Kashmir

1. Kashmir's Rich History of Diverse Rule and Cultural Synthesis

If on earth there be a paradise of bliss, it is this, it is this, it is this.

A land of beauty. Kashmir, historically known for its extraordinary beauty, has a long and complex past shaped by various rulers and cultural influences, including Buddhist, Hindu, and Muslim dynasties. Mughal emperors like Jehangir were captivated by its natural splendor, describing it as a paradise. This history fostered a unique cultural synthesis, blending Persian, Indian, and local traditions in arts, music, and language.

Religious tolerance. Despite periods of forced conversion and conflict, Kashmir developed a tradition of relative religious tolerance, heavily influenced by Sufi mysticism. Figures like Habba Khatun, a peasant queen and poet, exemplified a gentle version of Islam integrated with local practices, resisting clerical rigidity and giving literary form to the Kashmiri language. This syncretic tradition remains strong, influencing Kashmiri identity and explaining indifference to more militant religious forms.

Cycles of conquest. The valley experienced cycles of conquest and rule by different powers, including the Mughals, Afghans, Sikhs, and finally the Dogra maharajas under British patronage. Each era left its mark, often involving exploitation, heavy taxation, and suppression of the local population, particularly under Sikh and Dogra rule, which led to mass impoverishment and emigration. This history of external control laid the groundwork for future struggles for self-determination.

2. Partition's Unfinished Business: Disputed Accession and Conflict

Kashmir is the unfinished business of Partition.

The pivotal moment. The 1947 Partition of British India into India and Pakistan left the fate of princely states, including Muslim-majority Kashmir ruled by a Hindu maharaja, to their rulers, ideally considering the people's wishes. Maharaja Hari Singh delayed his decision, leading to an invasion by Pakistani tribesmen and subsequent accession to India in exchange for military aid. This provisional accession, pending a plebiscite, ignited the first Indo-Pakistan war.

A divided land. The UN-brokered cease-fire in 1949 established a Line of Control, dividing Kashmir into Indian-administered and Pakistan-administered territories. This partition, achieved through force and political maneuvering rather than a plebiscite, created a lasting dispute. The failure to resolve Kashmir's status became a central point of contention, fueling subsequent wars and decades of conflict between India and Pakistan.

Betrayal of trust. Sheikh Abdullah, the prominent Kashmiri nationalist leader, initially supported accession to India based on Nehru's promise of autonomy and a future plebiscite, viewing Pakistan's Muslim League as reactionary. However, India's subsequent actions, including Abdullah's dismissal and imprisonment, were seen as a betrayal of this trust and a move to integrate Kashmir fully against the people's will, deepening Kashmiri resentment and the desire for self-determination.

3. India's Broken Promises and Erosion of Kashmiri Autonomy

Abdullah was mistaken only in his belief that Nehru would protect them.

Autonomy undermined. Despite Article 370 of the Indian Constitution granting Jammu and Kashmir special autonomous status, India progressively eroded this autonomy over the decades. Indian jurisdiction expanded beyond defense, foreign affairs, and communications, effectively annulling agreements like the Delhi Agreement and curbing civil liberties. This centralization of power contradicted the initial understanding of Kashmir's relationship with India.

Political manipulation. India frequently interfered in Kashmir's internal politics, dismissing elected governments, imposing governor's rule, and rigging elections, notably in 1987. This manipulation undermined democratic processes and fueled widespread disillusionment among Kashmiris, convincing many that India would never allow them genuine self-governance or the right to choose their representatives freely. The appointment of figures like Jagmohan, known for his Hindu nationalist views, further alienated the Muslim majority.

Suppression of dissent. The Indian state responded to growing disaffection and protests with increasing ferocity, using arbitrary arrests, curfews, raids, and checkpoints. Leaders like Sheikh Abdullah were repeatedly imprisoned for advocating for Kashmiri rights. This systematic suppression of political dissent and civil liberties created an environment of fear and repression, pushing some towards armed resistance as the only perceived option against Indian rule.

4. Pakistan's Complex Role in Fueling Militancy and Instability

The vacuum he left would soon be filled by the men with beards, infiltrated, armed and funded by Pakistan.

Strategic interests. Pakistan has consistently disputed Kashmir's accession to India and has sought to integrate the Muslim-majority region into its territory. While claiming to support Kashmiri self-determination, Pakistan's actions have often been driven by strategic interests and a desire to counter India's influence. This has involved providing political, material, and military support to various militant groups operating in Kashmir.

