Modi is betting his legacy on ‘solving’ the issue of Kashmir – for better or worse

India’s dramatic announcement that it was moving to redraw the borders of Jammu and Kashmir state, reducing it to two less autonomous “union territories” and scrapping the Kashmir valley’s special constitutional status, is going to cause shockwaves that are felt far beyond the northernmost tip of India.

Pakistan has called it “illegal”; local party leaders say it is a “total betrayal” of the people of Kashmir. And while it was passed in parliament and given presidential approval, the decision is certain to be challenged in the courts.

To explain the significance of Article 370, the clause of the Indian constitution that is being scrapped, it is essential to go back to the foundation of India as an independent nation after the end of British colonial rule.

Kashmir, a powerful kingdom in its own right at the time, sitting at a critical junction between India, Pakistan and China, did not want to cede power to any larger nation.

As a Muslim-majority region, most expected it to eventually become part of Pakistan. But when Pakistan’s army invaded, attempting to force the Kashmiri king’s hand, he agreed a deal with India that would see the valley become part of its union – as long as it retained power over its own land and laws.

Article 370 enshrines those special powers in the Indian constitution. It allows Kashmir to prevent outsiders from the rest of India from buying property in the valley, and to reserve most government jobs and university places for Kashmiri families. Effectively, it ensured Kashmir maintained its distinctive character – for better or worse.

Those special rights, however, were unpopular in the rest of India, where right-wing nationalist politicians played up the idea that the system favoured Muslims over the country’s Hindu majority.

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) campaigned on a policy of scrapping Article 370 – and in 2018, the issue came to a head with the collapse of a coalition government in Jammu and Kashmir between the BJP and the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), one of the largest regional parties.

Kashmir has been governed by direct “president’s rule” since then, a period during which clashes across the border with Pakistan led the two neighbouring giants to the brink of war.

Kashmiris largely boycotted the general election in May which returned the BJP’s Narendra Modi to power for a second term by a landslide – and that huge mandate has clearly left the party feeling like now is the time to act.

Crucially, it is precisely because of president’s rule that the Delhi government can unilaterally change Jammu and Kashmir’s make-up. India’s constitution requires that decisions relating directly to states must be made with the state assembly’s consent. The assembly’s powers in Kashmir’s case have been taken over by the BJP-nominated president; in effect, the party has been able to rubber-stamp its own decision.

Kashmir’s local politicians have vowed to fight Monday’s decision, saying that the only route to a long-term peace in the region is self-determination. Pakistan also supports the idea of a plebiscite across both Indian and Pakistani-administered Kashmir – such is the extent of anti-India sentiment across the valley right now.

After 70 years of uneasy relations between Kashmir and the rest of India, and 30 years of armed separatist conflict, Mr Modi is now betting his legacy on “solving” the issue by permanently diluting Kashmir’s autonomy and demography. It seems inevitable that Kashmiris won’t give these things up without a fight.