By Pranav Asoori
Historical Context
In August of 1947, India and Pakistan were on the cusp of independence from British rule. The British, led by the then Governor General Louis Mountbatten, divided British India into the independent states of India and Pakistan. British India contained multiple princely states (states allegiant to the British but headed by an independent local monarch) along with states directly headed by the British. During the partition, the British granted the monarchs of the princely states the right to choose whether to cede to India or Pakistan. In general, the Muslim majority states went to Pakistan while the Hindu majority states went to India, although India is a secular nation.
The region of Kashmir presented a peculiar case because while the majority of the population was Muslim, the ruler, Maharaja Hari Singh, was Hindu. The princely state of Junagadh faced a similar conflict, considering that the Muslim ruler of Junagadh[2] wished to accede to Pakistan, against the desires of his people. General Mountbatten recommended that Junagadh should accede to India because India surrounds the largely populated state. When the ruler ceded to Pakistan, India annexed Junagadh. This was done on the pretext that the Pakistani Prime minister Muhammed Ali Jinnah had stated that Hindus and Muslims could not live in one nation [3].
In contrast to the situation in Kashmir, General Mountbatten recommended that Kashmir should accede to India, given the fact that India is a secular state. Hari Singh, the local monarch, decided that Kashmir would oppose acceding to India while the Hindus and Sikhs would oppose acceding to Pakistan [5]. During this period of ambivalence in Kashmir, there were outbursts of riots in certain districts of the region targeting the ruler. This led to Pakistani tribesmen and militia crossing into Kashmir, in an attempt to take over the city of Srinagar, looting and plundering the region[6]. Ruler Hari Singh pleaded with India to aid him against this anarchy and in doing so ceded Kashmir to India. This led to the First Indo-Pakistani War, also known as the First Kashmir War, which was fought between Indian soldiers and Pakistani tribesmen. In 1948, Pakistani armed forces entered the war and by the end of the year, both sides had solidified their positions in Kashmir. India and Pakistan agreed to a ceasefire agreement and a line of control (LOC) was established[7]. India retained roughly two-thirds of Kashmir, while Pakistan obtained control over a third of the region. This war marked the first of the many wars and conflicts between these two nations over Kashmir.
The establishment of the LOC in 1948, however, was insufficient as both nations were not satisfied and continued to dispute over it. The United Nations then played the role of the mediator and on the 21st of April, 1948, the United Nations Security Council passed and adopted resolution 47[8]. The resolution declared that a commission of five members (this commission was initially established by resolution 39) would go to the Indian subcontinent and aid India and Pakistan in restoring peace in Kashmir. The commission prepared to aid these countries in planning a plebiscite to decide Kashmir’s accession. A three-step process was recommended to ease tensions:
· Evacuation of all Pakistani nationals who entered Kashmir to fight
· Indian forces in the region would be reduced
· A referendum administrator, who was nominated by the UN, would be appointed by India
India accepted this resolution and Pakistan rejected it, leading to the failure of troop withdrawal and holding a referendum. Further international negotiations were attempted, but they failed as either India or Pakistan rejected the terms every time.
Kashmir’s Importance
The primary reason for this conflict in Kashmir is due to how valuable Kashmir is in terms of national security, geography and resources [9]. The vital Indus river flows through Kashmir. The Indus river is extremely crucial to agriculture in Pakistan. It is especially important in the lower Indus valley region, where rainfall is uncommon. Similarly, India depends on the Indus for irrigation, resulting in the Indus and its tributaries being highly sought after. The nation that controls this region can effectively cut off the water supply to the other nation. To manage these fears and ensure a fair distribution of the water from this river, the Indus Water Treaty [10] was established on the 19th of September, 1960. Under this treaty, India retained control over the eastern tributaries of Beas, Ravi and Sutlej, while Pakistan gained control over the western rivers of Indus, Chenab and Jhelum. India controls roughly 16% of the total water carried by the river while Pakistan has the rest. Despite this treaty, Pakistan still fears that in a potential conflict this arrangement could be catastrophic. Since India controls the region of Kashmir through which the Indus flows, it would be easy for India to stop water from flowing into Pakistan. It is important to note that in previous wars, India did not stop the water supply, but from the Pakistani standpoint the possibility remains, making Kashmir precious to them. [11].
The Kashmiri rivers and water bodies also have the potential to generate hydroelectricity at great magnitudes. The state of Jammu and Kashmir largely depends on hydroelectricity for its energy demands. At the moment, Kashmir only produces around 3000 megawatts of electricity, but the region has the potential to produce up to 16,000 megawatts of power. The Indian administration wants to utilize this potential, making Kashmir an important region. The region is also home to many valuable resources such as uranium, gold, oil and natural gas.
From a geopolitical standpoint, Kashmir is vital, as it serves as a bridge between South Asia and Central Asia. For India, Kashmir is the only direct route to Central Asia and through Central Asia to Europe. Additionally, Kashmir plays a key role in the Belt and Road initiative. More importantly, the region is key for the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC)[12]. The CPEC is a large-scale bilateral project involving the development of infrastructure in Pakistan, establishment of transportation networks between China and Pakistan and the creation of numerous energy projects. Many of these projects are run through Pakistan administered Kashmir, which Pakistan aims to use as a direct connection between both Central Asia and China. Ultimately, Kashmir acts as a critical region between three nuclear nations: India, Pakistan and China. India controls roughly 55% of the total area, Pakistan controls 30% of the land and China controls 15% of it.
