Why I will not vote

Voting is a method by which the electorate of a democracy appoints representatives in its government. A democratic government, as classically defined by Abraham Lincoln in his Gettysburg address in 1863, is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. In Kashmir, since time immemorial, there has never been anything like a government by the people, for the people, of the people.
John Fitzpatrick, a former US ambassador to the UN, wrote, ‘Democratic elections are not merely symbolic…they are competitive, periodic, inclusive, definite elections in which the chief decision makers in a government are selected by citizens who enjoy broad freedom to criticise government, to publish their criticism, and to present alternatives.’ In Kashmir, elections have been a merely symbolic gesture to throw sand in the eyes of the world community, hiding the reality of the ground situation in Kashmir. Elections are due in November, to elect representatives of the State Legislative Assembly, who, purportedly, will represent the people of Kashmir, and attempt to solve their problems. Really?
As a Kashmiri making an attempt to exercise his right to vote, I find the thought of voting a hopeless, futile exercise, and a royal waste of time, effort, money and energy. You may ask why. First, elections in a democracy are intended to solve the problems of the people who constitute the democracy. The single most pressing problem facing Kashmiris today is the continued interference of an “oppressive” Indian regime in the affairs of Kashmir through the instruments of its power; the army, the corrupt polity, the ineffective bureaucracy all conspiring together to keep the iron grip over Kashmir. According to the MORI survey of 2002, 64% of Kashmiris believed that Indian troops were guilty of human rights abuses. No government that will be elected through the process of voting in November will have the gumption to make a concerted effort to remove the instruments of oppression from the land of Kashmir. Through a corrupt polity, India has held the all-round socio-economic velopment of Kashmir hostage to the whims of a well-connected and power hungry few. The Kashmiris have on more occasion than one, expressed their desire for Kashmiri society to be developed on the lines of an Islamic nation, desires which have been torn down through oppression too painful to recount here. The election in November allows the Kashmiri no choice as regards the future of his nation as a nation of Islamic ideals. So if elections are held neither to solve the most pressing problem facing Kashmir today, nor to allow Kashmiri society to develop in the manner they want it to, the exercise is pointless. As per definition, a vote is an individual’s act of voting, by which he or she expresses support of preference for a certain motion, a certain candidate, or a certain selection of andidates. In Kashmir, the elections in November will present no choice of motion on the most pressing issue facing Kashmiris today –the continued Indian rule.
Second, the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir remains a disputed territory under the aegis of the UN, with a UN sponsored monitoring agency still functional in Kashmir. UN Resolution 47, states “that the final disposition of the State of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance with the will of the people expressed through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the United Nations.” Over the next few years, the UNSecurity Council passed four new resolutions, revising the terms of Resolution 47 to include a synchronous withdrawal of both Indian and Pakistani troops from the region, as per the recommendations of General Andrew McNaughton. UN arbitrators put forward 11 different proposals for the demilitarization of the region every one of which was rejected by the Indian government. Any attempt by India to use the elections to assert its supremacy in Kashmir is thus an internationally accepted illegal attempt that is fraught with legal complexities. The present elections are just such an attempt. If you vote for candidates, freely, and in a fair election, under the supervision of Indian authorities, then you have automatically accepted Indian rule, and the territorial dispute is too insignificant for you to influence your decision to vote. The voters will elect representatives who will swear by the Indian Constitution to uphold and protect it, thus accepting Indian rule outright, and without dispute. Such a travesty cannot be expected of genuine representatives of the Kashmiri people, who have again and again shown their bitter resentment towards Indian rule. Those representatives who accept Indian supremacy for the sake of personal gain, or for the lust of power, have betrayed the cause of Kashmir, and hold no legitimacy as leaders in my eyes.
Third, the bitter experience that the people of Kashmir have had in the past with elections. Elections in Kashmir have been rigged, often openly, as admitted by former Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee during his public address from the Red Fort. It is safe for anyone in his right-thinking mind, to understand that a government that maintains a huge presence of over five hundred thousand armed personnel in an area of a few thousand square kilometres, supposedly to counter the violent activities of a few hundred armed men, cannot have the interests of the people in its mind. Such a government can never be trusted with the process of elections, elections, which when held fairly and freely, will inevitably produce an outcome unfavourable to it. The Indian government has yet to display a genuine understanding of the aspirations of the Kashmiri people, and seems least inclined to do so. In the same vein, a majority of Kashmiris feel least inclined to accept the writ of the Indian government over Kashmir, and see no point in voting in an election held under its supervision.
Fourth, even if I would keep the above three factors in abeyance for a day, and decide to vote, who would I vote for? The so-called ‘democratic’ set-up in Kashmir has been so established that the choices among the candidates are between the more or less corrupt between the two, or, rather, the lesser evil, among a multitude of evils. My idea of an election is the choice between two differing visions for the nation, competing with each other, and vying for space in the minds and hearts of the people. Exactly who among any of the leaders contesting the elections has any vision for the socio-economic development of Kashmir? Putting it another way, who can claim to have a positive vision for Kashmir, and fight the elections, well in know of the fact that Indian rule presents the primary, most-pressing problem for all Kashmiris alike?
Finally, on an emotive note, the ground beneath my feet is too drenched with the blood of many a peaceful protestor, and the air too thick with smoke from the burning houses of many Kashmiris, and my heart too heavy with the sorrow of broken promises, for me to vote in a farcical exercise!