Two Years of Omar Abdullah Sarkar: A Reality Check
Unemployment, Accountability and the Unfulfilled Promise of Change
Ahmad Ayaz
As Omar Abdullah’s government completes two years in office on October 16, 2026, the time has come to assess whether the restoration of an elected government has translated into meaningful improvements in the lives of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. The return of an elected administration raised hopes of democratic empowerment, better governance, employment opportunities and greater accountability. People expected a leadership that would listen to their grievances, defend their interests and respond effectively to everyday challenges.
Two years later, however, the record remains mixed, with persistent concerns over unemployment, essential services, accountability and electoral commitments. More troubling is the apparent disconnect between public expectations and the government’s visible presence on the ground. For many people, the restoration of an elected administration has not generated the confidence that their representatives are firmly in control of governance and responsive to their interests.
An elected government must be more than a constitutional arrangement. Its presence must be felt through timely intervention, effective grievance redressal and tangible improvements in everyday life. People voted expecting their representatives to stand by them when the administration failed, hold officials accountable and ensure that pressing public concerns received urgent attention. Yet, on several important issues, the response has struggled to inspire the confidence people had anticipated.
The question, therefore, is not simply what the government has announced in two years, but what it has delivered—and whether the change promised during the elections is visible in the lives of ordinary citizens.
Unemployment: The Youth Cannot Live on Assurances
Unemployment remains one of Jammu and Kashmir’s most serious challenges. Educated young people continue to face uncertainty, with limited opportunities, recruitment delays and anxiety about their future adding to their frustration. The Periodic Labour Force Survey for 2024–25 reported an unemployment rate of 6.7 per cent among people aged 15 and above in J&K, compared with 3.5 per cent nationally.
Although the government has pursued recruitment initiatives and launched Mission YUVA to promote entrepreneurship, the real test lies in outcomes rather than announcements. The administration must publish transparent data on vacancies, completed recruitments, pending selections and jobs generated through entrepreneurship schemes. Recruitment processes must be timely, fair and merit-based.
Government employment alone cannot absorb the aspirations of the entire workforce. Tourism, horticulture, handicrafts, food processing, information technology and small industries offer opportunities for sustainable livelihoods, provided investment is encouraged through predictable policies, efficient clearances and adequate infrastructure. Without a credible employment roadmap and measurable results, the frustration of the youth will continue to weigh heavily on the government’s record.
Electoral Promises: Where Is the Concrete Action?
The National Conference secured its mandate on an electoral programme that raised considerable expectations. These commitments were central to the party’s appeal to voters and cannot now be treated as incidental campaign declarations.
Certain welfare initiatives deserve recognition where they have been implemented effectively. However, individual schemes cannot substitute for the wider commitments made to the electorate. Two years into its tenure, the government owes the public a transparent account of promises fulfilled, schemes approved, measures under implementation and commitments still awaiting action.
Where financial, administrative or constitutional constraints have delayed implementation, the government should explain the reasons and provide clear timelines. Electoral accountability requires more than assurances or repeated explanations. It requires visible progress and an honest assessment of what has been achieved and what remains outstanding.
The larger concern is that several important expectations have yet to be matched by sufficiently convincing action. People are entitled to judge the government by its performance rather than the intentions expressed during the election campaign.
Governance on the Ground: A Crisis of Public Confidence
Beyond unfulfilled promises, a troubling feature of the past two years has been the failure to establish a sufficiently visible, responsive and reassuring presence on the ground. The government has struggled, at times, to convey the impression that it is firmly engaged with the immediate concerns of the people it represents.
This does not mean every public problem can be resolved overnight or every administrative failure attributed directly to the elected leadership. Jammu and Kashmir’s constitutional and administrative arrangements impose genuine limitations. Nevertheless, people expect their elected representatives to intervene, coordinate departments and ensure that complaints do not disappear into bureaucratic procedures.
Ministers and legislators must remain accessible, particularly when essential services fail. Regular public engagement, time-bound grievance redressal and clear departmental accountability would help bridge the growing gap between the government and the people. Democratic representation loses much of its meaning when citizens cannot see a convincing response to the problems affecting their daily lives.
The Assembly Session: An Opportunity for Meaningful Debate
The recent Assembly session was expected to provide an important platform for deliberating on pressing issues confronting Jammu and Kashmir. People looked to their elected representatives to raise public concerns, seek answers from the government and engage in substantive debate on unemployment, essential services, economic uncertainty and electoral commitments.
The Assembly is not merely a venue for political exchanges or routine proceedings. It is the principal institution through which public grievances should find expression and the executive should be held accountable. At a time when people are seeking answers on several fronts, legislative proceedings should produce serious scrutiny, practical proposals and a clear sense of direction.
When the expected level of substantive deliberation and tangible follow-up is missing, public disappointment deepens. The government must answer difficult questions, while legislators across the political spectrum must demonstrate that public welfare takes precedence over political point-scoring. The quality of an elected government is reflected not only in its executive performance but also in the seriousness of legislative debate and accountability.
Srinagar’s Water Crisis: A Stark Test of Governance
The unprecedented drinking water difficulties witnessed in Srinagar have exposed serious concerns about administrative preparedness, coordination and responsiveness. Water is an essential public service, not a discretionary benefit. When households struggle to obtain it, they are entitled to demand an explanation and immediate relief.
The crisis has highlighted the gap between administrative assurances and the experience of residents. The government must identify the causes, examine administrative shortcomings and establish a credible plan for reliable supply. Emergency arrangements must be activated promptly, departments must coordinate effectively, and responsibility must be fixed wherever avoidable negligence is established.
