There was a time when the best that could be hoped from polling in Kashmir was that it could be described as “relatively peaceful”. Many things are still uncertain about the current round of elections: but one thing that appears certain is that those days are past, at least for now. Hundreds of candidates are contesting, many more than in the last, landmark elections; and now, in spite of the weather, a separatist boycott and all supposedly informed predictions of the public mood, turnout has been high.

Indeed, in two of the three districts in the Valley that went to the polls, the number of people turning out to vote was probably close to, if not more than, the number that did so in the 2002 elections. This is a moment to savour — regardless of one’s opinion on the Valley’s past and destined future.

Which is how the clear interest in elections should be viewed as well. On the one hand, those who claimed that the recent, prominent, visibility of separatist sentiment meant that keeping Kashmiris involved in the Indian state’s mechanisms was impossible are clearly discredited. On the other, nobody should think, as they began to last time round, that a high turnout means that everything’s hunky-dory, that separatist politics has been defeated. It means that people have at least developed a firm belief that “local issues” — roads, electricity, sewage — need accountability at the state level, and the Indian constitutional framework can provide that. What’s more, it might mean that “local issues” can keep people involved in the democratic process, keeping them interested in the constitutional structures that knit India together, can slowly accustom them to expecting representation of the sort that all parts of India are provided.

... contd.