Published Paper Details:

The terms radicalisation, violent extremism and all other associated processes evade a universally accepted definition. In most definitions, radicalisation is understood as a process and violent extremism is taken as an ideology. Essentially, when a person is a violent extremist, she/he can advocate and use violence as a means to achieve her/his ideological or political goals. However, there is no unilinear process from radicalization to violent extremism. From the perspective of radicalisation, the union territory of Jammu and Kashmir remains the most intractable problem for India. The Wahhabi ideology is used to indoctrinate young minds with conflict-driven narratives. This alien idea is inimical to the historic cultural traditions of the Kashmiri people and society. Many times, the radical ideology makes the traditional Kashmiri and Indian practices taboo to Islam. The penetration of the 'Arabised' version of Islam is deep and wide. On the other hand, the counter-radicalisation and-radicalisation efforts are sparse and non-coordinated. There are certainly good examples, even the goodwill activities taken up by the Indian army helped in empowering vulnerable individuals and communities, which can be seen as an indirect example. In recent times, some monumental steps were taken by the government of India which also contribute positively to the counter-radicalisation narrative (e.g revocation of Article 370). Unlike other places, the process of radicalization in Kashmir is also part of a 'proxy war' waged by foreign powers against India. The direct funding and support of the foreign powers make the traditional methods of deradicalisation less effective in this Union Territory.