In the aftermath of the tragic accidental explosion at the Nowgam police station near Srinagar, former Jammu & Kashmir chief minister and Jammu & Kashmir National Conference (JKNC) president Farooq Abdullah has urged for caution, accountability, and a renewed commitment to peace between India and Pakistan. Speaking after the incident, which claimed nine lives and left 32 injured, Abdullah reflected not only on the immediate failures that led to the blast but also on the broader geopolitical implications, referencing past counterterrorism operations such as Operation Sindoor.

The incident, which occurred late Friday night, involved explosive material seized from a recently busted terror module in Faridabad. Authorities had been in the process of sampling and analyzing the material over a span of two days when the explosion took place. Abdullah used the moment to highlight systemic shortcomings and the need for better handling protocols during dangerous operations.

A Tragic Incident That Exposed Critical Gaps

The Nowgam blast transpired at around 11:20 PM when forensic experts and police personnel were extracting samples from a substantial quantity of explosives, chemicals, and reagents confiscated from the terror module earlier in November. According to Jammu and Kashmir Director General of Police (DGP) Nalin Prabhat, the explosives were highly unstable and required delicate handling. Despite the caution exercised, something went fatally wrong, resulting in the destruction of lives, infrastructure, and trust in local safety protocols.

The nine individuals killed in the explosion represented a cross-section of the investigation and administration involved in the case. The victims included a member of the Special Investigation Agency (SIA) of the J&K Police, three experts from the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL), two crime scene photographers, two revenue officials accompanying the magistrate’s team, and even a tailor who had been assisting the team. The 32 injured comprised 27 policemen, two revenue officers, and three civilians living near the police station.

This devastating toll immediately prompted questions about whether proper precautions had been taken, whether the personnel involved had adequate expertise, and whether the sampling should have been conducted in a more controlled, specialized environment.

Farooq Abdullah’s Sharp Critique: “This Was Our Mistake”

Farooq Abdullah did not mince words in attributing responsibility. He criticized the way in which the explosive material was handled, stating bluntly that the local authorities erred by proceeding without consulting experts equipped to manage such high-risk material.

“This is our mistake,” he said. “Those who understand this explosive better should have been consulted first about how to deal with it, instead of trying to handle it ourselves. You saw the result—nine people lost their lives, and so much damage was caused to the houses there.”

His criticism targets not only the technical missteps but also the culture of overconfidence that sometimes surrounds sensitive security operations. Abdullah’s emphasis was that highly unstable materials require trained professionals with specialized knowledge, not routine handling by personnel—even skilled personnel—who may not have been fully prepared for the complexity or volatility of the seized substances.

Operation Sindoor and Lessons from the Past

In linking this incident to Operation Sindoor, Abdullah underscored a pattern of heavy-handed responses that, in his view, have yielded little positive outcome while costing lives and straining border stability. Operation Sindoor, which involved intensive counterterror measures, remains controversial for its effectiveness, proportionality, and long-term impact on peace in the region.

“I hope no such thing (Operation Sindoor) will happen,” Abdullah said. “Nothing came out of it. Our people died. Our borders were compromised.”

He coupled this with a broader reflection on international relations, invoking former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s famous doctrine on neighbourhood diplomacy: that while friends may change, neighbours cannot. Abdullah argued that sustainable peace and stability require India and Pakistan to improve their relationship rather than engage in episodic, high-intensity operations that escalate tensions without addressing root causes.

A Call for Dialogue Over Escalation

Abdullah’s broader message was a plea for dialogue, de-escalation, and the prioritization of human lives over aggressive posturing. He stressed that regional peace depends not only on internal security measures but also on diplomatic engagement with Pakistan.

While he did not deny the need to address terror modules or threats emerging from such networks, he argued that military or police operations alone cannot provide lasting solutions. Instead, a stable environment requires cooperation, intelligence sharing, and efforts to reduce mistrust on both sides.

His comments also reflect the lived reality of Kashmiris, who often find themselves caught between cross-border tensions, internal security measures, and the human cost of both. Abdullah’s remarks, therefore, signal the need for a recalibrated approach—one that recognizes the limitations of force and the necessity of diplomatic efforts.

Official Explanation and Appeal Against Speculation

DGP Nalin Prabhat clarified during a press conference that the explosion was accidental and occurred despite careful handling. He emphasized that the nature of the explosives made the sampling procedure inherently risky. Prabhat discouraged speculation about alternative causes, urging the public to trust the factual assessment provided by investigators.

His insistence on avoiding speculation reflects an attempt to prevent misinformation and undue panic in a tense environment. Nevertheless, the incident has inevitably sparked debate on procedural lapses, the adequacy of safety measures, and the need for more robust forensic infrastructure.

The Broader Context: Security, Risk, and Responsibility

The Nowgam blast has reopened difficult conversations about how India handles seized explosives, especially in regions with a history of conflict. Forensic teams are often stretched thin, and not all facilities are equipped to manage large, volatile caches of chemicals. Many experts believe that explosive sampling should take place in isolated, controlled environments—well away from populated areas and with bomb-disposal specialists present throughout the process.

This tragedy also highlights an uncomfortable truth: that personnel involved in such operations often face extreme danger, sometimes without the protective systems, technologies, or training that equivalent teams in more developed security ecosystems may take for granted.

Moving Forward

Farooq Abdullah’s statements and the official briefings following the blast converge on one point: the need to reassess protocols to ensure such a tragedy does not happen again. Whether this leads to procedural reform, infrastructural upgrades, or broader shifts in Kashmir’s security strategy remains to be seen.

At the same time, Abdullah’s reminder—anchored in Vajpayee’s philosophy—that neighbours cannot be changed signals a desire for a long-term diplomatic route. It is a call to recognize that true security involves not only preventing terror modules but also preventing cycles of retaliation, miscommunication, and mistrust between nations.

For now, the grief of the families who lost loved ones, and the trauma of those injured, remains the most immediate and painful reminder of the cost of such lapses. The Nowgam blast stands as a somber testament to the need for better planning, better expertise, and a better commitment to peace—within borders and across them.