The Vision of Greater India: Kashmir as the Test Case for India’s Expansionist Doctrine
By Farzana Yaqoob and Manzar Qureshi
In 2023, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led Indian government inaugurated its newly constructed Parliament building in New Delhi, a structure thick with architectural and political symbolism. A mural inside the building caused immediate regional uproar. The map of India it displayed stretched far beyond internationally recognized borders, including territories from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh, and Myanmar. For many observers, this was not a historical reference but a projection of the BJP’s ideological vision: Akhand Bharat, or Greater India.
While BJP leaders celebrated the mural as a tribute to India’s civilizational past, it was widely interpreted as a declaration of intent, a visual articulation of territorial and ideological ambition. Critics argue that this reflects more than mere nostalgia. It signals the operationalization of an aggressive doctrine that seeks to consolidate a majoritarian identity across India and potentially beyond. At the center of this ideological and political experiment is Jammu and Kashmir.
Kashmir: The Test Case of an Expansionist Ideology
Long contested and deeply politicized, Kashmir has historically symbolized the limits of Indian federalism and the unresolved tensions of Partition. Under BJP rule, it has transformed into something more: a laboratory for legal and demographic engineering, and the proving ground for a wider political project.
The abrogation of Articles 370 and 35A in August 2019 marked the first overt demonstration of this strategy. These constitutional provisions had granted Kashmir limited autonomy and protected its demographic composition by defining “permanent residents.” Their revocation removed these protections, allowing non-Kashmiris to acquire land and residency. Within months, new domicile laws were introduced, land was opened to external buyers, and state-specific laws were replaced with centralized statutes.
The BJP justified these actions as integration and development. However, many see this as a blueprint for a deeper ideological mission: to dismantle the political identity of Muslim-majority Kashmir, disempower its native institutions, and replace them with centralized, uniform governance under the BJP’s Hindu nationalist vision.
Settler Colonialism and Legal Overreach
The changes in Kashmir have not been limited to lawbooks. On the ground, land seizures, property demolitions, and aggressive eviction drives have accelerated. Previously, such actions occurred under military pretexts like Cordon and Search Operations (CASO). Now, they are backed by newly minted civilian laws and bureaucratic mechanisms.
Human rights organizations and legal scholars describe these moves as symptoms of settler colonialism, wherein demographic change is engineered through legal manipulation, economic incentives, and coercive state power. The use of civilian law to implement militaristic goals blurs the line between governance and occupation, especially in a region already saturated with security forces.
Kashmir, thus, becomes more than a region, it becomes a method. It is the first draft of how a homogenizing, centralist agenda can be rolled out under legal pretense and development rhetoric.
From Kashmir to Waqf: Exporting the Model
By 2024, the BJP’s approach in Kashmir appeared to be extending into other Muslim-majority institutions across India. That year, the government passed the Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2024, which curtailed the authority of Muslim-majority Waqf Boards—bodies traditionally entrusted with managing Islamic charitable and religious properties.
The new amendment transferred substantial control over Waqf assets to state governments, including officials with no ties to the religious purpose of these properties. Historically, Waqf land could not be sold, inherited, or diverted. But the new law opens up space for state-driven reappropriation.
Critics point out the structural similarity between what happened in Kashmir and what is now happening with Waqf properties: the targeting of community land, erosion of legal autonomy, and assertion of state power to control identity-linked spaces. The BJP’s Kashmir doctrine is becoming nationalized.
Continuity with Congress, But a Cruder Execution
It’s important to note that the BJP is not the first party to centralize power or assert territorial unity in India. The Indian National Congress, the country’s post-independence political hegemon, pursued a similar project, but did so under the veneer of constitutionalism and federalism. Through tools like President’s Rule, linguistic reorganization, and development-based assimilation, the Congress steadily eroded regional autonomies while maintaining a liberal-democratic façade.
The BJP, by contrast, is doing crudely and overtly what Congress did more subtly. Where Congress relied on institutional consensus and incrementalism, the BJP leverages legal bulldozing, public spectacle, and ideological clarity. This shift from subtle assimilation to aggressive redefinition is what sets the current moment apart. In Kashmir, what had once been off-limits even to Congress has now become the first battlefield for hardline consolidation.
From Experiment to Doctrine
What began as an experiment in Kashmir has evolved into a replicable doctrine that is reshaping the very fabric of the Indian state. While previous governments pursued centralization under the guise of national unity, the BJP has stripped away pretense, replacing incrementalism with ideological assertiveness.
Through constitutional overhauls, demographic engineering, and symbolic projections like the mural of Greater India, the BJP is not merely governing, it is redefining the nation. Kashmir is no longer the exception; it is the ideological and operational template. As this model spreads to other regions and institutions, the transformation of India appears less like a phase of governance and more like the establishment of a new political order, one that blurs the lines between nationalism and expansionism, integration and erasure.
The test case is complete. The doctrine is now in motion.
