With Kashmir Day being observed, it is important to remind that the dispute is not a frozen conflict of the past but a living reproach to the exposure of international law, constitutionalism, and human rights, and Pakistan has not forgotten Kashmir. Regardless of insistent attempts by India to rebrand the problem as an internal affair, Kashmir is a known international conflict, the unresolved condition of which is no less disruptive to South Asia and makes the international system itself less credible. The legal basis of the Kashmir conflict is deeply rooted in the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council, which recognizes the land as disputable and reaffirms the right of the Kashmiri population to shape their future by plebiscite. These resolutions have not expired or been nullified; they have simply been disregarded by India. The fact that India insists on bilateralism and internal sovereignty does not deny that the dispute has an international character; rather, it is part of a broader trend of selective compliance with international obligations, in which power politics is permitted to overshadow legal commitments.
This ignorance of international law culminated in August 2019, when India abrogated Articles 370 and 35-A unilaterally, changing the special status of Kashmir. They were not administrative concessions but the constitutional expression of Kashmir’s controversial and autonomous position. Their eviction, which was to happen without the approval of the Kashmiri population and under the circumstances of the unparalleled military curfew, constituted a radical change of the legal and political identity of the territory. The dissolution of the with the region’s limited autonomy and its relegation to a centrally governed territory, in effect, changed constitutional pluralism through executive fiat in India. While this was not the first time India had taken decisions regarding Kashmir unilaterally. Kashmir also had its prime minister and president until 1953, when New Delhi imprisoned its prime minister, Sheikh Abdullah, and did away with the office in what it claimed was an attempt to integrate the Muslim-populated state with the rest of India.
What followed has been more significant than the abrogation itself. The abrogation of Article 35-A abolished historic rights to land and permanent residence that limited ownership to local residents. Instead, new domicile laws and settlement policies were introduced, which legalized the region to demographic transformation. This has raised serious questions about demographic engineering, in which population movements are used to manipulate an area’s political outcomes, a practice never intended to be imposed in such a manner. These practices are not only threatening the norms of so-called democracy in India but also the sole principle of political legitimacy, which has to emanate from the will of the governed.
constitutional and demographic modifications have been imposed by a vast security apparatus, which has made exceptional measures an ordinary form of governance. Kashmir is among the most militarized areas in the world, where curfews, mass detentions, surveillance, media, and civil society restrictions have become the new norm. The constant imposition of internet shutdowns that lasted for a staggering 552 days, along with communication blackouts, has served as an instrument of collective punishment rather than a valid security measure. The human rights abuse in Kashmir are not a one-off event of a policy regime set out to stifle opposition and avert political mobilization.
The central theme of such repression is denying the Kashmiri people the right to self-determination. This right is acknowledged as one of the key ones by international law, but the post-2019 strategy of India seems to be directed to make this right obsolete by altering the political and demographic environment on the territory. By chaining up native voices and disrupting political leadership, the state does not intend to end the conflict but to outlast it. History, on its part, does not provide much evidence for the assumption that conflicts based on denied self-determination can be overcome by coercion or legal manipulation. Such strategies more frequently create alienation and reinforce resistance.
The strategic context of the Kashmir dispute grants it the status of a global tragedy, in addition to being a regional one. Kashmir has been at the heart of more than 75 years of animosity between India and Pakistan. Every crisis on the Line of Control has the threat of escalation, miscalculation, and unwanted war. In 2019, unilateral decisions by India disrupted the status quo in crisis-management processes and reduced the margins in the diplomatic sphere, which could easily turn into a local conflict.
Militarization of Kashmir is a constant process, and unresolved grievances and narrowing political space keep the situation in a state of chronic instability. This strategy takes the form of a vicious circle where repression breeds resentment and resentment begets repression. The danger of a military escalation between India and Pakistan cannot be ruled out as a hypothetical risk in such a scenario. It is also a constitutive element of a conflict intentionally left unresolved. The Indian policy towards Kashmir is based on a conviction that absorption, silence, and population recalibration could be used to create a stable situation. But the stability that is not founded on justice is inherently weak. Changes in the constitution cannot replace consent, and development rhetoric cannot hide political dispossession. In its effort to address Kashmir by acting unilaterally, India has never shut the door; it has internationalized the repercussions.
The denial of justice in Kashmir is not only costly to the region but also to the entire world, as Kashmir Day proves. It undermines belief in international law, undermines democratic standards, and perpetuates one of the most dangerous fault lines in world politics. The Kashmiri people will not be settled until they are returned as the primary political participants instead of being mere recipients of policy, and the dark cloud that the conflict casts over regional and international peace will further darken. Pakistan always stands with Kashmir.
Be the first to comment