Politics of empathy: Sakeena Masood Itoo’s people-first leadership

By: Dr. Arif Ahmad Dar

One of the most remarkable aspects in the political life of Sakeena Masood Itoo was, possibly, the conscious development of the emotional quality of political capital of empathy. Empathy is the social and political currency of Kashmir, rather than an extractive quality. Decades of conflict, broken institutions and destabilized governance have changed the relationship between the citizens and the state and the gaps cannot be closed only with policy announcements. Here, empathy, as manifested in presence, listening, and in common rite, serves as an effective tool of politics, placing leadership in the social reality experienced but not in the remote authority.

Funeral attendance, visiting the hospital and family meetings were not a ritual and an appendices to official political activity. Political legitimacy itself consisted of it. The Kashmiri community is very communal in terms of their moments of sadness and vulnerability. A funeral is never a harmful family affair; it is a group event in which the social ties are confirmed and a community moral reputation is silently judged. Hospitals turn into the places of fear, hope and uncertainty meeting, and where lack of leadership or its presence are very acutely experienced. Gathering of families, particularly, when there was loss, illness or bad times, is one of the situations, when social hierarchies are blunt and human connection is of primary importance. Sakeena Itoo placed herself within the community by just being there among them rather than above them.

In this meaning of the term, empathy served as the mediator between state and citizen. When the institutional trust is undermined in any situation, the citizens tend to feel that the state is impersonal, dry or remote. Paper trails, unfriendly offices, and unhelpful decisions are involved. The stay of political representatives in offices may be threats to accentuate this remoteness. On the contrary, empathy led interaction bridges the divide. Whenever a leader is next to a bereaved family or pays a visit to a traumatized protester, she is acting as the state to face its face-to-face with humanity, without the veil of bureaucracy. This does not necessarily solve structural issues, but rather alters the emotional key of communication. The state is no longer abstracted but rather it becomes a reality that can be noticed and touched.

Second, empathy was also a reassurance-mechanism. Fear is a common phenomenon among society in conflicts and information usually lag behind. Families are concerned not only with the short-term loss but the next step such as safety, uncertainty of the law, economic survival, and social stigmatization. When dealing with crises, the leader is always there to help people to know that they are not alone in dealing with such anxieties. Reassurance does not need promises it needs acknowledgment. Sakeena Itoo played a stabilizing role by listening to the customers, providing solace, and being with them even at times when the solution to the situation was weak. This concession was useful in taming temper, alleviating panic, and establishing a platform to conduct dialogue, which were political in nature despite being not easy to measure.

Third, empathy was used as a replacement of the lacking institutional trust. In what is construed to be unreliable in institutions, the functions of institutions have a tendency to be assumed by personal relations. Human beings depend on those whom they trust in intermediating with systems that they do not trust. Under this consensus empathy takes the shape of informal governance. When a leader appears, listens and responds in a caring manner, he becomes a reliable channel using which the citizens are able to interact with the state. Such trust allows curbing the effects of systemic deficiencies, but not eradicating them since it maintains a line of communication. Consumer of empathetic experience over time is a build up of reputational capital, which is knowledge that the leader is likeable, sensitive, and rooted to the community life.

The meaning of political visibility also underwent changing as a result of these practices. In a lot of political societies, the visibility is attained via rallies, speeches, and press appearances. On the social plane of Kashmir visibility is attained through common places such as quietly attending a funeral, visiting an injured youngster or an unhappy family. It is the relational, not performative such visibility. It is an indication of unity devoid of extravagance. This style of engagement fitted well with the overall manner of politics exhibited by Sakeena Itoo where the focus was on listening as opposed to speech and availability as opposed to declaration.

Emotional discipline was also required in the politics of empathy. Spending time in environments of lamentations and hardship demands the ability to recover pain without going into an overly emotional state. It involves being restrained- when it is better to talk and when it is better to keep silent. It presupposes respect to the norms in society and being aware of the way emotions are transmitted in communities. This needed to be boiled down into a style of leadership that had been characterized by calmness and restraint. In this setting, empathy was not sentimentality but the act of practicing seriousness, which was based on the knowledge of social codes and personal limits of emotions.

Significantly, there was no substitute in empathy-based engagement with governance; it was an addition. The visits at the funeral and in the hospital could be succeeded by tangible followed up- taking care of the medical process, solving some administrative problem or seeking compensation. Nevertheless, the initial compassionate interaction was important even in the case of outcomes that were delayed or limited. The individuals separated weakness and apathy. When they perceived themselves to be regarded it was more agreeable to them to accept delay. This differentiation is important in the societies where frustration with the institutions is easily converted into alienation.

Sakeena Itoo also reinforced her people-facing leadership position through long-term empathetic practice. This self was in opposition to the picture of remote authority figures, which interrelate on formal, especially on official, levels. Her politics were felt as something quotient and grounded. Some of the battle results or official openings were often experienced by constituents, but it was in the instance of weakness, which characterizes the social memory. These experiences defined her interactions with others in society not just in the sense that she was a representative of a group, but she was part of their emotional world.

With time the cumulative impact of such practices was the consolidation of trust. When the trust was built, her skills to mediate crisis, cope with expectations, and institutional constraints were improved. The empathy would therefore be the source and the magnifier of political performance. It made it possible to have a conversation where a confrontation would have been unsuccessful and a legitimacy would not have worked on its own in the absence of formal authority.

The politics of empathy did not exist on the periphery of this period; it was its rationality. Incorporating the element of political participation in joint social practices and vulnerability, Sakeena Itoo turned empathy into a stockpile of a long-lasting political capital. It closed the distance between the state and the citizen, it soothed the communities that were experiencing stress and it replaced the diminished trust in the institutions. These practices have seen her not just as some far-off figure of authority, but rather as a figure whose authority lay in her flesh and blood, tendencies and nurturing close to humanity elements that would have been invaluable in the complicated political landscape in the region of Kashmir.

The writer is a Contractual Assistant Professor at Govt. Degree College Kulgam.
Email: hsnarif37@gmail.com