Former Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir, Omar Abdullah, has launched a pointed critique against the current administrative framework governing the region. Speaking at a high-profile forum, he attributed significant flaws in security coordination directly to the Union Territory model implemented after the abrogation of Article 370.
UT Model Fosters Fragmented Decision-Making
Abdullah presented his arguments at the Hindustan Times Leadership Summit in New Delhi. His central contention was that the Union Territory (UT) structure has created operational 'silos'. He explained that this fragmentation hinders seamless collaboration between various security and intelligence agencies. According to him, the absence of a unified, elected government has led to a compartmentalized approach where decisions are made in isolation, potentially compromising effectiveness.
The National Conference leader emphasized that this silo effect was a direct consequence of the constitutional changes enacted in 2019. He suggested that the previous state model, for all its challenges, allowed for more integrated civil-administrative oversight on security matters that considered local nuances.
"Homegrown Terrorism Never Disappeared"
In a related and crucial observation, Omar Abdullah challenged a prevailing narrative about the security situation in the valley. He firmly rejected the notion of a 'return' of homegrown militancy. His argument was stark: it never left.
"The idea that we are seeing a resurgence of local terrorism is misleading," he implied. Abdullah argued that while the manifestations and intensity may have fluctuated, the underlying issue of indigenous recruitment and militant activity has been a persistent challenge. This statement serves as a counterpoint to official assessments that often highlight periods of calm as signs of permanent resolution.
Implications and the Road Ahead
The critique, delivered on December 6, 2025, opens a debate on the long-term efficacy of the UT model in Jammu and Kashmir. Abdullah's comments underscore a potential trade-off between direct central administration and cohesive, ground-level governance. The creation of 'silos' he mentions points to a systemic issue that could affect not just security but overall administrative harmony.
Furthermore, his insistence on the continuous presence of homegrown terrorism suggests a need for strategies that address root causes beyond structural changes. His remarks are likely to fuel further discussion on whether the current system requires recalibration to improve inter-agency synergy and address persistent security concerns with a more unified command and understanding.
