Kashmir issue will be resolved by talks that heal, not experiments or UAPA: Mehbooba Mufti

Mehbooba Mufti is proposing talks, restored travel links and political engagement as alternatives to arrests, UAPA and PSA cases, employee dismissals, and passport restrictions. Her central argument is that force may suppress visible dissent, but it cannot resolve the deeper Kashmir dispute or rebuild public trust. She wants the Centre to stop experimenting with security-first policies.

She points to the PDP's earlier opening of two roads for trade with Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. Those routes are now closed, she says. She also asks why Kashmiris cannot travel to China's Kashgar and Khotan if roads with China can open in Uttarakhand. These examples show her proposed mechanism: contact and movement could reduce isolation and create space for dialogue.

Mufti says Kashmir's current silence is fragile. She warns of a brewing volcano and urges talks to heal wounds. Her proposal would require reopening channels, reconsidering restrictions and addressing political grievances. The article does not report any government response or say that these proposals have been accepted.

The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, or UAPA, is an Indian law used against unlawful activities and terrorism. It permits investigation, prosecution and, in specified circumstances, detention during legal proceedings. The Public Safety Act, or PSA, is a preventive-detention law used in Jammu and Kashmir. It allows authorities to detain a person to prevent conduct considered harmful to security or public order, without waiting for a criminal conviction.

In practice, these laws work through different legal routes. UAPA cases are criminal proceedings, while PSA detention is intended to prevent anticipated threats. Both can keep people in custody, subject to statutory safeguards and judicial review. The article does not provide case numbers or describe particular charges.

Mufti criticises their use as part of a wider security approach. She says the Kashmir issue will not be solved by jailing people under UAPA and PSA. Her alternative is dialogue, alongside reopening roads and addressing public grievances. The article presents her view, not a legal assessment of individual cases.

The article does not independently verify the size of Kashmir's security deployment. It quotes Mehbooba Mufti asking why there are still 10 lakh soldiers to man Kashmir. That is the only specific security figure provided, so it should be understood as her stated figure or political claim, not as a separately established count in the report.

The figure matters because it represents the scale of the security-first approach she criticises. Alongside arrests, passport denials and employee dismissals, a large deployment signals that authorities continue to treat the region as requiring intensive control. Mufti uses the contrast to ask whether force has produced a durable political settlement.

Her argument is that continued deployment has not removed the underlying grievances. She warns that apparent silence may not last and says a “volcano” is brewing. The article gives no official explanation for the troop figure, no breakdown by force, and no timeline for reducing or changing the security presence.

Mufti argues that policing can contain protest without resolving the reasons behind it. If arrests, job dismissals, passport denials and restrictions remain the main response, she believes resentment may deepen. Her warning matters because a quiet public atmosphere can conceal unresolved anger rather than demonstrate genuine peace.

Her clearest example is her statement that “there is a volcano brewing in Kashmir and it can erupt.” She says the baton policy will not work and warns Delhi that an eruption would endanger all. She also links the problem to people being jailed under UAPA and PSA, and to government employees losing jobs under special security provisions.

The forward implication in her speech is a choice between escalation and engagement. She calls for talks to heal wounds and for roads to reopen. The article does not report that an eruption occurred, nor does it establish that her prediction will happen. It records her warning and proposed remedy.

Roads and travel links across the Line of Control are politically important because they connect people divided by the India-Pakistan dispute. They can support trade, family contact and ordinary movement. Reopening them can therefore signal confidence and political engagement, while closure can reinforce separation and distrust. For Mufti, movement is part of healing Kashmir's wounds.

She says the PDP managed to open two roads for trade with Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, but both are closed today. She also asks why roads with China can be opened in Uttarakhand while Kashmiris cannot travel to China's Kashgar and Khotan. These comparisons frame access as an issue of equal treatment and regional connection.

Mufti presents reopened routes as a practical alternative to a baton policy. They would not by themselves settle the dispute, but could create contact alongside talks. The article does not explain why the roads were closed, identify their exact routes, or report any plan to reopen them.

The article presents accession as a decisive but contested starting point. Mehbooba Mufti says Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah chose to accede to Mahatma Gandhi and Ambedkar's India, despite Kashmir being Muslim-majority and despite competing political forces in India. She calls the decision good, but says Abdullah later sought a referendum between India and Pakistan. That history helps explain why Kashmir remains tied to competing national claims.

The article also says former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee recognised Kashmir's position as entangled between India and Pakistan and extended friendship to Pakistan. Mufti says she spoke about Kashmir after 2019 and warned the country would suffer. The report does not specify what changes occurred in 2019 or describe their legal details.

Today, she links the dispute to suspicion of Kashmiris, jailings, denied passports, terminated jobs and land decisions. She calls for introspection and dialogue. The article therefore connects accession, competing claims and the post-2019 atmosphere, but leaves the precise constitutional background unstated.

Governments facing armed or separatist conflict must protect people while preserving the rights that make political rule legitimate. Arrests and security operations may address immediate threats, but broad or opaque restrictions can alienate communities. If people cannot express grievances, participate politically or trust institutions, resentment may grow and cooperation may fall. Security and liberty are therefore connected, not necessarily opposing goals.

The article illustrates this tension through Mufti's criticism of UAPA and PSA jailings, employee dismissals, passport denials and the presence of 10 lakh soldiers. She says these measures have not resolved Kashmir's issue. She contrasts them with talks, open roads and attention to identity and land concerns. Those examples show how policy choices affect both daily life and public confidence.

A durable approach would require lawful security measures, accountability, representation and dialogue. It would also need to address genuine threats without treating an entire population as suspect. The article records Mufti's argument, but does not present a government response or prove that dialogue alone would settle the conflict.