Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his party, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)’s Kashmir card, ensuring return of displaced Kashmiri Hindus, known largely as Kashmiri pandits, to Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) is very much on the table.

Yet, it is still not clear as to what steps will be taken to ensure its implementation. Around 25 years ago, amid a wave of militancy, around 300,000 Kashmiri pandits chose to leave the Kashmir valley.

J&K government is currently headed by an alliance of People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and BJP, with the former holding 28 seats and the latter 25 in the 87-member state assembly.

Tough negotiations between these two parties ensured the BJP a share in state’s coalition government for the first time. The agreement reached between PDP and BJP included return of Kashmiri pandits. Around a month ago, this issue was discussed in Delhi between Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh (BJP) and J&K Chief Minister Mufti Mohammad Sayeed (PDP).

Sayeed assured Singh that J&K government would acquire and provide land at the earliest possible for composite townships for Kashmiri pandits. Later, Singh told Lok Sabha that Sayeed had promised to earmark 50 acres of land as first installment for rehabilitation of displaced Kashmiri pandits. Paradoxically, PDP and BJP have not voiced a common stand on this issue, with one referring to composite townships and other suggesting townships for (only) Kashmiri pandits.

Countering opposition in Srinagar, Sayeed tried assuring Kashmiris that he would not allow “Israeli-type settlements” for Kashmiri pandits. Sayeed stated, “I have told the home minister that they can’t stay separately. There is no plan, no decision...but it is being floated that a separate homeland will be created. That is not possible.”

On his part, Singh pointed out in Delhi, “Whatever decision was taken by (the) central government for rehabilitation of Kashmiri pandits...the decision remains the same.” Confusion over the issue has been further complicated with the central government indicating a different stand on this issue.

Fearing that separate townships could lead to “ghettoization,” former J&K Chief Minister Omar Abdullah (National Conference Party) said, “I very much doubt very many Kashmiri pandits would like to return to the Valley just to be housed in ghettos, segregated and isolated.”

“In garb of return of Kashmiri pandits, a state within a state is being created. It is a ploy to make Kashmir the next Palestine and rob people of their land,” according to Syed Ali Shah Geelani, chairman of separatist Hurriyat Conference. These critics want Kashmiri pandits to return to their native homes and live amid them.

If separate townships are created for Kashmiri pandits, it may lead to religious polarization in J&K along communal lines. The townships would become soft targets for militants pursuing radical, extremist agenda against non-Muslims. Besides, townships inhabited only by Kashmiri pandits may be used by the saffron brigade to stoke communal tensions.

J&K is the only state in India, where Muslims are in a majority. There prevails apprehension that creation of townships, ostensibly to rehabilitate displaced Kashmiri pandits, may reduce Muslims to a minority here.

All of the Kashmiri pandits are not pleased with these plans, since they are not aware about the details. Not surprisingly, a significant number of them staged a protest in Delhi (May 3) demanding that they should be taken into confidence regarding any decision about their return to the valley. Besides, new generation of Kashmiri Pandits is not too keen to be uprooted from where they are settled in different parts of India.

According to Pakistan, this move would change the demographics of J&K and would be in violation of United Nations’ Security Council resolutions. Countering Pakistan’s stand, India has objected to interference in its “internal matters” and has stated that the central government does not want others to dictate its agenda.

It is still too early to speculate the impact of this move. The little attention gained by PDP-BJP proposal has proved politically expensive for both, inviting strong criticism from most quarters.