People need water, not merely departmental assurances. When an essential service fails, the elected government must demonstrate urgency and leadership rather than leave residents struggling to navigate an unresponsive system. For Srinagar’s residents, the crisis has become a particularly stark test of whether their grievances matter.
Corruption, Electricity and Civic Enforcement
Corruption and administrative accountability remain important tests of governance. Allegations of irregularities, negligence and selective enforcement should not automatically be treated as established facts, but neither should legitimate complaints be dismissed without impartial investigation. Transparent procurement, time-bound inquiries and effective grievance-redressal mechanisms are essential to restoring public confidence.
Electricity supply presents another challenge. Long-term targets and infrastructure plans are important, but consumers remain concerned about reliability and affordability. Improvements must be reflected in the services households actually receive, rather than confined to policy announcements.
Srinagar’s civic administration also faces questions over sanitation and illegal construction. The persistence of unauthorised structures raises concerns about the effectiveness and impartiality of enforcement. Regulations cannot command public respect if citizens believe that influence determines who is held accountable. The government and the concerned civic authorities must ensure timely action, transparent procedures and equal application of the law.
Statehood: A Legitimate Demand, but Where Is the Roadmap?
Chief Minister Omar Abdullah has repeatedly argued that the restoration of statehood is essential for effective governance and the delivery of public services in Jammu and Kashmir. The Union Territory framework does impose genuine limitations on the elected government’s authority. However, the statehood question also raises legitimate questions about the preparedness, strategy and sustained efforts of the political leadership.
Before entering the Assembly elections, Omar Abdullah and the National Conference knew that the elections were being conducted under the Union Territory framework, with the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019, already in force. The limitations on the government’s powers were therefore not unforeseen. Having sought and secured the people’s mandate under these circumstances, the leadership was expected to have a clear strategy both for governing effectively within the existing framework and for pursuing the restoration of statehood.
Omar Abdullah has raised the issue with the Union government and pursued political engagement, but the public is entitled to ask whether these efforts have produced a clear roadmap, a definite timeline or a sufficiently firm commitment towards restoration. The assurances given by the Centre, including the commitment made in Parliament, created expectations that statehood would be restored. Yet the absence of a publicly established timeline has left the issue unresolved.
The demand cannot be advanced through statements alone. It requires sustained engagement with the Union government, coordinated efforts with political parties, parliamentary pressure and regular public reporting on progress. The government should explain what concrete steps have been taken, what assurances have been obtained and what further course of action is envisaged.
At the same time, the restoration of statehood cannot become a blanket explanation for shortcomings in areas where the elected government already has the authority to act. People voted for better services, employment opportunities and accountable administration under the circumstances prevailing at the time of the elections. The government must therefore pursue statehood with determination while making effective use of the powers currently available to it.
Healthcare, Education and Economic Development
Healthcare, education and economic development must also be assessed through outcomes rather than announcements. Better hospital infrastructure matters when it improves patient care, staffing and access to treatment. Investment in education matters when it strengthens public institutions and improves learning standards.
Similarly, development cannot be measured solely through project announcements or tourism figures. Its value lies in jobs created, incomes improved, businesses sustained and opportunities made available to ordinary households. Jammu and Kashmir possesses considerable potential in tourism, horticulture, handicrafts, food processing and emerging technology-related industries. Realising it requires consistent policies, infrastructure, efficient administration and meaningful support for local entrepreneurs.
The government must demonstrate how its development priorities are translating into tangible economic benefits. Growth that does not create sufficient livelihood opportunities or improve public services will do little to address the anxieties confronting households.
The Way Forward: Accountability Through Results
As the government enters its third year, it should introduce a publicly accessible performance dashboard tracking electoral commitments, recruitment, welfare delivery, infrastructure projects and departmental performance. Each major commitment should carry a clear status, the funds allocated and utilised, progress achieved and an expected completion date. Periodic reporting would help citizens distinguish genuine achievements from delayed promises.
Public consultation must also become more meaningful. Ministers and elected representatives should remain accessible, while departments must record grievances, communicate decisions and monitor corrective action. An elected administration must remain connected to the people between elections, not merely seek their support when the next electoral contest approaches.
The Verdict: The Promise of Change Remains Unfulfilled
Two years of Omar Abdullah Sarkar call for honest introspection rather than self-congratulation or political defensiveness. Certain initiatives deserve acknowledgement, and the limitations imposed by the existing constitutional framework must be recognised. Yet these considerations cannot obscure the concerns surrounding unemployment, essential services, accountability and electoral commitments.
The most troubling issue is the failure to create a convincing impression that the elected government is sufficiently present, responsive and firmly committed to the immediate interests of the people it represents. The public expected not merely a change in political arrangements but a visible improvement in governance.
The youth want employment and a credible future. Households need reliable water and electricity. Citizens expect impartial enforcement of the law, clean administration and an Assembly that debates their concerns seriously. They also expect the government to pursue the restoration of statehood through a clear and sustained strategy, rather than allowing the issue to remain an unresolved promise.
Ultimately, a government is judged not by the explanations it offers or the number of announcements it makes, but by the difference it makes to people’s lives. The third year must bring greater urgency, transparency and accountability, backed by measurable results.
For the people of Jammu and Kashmir, the fundamental question remains whether the government they elected has become the responsive and dependable institution they expected it to be. Two years on, that question deserves a convincing answer—not in words, but through performance.
A mandate for change is not a certificate of achievement; it is a continuing obligation to deliver.
(STRAIGHT TALK COMMUNICATIONS EXCLUSIVE. The author is a columnist. He can be reached at ahmadayaz08@gmail.com.)
(Disclaimer: The views are of the author and not of the Straight Talk Communications)
