Malik Owais
Kashmir has witnessed political promises before. It has celebrated new faces, embraced fresh voices, and placed enormous hopes in leaders who claimed they would change the course of its history. But every time a new political personality emerges, one question deserves to be asked: How long will the youth of Jammu and Kashmir continue to invest their hopes in political experiments?
Today, that question is no longer hypothetical. Aga Syed Ruhullah Mehdi has resigned from the National Conference and from his Srinagar parliamentary seat. The resignation is now a fact, not a possibility. And with it comes a moment of reckoning — not just for Ruhullah, but for every young Kashmiri who has been asked, yet again, to believe.
In 2019, Shah Faesal, the IAS topper from Jammu and Kashmir, became a symbol of hope for thousands of young Kashmiris. When he resigned from the civil services and launched the Jammu and Kashmir People’s Movement (JKPM), many youngsters saw him as a new political alternative. His words, his speeches, and his promises created an atmosphere of expectation. The youth believed that perhaps a new generation of leadership had finally arrived.
But what followed?
Within approximately eighteen months, Shah Faesal stepped down from his party’s leadership and announced his departure from politics. In 2022, he returned to the IAS. For many young people who had emotionally invested in his political journey, this was a deeply disappointing chapter.
His political journey left behind an uncomfortable question: What happens to the dreams of ordinary youngsters when the person who inspires them decides to take a different road?
Today, Jammu and Kashmir is witnessing another moment of political anticipation, this time surrounding Aga Syed Ruhullah Mehdi.
Ruhullah has emerged as a prominent voice against the National Conference leadership, accusing the party of abandoning its electoral commitments, particularly concerning the restoration of special status and the constitutional rights of Jammu and Kashmir. His resignation from the party and his parliamentary seat has attracted attention, particularly among young people who are disillusioned with conventional politics.
But is criticism enough to become a leader? Is opposing an established political party sufficient to earn the trust of an entire generation?
Kashmir does not need another emotional political episode. It needs a sustainable political movement.
Ruhullah speaks about returning to the people, consulting the youth, and collectively deciding the future political course. These are encouraging words. But the youth must remember that promises made in public meetings are not the same as political accountability demonstrated over time.
If a new political platform is formed, what will distinguish it from the political parties that have disappointed Kashmir before? Will it have a transparent organisational structure? Will young people receive meaningful decision-making powers, rather than merely filling the front rows of rallies? Will there be a clear programme addressing unemployment, education, economic insecurity, political rights, and democratic accountability?
Or will the youth once again become an audience for powerful speeches, emotional slogans, and ambitious political personalities?
The comparison with Shah Faesal is not necessarily a declaration that Ruhullah will follow the same path. Their political circumstances and journeys are different. But the comparison is a legitimate warning about the dangers of building an entire political movement around one individual.
The youth of Jammu and Kashmir must not confuse political popularity with political reliability.
It is worth remembering how much has already been asked of this generation. They have marched, they have voted, they have waited. They have watched leaders rise on waves of emotion and then disappear when the tide turned. They have seen movements built around personalities rather than principles, and they have paid the price for it — in lost years, in shattered expectations, and in a creeping cynicism that makes each new promise harder to believe than the last.
Kashmir’s youth are not naive. They are among the most politically aware young people in the country. They understand the difference between a speech and a strategy. They know that slogans do not create jobs, that rallies do not restore rights, and that emotional rhetoric does not pay the bills or secure a future. What they need is not another stirring voice — they need a structure they can hold accountable.
Ruhullah has an opportunity that many politicians never get: an opportunity to learn from the disappointments of the past. If he genuinely wants to represent a new political beginning, he must demonstrate that his commitment extends beyond his differences with the National Conference.
He must show consistency when the cameras are gone, when public attention fades, and when political decisions become difficult.
And most importantly, he must understand that the youth are not a political crowd to be mobilised whenever a new party is needed. They are citizens whose future, careers, and aspirations deserve respect.
Perhaps Aga Syed Ruhullah Mehdi will prove to be a courageous and principled leader who can give Jammu and Kashmir a meaningful political alternative. That possibility should not be dismissed.
But neither should he be handed a blank cheque of public trust.
Kashmir has already seen the Shah Faesal chapter. It cannot afford another chapter in which the hopes of its youth become casualties of an individual’s political journey.
The question is not whether Ruhullah can deliver powerful speeches against the establishment or challenge the National Conference leadership.
The real question is whether he can build something that survives beyond his own political ambitions.
Will Aga Syed Ruhullah Mehdi become the second Shah Faesal, leaving another generation disappointed, or will he prove himself to be the leader who transforms the hopes of Jammu and Kashmir’s youth into a genuine political movement?
Time will tell. But this time, the youth must watch, question, and demand accountability before they believe.
Because Jammu and Kashmir does not need another political hero created by emotions.
It needs leadership built on commitment, courage, consistency, and accountability.
The future of Kashmir’s youth must never again become an experiment in somebody else’s political ambitions. Leaders must now deliver — not exploit the emotions of a people who have already given too much. The youth of Kashmir have been patient long enough. They deserve action, not another promise. They deserve substance, not another symbol. And they deserve leaders who stay, not leaders who leave when the road gets difficult.
There is a deeper danger in repeating this cycle. Every time a political hope is raised and then abandoned, something in the collective psyche of the youth hardens. The first disappointment breeds caution; the second breeds cynicism; and the third breeds apathy. Kashmir cannot afford a generation that stops believing altogether — not because they lack conviction, but because they have been let down too many times by those who claimed to carry their dreams.
This is why the burden on Ruhullah is different from the burden on any ordinary politician. He is not merely being asked whether he can lead. He is being asked whether he can break a pattern that has already cost Kashmir dearly. The youth do not need him to be perfect; they need him to be consistent. They do not need him to promise the moon; they need him to tell them the truth about what is possible, and then stay to see it through.
If he can do that — if he can build an organisation that outlives his own popularity, if he can cede power to the young people he claims to champion rather than merely borrowing their energy for his own ascent — then he will have done something none of his predecessors could. He will have turned hope into habit, and habit into a durable politics.
But if he cannot, then the Shah Faesal comparison will not be a warning heeded; it will be a prophecy fulfilled. And Kashmir will have lost not just another leader, but another reason to trust anyone at all.
That is the stakes. That is why this time must be different. And that is why the youth of Jammu and Kashmir must demand delivery, not drama — because they have already given enough of their hearts to leaders who could not keep their word.
(The author is an Educationist with the
B.Tech, MBA as academic qualifications..The opinions expressed in the article are the author’s own and do not reflect the editorial opinion of this newspaper.)