Infiltration and proxy war. Pakistan-sponsored infiltration of armed groups, particularly after the rigged 1987 elections and the rise of indigenous resistance, significantly escalated the conflict. Groups linked to Pakistan's military intelligence (ISI), including those with Islamist agendas, crossed the Line of Control to fight Indian forces. This proxy war, while intended to weaken India's hold, also led to intra-militant violence and atrocities against civilians, including Kashmiri Pandits.

Internal contradictions. Pakistan's own internal political instability, military dictatorships, and the rise of Islamist extremism have complicated its stance on Kashmir. The country's ruling elite has often used the Kashmir issue for domestic political gain, sometimes at the expense of a genuine resolution. The presence of powerful militant groups within Pakistan, often linked to the state apparatus, makes it difficult for any Pakistani government to fully disengage from the conflict or control the actions of these non-state actors.

5. The Devastating Human Cost of Militarization and State Violence

Over 60,000 people have been tortured in interrogation centres...

A militarized zone. Kashmir is one of the most densely militarized zones in the world, with hundreds of thousands of Indian soldiers, paramilitary, and police personnel enforcing control. This overwhelming military presence permeates every aspect of daily life, marked by checkpoints, bunkers, and constant surveillance. The militarization has normalized violence and created a climate of fear and insecurity for the civilian population.

Systematic human rights abuses. The Indian forces have been widely accused of systematic human rights violations, including extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, torture, rape, and arbitrary detention. Testimonies reveal horrific abuses in interrogation centers, designed to break the will of the people and punish dissent. The discovery of unmarked and mass graves containing unidentified bodies further highlights the scale of these atrocities and the impunity enjoyed by the security forces under laws like the Armed Forces Special Powers Act.

Psychological trauma. Beyond physical violence, the constant threat of repression, the loss of loved ones, and the lack of justice have inflicted deep psychological trauma on the Kashmiri population. The stories of torture survivors, grieving families, and 'half-widows' (women whose husbands have been disappeared) illustrate the profound and lasting impact of the conflict on individuals and communities. This suffering is often ignored or downplayed by the outside world.

6. The Rise of Mass Non-Violent Protest Demanding Freedom

Raised in a playground of army camps... the younger generation suddenly discovered the power of mass protest...

A new phase. Following years of armed insurgency and intense militarization, Kashmir witnessed a shift towards mass, non-violent protests, particularly since 2008. Large numbers of people, often young, took to the streets armed with stones, demanding freedom (azadi) and an end to Indian rule. These protests, described as an 'intifada-like popular revolt', demonstrated a broad base of popular discontent beyond militant groups.

Overwhelming numbers. The sheer scale of these demonstrations, involving hundreds of thousands of people, often overwhelmed the heavily armed security forces. Despite facing violent repression, including killings of protesters, the movement persisted, fueled by collective memory of past injustices and a newfound sense of dignity in speaking out. This non-violent resistance presented a challenge to the Indian state, which had primarily focused on counter-insurgency operations.

People in charge. These mass uprisings were largely spontaneous and driven by the people, with separatist leaders often following rather than leading the movement. The protests became a form of plebiscite, a clear expression of the Kashmiri people's desire for freedom and rejection of Indian rule. The use of slogans, graffiti, and public gatherings became powerful tools of dissent, demonstrating that the voice of the Kashmiri people could not be easily silenced.

7. International Indifference and Geopolitical Interests Overshadow Human Rights

Why, then, does the immense human suffering of Kashmir occupy such an imperceptible place in our moral imagination?

A neglected crisis. Despite the immense human suffering and the scale of violence in Kashmir, the issue receives relatively little attention on the international stage compared to other conflicts. Western governments, media, and civil society often remain cautious or indifferent, failing to highlight the human rights abuses or advocate for a resolution based on the Kashmiri people's aspirations. This silence is a source of bitterness and feeling of neglect among Kashmiris.

Geopolitical priorities. International powers, particularly the United States, prioritize strategic relationships with India, viewing it as a counterweight to China and a potential economic partner. This geopolitical calculus often overshadows concerns about human rights in Kashmir. Despite initial promises, leaders like Barack Obama have largely remained silent on the issue, advised to maintain strategic public silence to avoid jeopardizing relations with India.

