India’s support for Israel is about Islamophobia: Kashmir MP

FairPlanet spoke to Mehdi, one of the few elected representatives openly challenging not just the BJP’s Hindu nationalist agenda, but also the shifting stance of his own party, the National Conference.

A sitting MP from Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) and a critic of Prime Minister Modi, Mehdi confronts what he calls an “ideological assault” on India’s secular foundations and refuses to let Kashmir’s political identity be rewritten in silence.

In this wide-ranging conversation, Mehdi speaks with FairPlanet journalist Hanan the erosion of autonomy in Kashmir, India’s changing position on Palestine, and why he believes the current political discourse in Jammu and Kashmir is being manipulated to bury constitutional guarantees once promised to its people.

Note: The following Q&A is adapted from a longer interview. Responses have been paraphrased for clarity and brevity.

Hanan Zaffar: Since the abolition of Article 370 in 2019, the discourse among Kashmiri parties has shifted from autonomy and self-rule to a demand for statehood. Is this the new normal?

Aga Syed Ruhullah Mehdi: That’s how the BJP wants to shape the political discourse in Jammu and Kashmir.

But your own party is also following that line.

And that’s what I’m confronting within my party. That’s where my disagreements lie. We committed ourselves to the people on a political agenda that speaks about autonomy and the constitutional guarantees we had, which were beyond statehood.

We got votes from the people to represent that agenda. I remind my party of this responsibility, and whenever I feel the party is moving away from it, I speak up.

After 2019, hardly anyone was speaking about Article 370. I was one of the few who kept that discourse alive. That’s why there’s a certain trust between me and the people. The party saw that before the election, and that’s how we got votes. So it’s our duty to continue on that path.

Recently you’ve reached out to Muslims and other marginalised communities outside of Kashmir. Do you see yourself as part of the broader Indian Muslim discourse?

Why not?

Traditionally, Kashmiri leaders haven’t taken that role.

But we live in a country - we cannot isolate ourselves. We have stakes in it. Whatever happens to Muslims across India affects us. And not just Muslims - other minorities, oppressed and persecuted communities too.

We need to align ourselves with people who stand for the values we believed in and acceded to. We didn’t accede to BJP’s Hindutva idea of India. We never thought India would become what it is today - a kind of Hindu Pakistan.

There are still people in this country who stand for secularism, pluralism, functioning democracy, and the rights of different regions to protect their identity and dignity. We need to reach out to them. Yes, reaching out to Muslims outside J&K is necessary - and so is allying with right-minded people everywhere.

Some critics say your position is just rhetoric - that Kashmiri political parties have long talked about autonomy without results. The erosion began in 1953. Why didn’t you align with separatists like Geelani or Lone who demanded the same? And why join the NC, which many say helped erode autonomy in 1979?

Who sabotaged autonomy in 1979? Look at who was in the cabinet at that time, who amended the 1953 position. Some of the same individuals you named were part of those governments.

So that argument doesn’t hold much weight. I joined the National Conference because of its ideology: that we are part of the Union of India, but we acceded on certain terms - and in return, we were given guarantees under Article 370. We lived with those guarantees, to some extent, until 2019.

Another value that brought us to India was secularism and pluralism. Today, both the guarantees and those values are under threat.

So, I believe it’s the responsibility of a party that stood for these principles to fight back. The NC must fight for the return of our rights.

Is that pragmatic?

I’ve spoken about this before and after the elections. People asked me whether this is rhetoric or realistic, and I made certain predictions. I said that one day, India would realise the need for a stronger federal structure. Other states - not just J&K - will demand protection against the Centre’s overreach.

That’s what we’re beginning to see now. M.K. Stalin of Tamil Nadu has started using the word “autonomy” again. West Bengal is also asking for protection. There’s a growing demand for a stronger federal structure and more autonomy for states.

That’s what J&K already had - and lost. So our struggle is not isolated. In a post-Modi India, I see genuine forces pushing to restructure the federal arrangement. And that’s when a window may open for our cause.

Do you have a roadmap or blueprint for how that could happen?

