Jammu and Kashmir Apni Party president Altaf Bukhari on Wednesday sharpened the political debate around land ownership and representation in the Union Territory, warning that outsiders buying land in Srinagar must be held accountable for the demographic consequences of such transactions. His remarks come at a time when land use, residency, and political trust remain among the most sensitive issues in post-2019 Jammu and Kashmir.
Land And Demography
Bukhari's intervention is likely to resonate far beyond party lines because it touches a core anxiety in the Valley: whether economic activity and property transactions are gradually reshaping the social and political character of Srinagar. By linking land purchases to demographic change, he placed the issue squarely in the broader debate over identity, local rights, and the future of urban Kashmir.
While Bukhari did not outline a specific policy proposal in the remarks cited, his language suggests a demand for closer scrutiny of who is buying land, under what conditions, and with what long-term implications for local communities. In Kashmir, where land has long carried political as well as economic value, even routine real-estate activity is often interpreted through the lens of sovereignty, belonging, and demographic protection.
The comments also reflect the continuing sensitivity around the post-Article 370 landscape, in which the Centre's decisions on domicile and property rules have remained politically contentious. For many in the Valley, the issue is not merely legal ownership but the fear that structural changes in land access could alter the region's demographic balance over time. Bukhari's warning taps into that unease while seeking to position his party as a defender of local interests.
Trust Deficit Persists
In the same set of remarks, Bukhari urged Prime Minister Narendra Modi to initiate a direct dialogue with the people of Jammu and Kashmir to address their issues and grievances. He said the prevailing trust deficit would not end until direct talks are held between the Centre and the people, particularly the youth of J&K.
That appeal is politically significant because it revives a longstanding demand from regional leaders who argue that governance in Jammu and Kashmir cannot rely only on administrative control and security management. Instead, they say, durable stability requires political engagement that includes young people, who have grown up amid conflict, uncertainty, and repeated policy shifts.
Bukhari's emphasis on youth is especially notable. In Kashmir, the younger generation has often been described by politicians and analysts alike as the most alienated cohort, shaped by unemployment, restricted mobility, and a deep skepticism toward institutions. By calling for direct engagement with them, Bukhari is signaling that the legitimacy deficit in the region cannot be repaired through top-down messaging alone.
His remarks also place pressure on the Centre at a moment when New Delhi has repeatedly projected normalcy and development in Jammu and Kashmir, even as political reconciliation remains incomplete. The demand for direct talks suggests that, in the view of regional leaders, infrastructure and investment cannot substitute for political confidence-building.
Political Stakes Rise
Bukhari's comments are likely to be read as both a warning and a political opening. On one hand, they underline the continuing fragility of public trust in Jammu and Kashmir; on the other, they attempt to reclaim space for regional political voices that argue they remain essential to any meaningful settlement of local grievances.
The land issue is particularly combustible because it combines economics, identity, and governance in a region where every policy change is measured against historical memory. Any perception that outsiders are gaining an outsized foothold in Srinagar could deepen anxieties among residents already wary of demographic and political marginalization.
At the same time, Bukhari's call for direct dialogue places the onus on the Prime Minister to respond not only with development rhetoric but with political outreach. Whether the Centre chooses to engage in such a conversation will be closely watched in Jammu and Kashmir, where the gap between official assurances and public sentiment remains wide.
For now, Bukhari has put two issues back at the center of the debate: who gets to own land in Kashmir, and who gets to speak for its future. Both questions remain central to the region's politics, and both continue to test the Centre's claim that normalcy has returned.