategy.

The first resolution – cautiously worded

The first resolution, moved by Deputy Chief Minister Surendra Choudhary, avoided direct mention of Article 370 and was, according to analysts, "cautiously worded”. The resolution sought to reaffirm the need for dialogue between the Centre and the elected representatives of Jammu and Kashmir.

Political analyst Puneet Nicholas Yadav described this resolution as one that “scales back” from a direct demand for the restoration of Article 370, instead calling only for dialogue. Many believe that its soft language was intended to facilitate a starting point for discussions on the future of Jammu and Kashmir’s constitutional status.

However, the mild wording of the resolution did not prevent it from being met with resistance from BJP members, who disrupted the proceedings when PDP representatives unfurled banners demanding the restoration of Article 370.

No further dialogue on Article 370: BJP

BJP spokesperson Abhijeet Jasrotia argued against the need for further dialogue on Article 370, emphasising that its abrogation in 2019 had already been upheld by the Supreme Court. He questioned the necessity of revisiting the issue, insisting that Article 370 only fostered separatism and prevented Jammu and Kashmir from achieving economic and social progress.

Also Read:

“We have moved on. We do not want to return to the days of Article 370,” Jasrotia stated, adding that the BJP's position was clear: there would be "no dialogue on this matter."

Jasrotia further defended the BJP’s stand by listing what he termed as achievements since the abrogation of Article 370, such as economic growth, improved job prospects, and heightened security. However, the BJP’s refusal to engage in discussions on the special status of J&K prompted criticism from both opposition members and political analysts.

‘BJP’s unwillingness to consider alternative perspectives’

According to Yadav, this approach reflects the BJP’s broader unwillingness to consider alternative perspectives, saying, “The BJP does not want to listen to any other view except their own.”

Suhail Kazmi, editor-in-chief of Daily Taskeen, a Jammu-based newspaper, criticised the BJP’s resistance to dialogue within the Assembly, arguing that this stance undermines the democratic process.

“The Assembly is a platform for discussions. The BJP should respect this institution and recognise the importance of healthy debate,” Kazmi said.

Proponents of the resolution argued that a middle ground is necessary to address the needs and sentiments of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. Yadav emphasised that the cautious language of the resolution should not be viewed as an affront to the Centre or the BJP but as a call for inclusivity and respect for the aspirations of the region’s population.

‘Balanced approach best way forward’

Yadav noted that even Omar Abdullah, a senior leader in the National Conference, had publicly stated that expecting the BJP to reinstate Article 370 was unrealistic, suggesting that finding a balanced approach might be the best way forward.

Jasrotia, however, remained firm in his stance, dismissing calls for dialogue as “opportunistic.” He pointed out the abuses of Article 370 that, in his view, led to the exploitation of communities such as the Valmiki Samaj and West Pakistani refugees. In his closing remarks, Jasrotia compared calls for dialogue on Article 370 to a thief asking for reconciliation after committing a crime, reflecting the BJP’s conviction that revisiting the special status of Jammu and Kashmir would only open old wounds.

As the debate over Jammu and Kashmir’s constitutional status intensifies, the BJP’s unwillingness to discuss Article 370 within the Assembly may further polarise the region’s political climate. For the Opposition at the Centre, the issue is not just about restoring past protections but about ensuring representation and dignity for all communities in Jammu and Kashmir.

(The content above has been generated using a Gen AI model fine-tuned to The Federal’s proprietary data. To ensure accuracy, quality, and editorial integrity, we employ a Human-In-The-Loop (HITLO) process — while AI assists in creating the initial draft, our experienced editorial team carefully reviews, edits, and refines the content before publication. At The Federal, we combine the efficiency of AI with the expertise of human editors to deliver reliable and insightful journalism.)