In a recent statement that has reignited political debate, National Conference leader Farooq Abdullah questioned why terror attacks in Jammu and Kashmir seem to spike whenever the restoration of statehood is discussed. However, historical records paint a starkly different picture, showing that terrorism in the region flourished for decades under the very Article 370 that Abdullah and his party have long championed. The juxtaposition raises critical questions about the narrative linking statehood to peace.

Abdullah's Claim and the Political Context

Speaking to reporters, Abdullah suggested a correlation between discussions on J&K's statehood and subsequent terror incidents, implying that political uncertainty fuels violence. "Why do terror attacks happen whenever J&K statehood is discussed?" he asked, insinuating that the central government's handling of the region's political status is a trigger for unrest.

His comments come amid ongoing deliberations in New Delhi about restoring full statehood to the union territory, which was bifurcated and downgraded in August 2019. While Abdullah's party has consistently demanded statehood restoration, his latest remarks attempt to link that demand directly to the security situation, a framing that critics argue ignores the region's complex history.

The Article 370 Era: A Hotbed of Terrorism

Data and historical evidence from the decades preceding 2019 show that terrorism in J&K was not an occasional phenomenon but a persistent and deadly reality. From the late 1980s onward, the region witnessed a full-blown insurgency, with thousands of lives lost in terror attacks, cross-border infiltration, and violent protests. During this period, Article 370 granted special autonomy to J&K, including a separate constitution and the ability to prohibit outsiders from buying property, yet it did nothing to stem the tide of violence.

In fact, many experts argue that the special status created a permissive environment for separatist ideologies to flourish, as political leaders in the region often used the autonomy to shield or even encourage anti-India sentiments. The period from 1990 to 2019 saw multiple peaks in terror-related fatalities, including the infamous 2016 Uri attack and the 2019 Pulwama bombing, both of which occurred while Article 370 was in force.

  • 1989-2004: The peak of the insurgency, with over 40,000 civilians, security forces, and militants killed.
  • 2008-2018: A resurgence of violence, including the 2008 Mumbai attacks and numerous fidayeen (*******) attacks.
  • 2016-2019: A spike in local recruitment into terror groups, fueled by social media and political rhetoric.

Post-2019: A Decline in Violence

Following the abrogation of Article 370 and the bifurcation of the state into two union territories, the security situation in J&K improved significantly. According to government data, terror-related incidents dropped by over 50% in the first two years after August 2019, and civilian casualties fell to their lowest in decades. The removal of special status allowed for the implementation of central laws, better coordination between security agencies, and a crackdown on terror financing.

While Abdullah and other political leaders have criticized the government's approach as heavy-handed, the numbers speak for themselves. The period since 2019 has seen a marked decrease in stone-pelting protests, hartals (strikes), and cross-border infiltration attempts, even as occasional attacks continue to occur, often orchestrated by Pakistan-based groups.

The Statehood Debate: A Political Football?

Abdullah's assertion that terror attacks coincide with statehood discussions appears to be a politically motivated attempt to pressure the central government into a timeline for restoration. However, his own party's history contradicts this narrative. During the 1990s, when the National Conference was in power under Article 370, terrorism was at its peak, with daily violence and a collapse of civil administration in many areas.

Moreover, the demand for statehood is not inherently linked to terrorism — it is a constitutional and administrative issue. Many regions in India, such as Delhi and Puducherry, have union territory status without experiencing terror attacks. The real drivers of terrorism in J&K, as analysts point out, are external support from Pakistan, radicalization of youth, and a history of political exploitation by local leaders.

Conclusion: Rethinking the Narrative

Farooq Abdullah's question may resonate with some, but the historical evidence suggests the opposite of his implied causality. Terrorism in J&K was not a reaction to the lack of statehood; it thrived under a system that many believe enabled it. The abrogation of Article 370, for all its controversies, has brought a degree of peace that was elusive for three decades.

As the debate over statehood continues, it is crucial to separate political demands from security realities. The people of J&K deserve peace and development, and that can only be achieved by addressing the root causes of terrorism — not by resurrecting a status quo that failed them for so long.