Yes. First, we have to institutionally reject the decisions of 5 August, 2019 - from both the Jammar and Kashmiri Assembly and Parliament. That’s the starting point. I expected the National Conference to take this position once it was elected.

Then, we must find like-minded allies across India - parties that also believe in a stronger federal structure. The Chief Minister should visit these states, explain J&K’s position, and invite their MPs to come to Kashmir and understand the situation.

Eventually, numbers in Parliament may shift. If we can explain our demand for autonomy in a language that resonates with other states’ struggles, we might build a common cause.

After five years, a Parliament that supports stronger federalism might be possible. And if that happens, we could have the numbers to reclaim our rights.

India used to support Palestine and a two-state solution. Now we abstain from voting for a ceasefire. What’s behind this shift? Has there been any coordinated opposition response?

There’s been no joint statement because there hasn’t been a Parliament session. Not after the escalation between India and Pakistan, and not after Iran and Israel. So we didn’t have the opportunity.

But individually, most opposition parties have spoken against Israeli aggression-and that’s consistent with India’s long-standing support for Palestine.

The Modi regime and the RSS have redrawn India’s position to suit right-wing ideology. They’ll side with any power that is anti-Muslim-and that’s what’s happening with Palestine. India traditionally stood with the people of Palestine, but BJP stands for the Zionist regime. 

India’s first Prime Minister Jawarlal Nehru in 1951 gave a statement that there will be a gradual step towards the erosion of autonomy in Kashmir. So why are you surprised with what India is doing in Kashmir? 

People who quote that statement often skip the last line. Nehru said, “But the demand for this erosion should come from the people of Jammu and Kashmir.”

That’s the key. He believed any such decision should be taken with the consent of the people here. That’s also what Article 370’s clause 3 says - any changes must happen with the concurrence of Jammu and Kashmir.

That is how we manipulate his statement. We conveniently put aside his last line, which defines his entire idea of how the decision should be taken.

Yes, changes were made in the past. But they were made through institutions - even if those institutions were compromised. Today, the change has come through brute force. That’s the difference.

Have you already found allies for this federal push?

Yes. I’ve spoken to several parties in the INDIA alliance - TMC, Samajwadi Party, Congress, DMK. They may define autonomy differently, but one thing is common: they want more protections for states.

I’ve said this before - any genuine issue-based fight, so long as it doesn’t cross into secessionism or separatism, will find support. It’s up to us to stand for ourselves.

For example, I brought an impeachment motion against a judge of the Allahabad High Court. I got full support from these parties. Same with the Waqf Board Amendment Bill - there was unified opposition. So yes, there’s alignment on these issues.

Calling for dialogue with Pakistan was once normal. Now mainstream parties hesitate. What’s your stance?

My position is clear. After every escalation, both India and Pakistan agree to a ceasefire and return to talks. So if that’s the outcome after lives are lost, why not talk before that point?

If the governments can listen to Trump and agree to talk, then they should also listen to the people of Jammu and Kashmir - because it’s our lives at stake. Dialogue should never be off the table.

You’ve openly disagreed with the NC leadership. Are you working toward building internal consensus?

Consensus should happen for the purpose we went to the people for - not just for the sake of the party. If the NC returns to the position it held before elections, the consensus will follow naturally.

It’s too early to say we’ve lost our way, but we don’t have the luxury of time. The moment this government starts reflecting the people’s sentiment again, consensus will come automatically. My disagreement is for a purpose - and consensus should be too.

Thousands of Kashmiris remain in jail, many without trial. What steps are you taking to secure their release?

I met with Home Minister Amit Shah and submitted a formal letter requesting their release. But unfortunately, they are not very responsive. Even the standard protocol - replying to an MP - is not being followed.

I’ve written again, this time about Shabbir Shah . The first time, Shah said he’d get back to me. He didn’t. So now we’re preparing to go to the Supreme Court.

We’re working on a petition for the release of all prisoners who have not been convicted or are being held without trial. We'll knock on the doors of the Supreme Court.

Image by Prakhar Sharma.