Framing the narrative. The dominant international narrative is often influenced by India's portrayal of the conflict as primarily a terrorism problem sponsored by Pakistan, rather than a legitimate struggle for self-determination. This framing, sometimes amplified by Western commentators who view India as a democratic ally against 'Islamofascism', makes it difficult for the Kashmiri perspective to gain traction and for the international community to hold India accountable for its actions.

8. The Demand for Azadi (Freedom) as the Core Kashmiri Aspiration

Hum kya chahte? Azadi!

The central cry. The core demand of the Kashmiri people, expressed through decades of resistance, both armed and non-violent, is 'Azadi' – freedom. This aspiration signifies an end to Indian rule and the right to determine their own future, whether through independence or other forms of self-governance. This desire is deeply rooted in their history of external control and the experience of repression under Indian administration.

Complex interpretations. While the demand for Azadi is unified, the vision for a future Kashmir is complex and debated among Kashmiris. Some advocate for complete independence, others for accession to Pakistan, and some for a united Kashmir encompassing all divided territories. The slogan "Pakistan se rishta kya? La ilaha illallah" (What is our bond with Pakistan? There is no god but Allah) reflects a complex mix of religious identity, solidarity with Pakistan against India, and a distinct Kashmiri identity.

Beyond simple binaries. The Kashmiri struggle cannot be reduced to a simple choice between India and Pakistan. It is a movement for dignity, justice, and the right to live free from military occupation and state violence. While some expressions of this demand are rooted in Islamic identity, the movement encompasses diverse perspectives and seeks a future where all communities, including minorities, have their rights protected. The challenge lies in translating this unified demand for freedom into a concrete, inclusive vision for a future state.

9. Media Suppression and the Obscuring of Kashmir's Reality

Kashmir has turned out to be a ‘great suppression story’.

Controlling the narrative. The Indian state actively works to control the narrative surrounding Kashmir, often portraying the resistance as solely Pakistan-sponsored terrorism and downplaying the indigenous nature of the movement and the extent of human rights abuses. This involves censoring information, intimidating journalists, and promoting a state-approved version of events. The veteran journalist Masood Hussain described Kashmir as a "great suppression story" due to the difficulty in reporting the truth.

Complicit media. Sections of the Indian corporate media often act in concert with the government and intelligence agencies, amplifying falsehoods and denying legitimacy to protests. Choleric TV anchors and partisan journalists routinely demonize Kashmiri dissenters and fail to report on state violence and human rights violations. This effective censorship prevents the Indian public from fully understanding the reality of the situation in Kashmir and fosters indifference or hostility towards Kashmiri aspirations.

Kashmir sees itself. Despite external attempts to obscure the truth, Kashmiris themselves are acutely aware of their reality. Writers, journalists, and ordinary people document and remember the events, the violence, and the suffering. As Basharat Peer wrote, "Kashmir sees the unedited Kashmir." This internal memory and narrative stand in contrast to the suppressed and distorted versions presented to the outside world, highlighting the gap between lived experience and external perception.

10. Seeking Resolution Beyond the Status Quo: A South Asian Vision

Economic and political logic dictates the formation of a South Asian Union, a voluntary confederation of republics.

The impasse. The current situation in Kashmir is an intractable impasse, with India unwilling to concede self-determination and Pakistan unwilling to abandon its claims and support for militant groups. Bilateral talks between India and Pakistan have failed to produce a lasting solution, and confidence-building measures have not fundamentally altered the reality of military occupation and repression for Kashmiris. The status quo is unsustainable and perpetuates violence and suffering.

A regional solution. Some argue that the resolution of the Kashmir dispute requires a broader regional framework, moving beyond the narrow national interests of India and Pakistan. A vision for a South Asian Union, a voluntary confederation of republics including India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and potentially others, is proposed as a way to address historical disputes and foster cooperation. Within such a union, Kashmir could be granted complete autonomy, with its frontiers guaranteed by the member states.

Shared sovereignty. This approach suggests that shared sovereignty and regional integration could provide a path towards peace and stability, allowing Kashmir to become a secular, multicultural space open to citizens from both India and Pakistan. It would also enable a massive reduction in military expenditure across the region, freeing up resources for development. However, achieving such a vision requires overcoming deep-seated mistrust, nationalist ideologies, and the vested interests that benefit from the ongoing conflict.

Last updated: May 23, 2025