Kashmir from the Indian Viewpoint
According to India, Kashmir belongs to India, and both Pakistan and China are falsely laying claim on Indian territories. India views the instrument of accession that was signed by Maharaja Hari Singh as legally binding, hence legally and fairly giving Kashmir to India.
Kashmir is India’s only path to Central Asia and India does not have access to Central Asian and European countries directly through land without it. Kashmir is also extremely important to India’s national security [13]. The Siachen Glacier, which is located in Kashmir, is the only barrier between Pakistan and China. Without access to this region, China and Pakistan could combine forces and bring a united front close to large Indian cities. With India’s straining relationships with both China and Pakistan, India wants to maintain a stronghold over the region in order to prevent an attack from these nations.
Additionally, in 1963, Pakistan ceded the Shaksgam valley and Gilgit to China. This region was originally a part of Pakistan administered Kashmir [14]. Indian analysts claim that this was done in order to undermine India and in order to allow Chinese military presence in Kashmir. While India does not accept the accession, the country is nonetheless threatened. With China and Pakistan strengthening ties, increasing Chinese and Pakistani troops has made this region increasingly important.
There has also been a surge of Indian nationalism, accelerated by the nationalist Bhartiya Janata Party coming to power in 2014 with Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the helm[15]. Since the inception of the state of Jammu and Kashmir, the region and India have faced numerous terrorist attacks, both by outside terrorist groups and by local insurgents. In 2001, insurgents from this region along with terrorists from outside the area attacked the Indian Parliament, killing many citizens. There have been many incidents such as this, resulting in the deaths of thousands of civilians and Indian soldiers. These attacks have led to strong resentment and anger among the Indian people. Pakistan is often blamed for these attacks, especially due to the presence of multiple terrorist bases in Pakistan [16]. The Indian people want these deaths to stop and the government to decisively deal with these acts of terror. The Indian people have also developed feelings of anger and resentment towards primarily Pakistan, but also China for illegally taking over their territory. They believe Kashmir in its entirety belongs to India and severe action must be taken to reclaim the territory.
Kashmir from the Pakistani Viewpoint
Historically, Pakistan believes that Kashmir was illegitimately ceded to India by a ruler who did not represent the people of Kashmir. Additionally, since a majority of the Muslim majority states went to Pakistan, the country believes that Kashmir should belong to them. Kashmir is also important to Pakistan for strategic reasons[17], especially due to the plethora of resources in the region. Pakistan is largely dependent on the Kashmiri rivers. If India has complete control over Kashmir, it could potentially paralyze Pakistani agriculture and induce droughts.
Kashmir is the only direct link between Pakistan and China, a strong ally, making Kashmir important, both for military reasons and for economic development. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor goes through Kashmir, without which there would be no direct link to Pakistan from China. This direct link with China has been largely beneficial in terms of economic development, which resulted in the development of infrastructure and an increase in economic activity. Additionally, if India has complete control over Kashmir, India could move a large number of troops to the edge of the border, posing a large threat to Pakistani security. Losing Kashmir would not only cut off access to help from China, but also allow Indian troops to remain very close to important cities in Pakistan. This could prove devastating in times of conflict, leading Pakistanis to believe that they will be at the mercy of India if Kashmir is lost.
In general, the Pakistani people seem to be against India over this issue. Many are sympathetic towards the Kashmiris and believe that their lives will improve if Kashmir joins Pakistan. However, there is a sizable population that is rather tired of this conflict and criticizes the government for investing many resources in the Kashmiri conflict. The Pakistani administration has maintained the view that Pakistan cannot lose Kashmir. The administration also maintains that India has no legal or moral right over Kashmir and that Kashmir is rightly theirs. This has led Pakistan to call for UN mediation over the region.
Kashmir from the Kashmir viewpoint
The Kashmiri perspective is one that has been largely ignored by the world. This issue has stemmed due to ambiguity surrounding the instrument of accession signed by the ruler Hari Singh. Before the partition, Kashmir had approximately 4 million people. Of these, around 70% were Muslims, 25% were Hindus, and the remaining 5% were Buddhists and Sikhs [18]. Even before the time of the partition, there was a rising movement against the ruler, Hari Singh. The Muslim Conference led by Sheik Abdullah denounced the Maharaja and claimed that he was a danger to Islam. Over time, the conference lost its steam and a majority of its followers, causing Abdullah to embrace secularism. Nonetheless, Abdullah remained a prominent leader.
Later on, Mohammed Ali Jinnah, the future prime minister of Pakistan, and Abdullah became fierce adversaries. This negative relationship between Abdullah and Jinnah caused Abdullah to ally with Indian leaders. After the partition of India and Pakistan, Kashmir signed a standstill agreement with both nations while they decided the region’s fate. However, with the Pakistani tribesmen attacking India, Abdullah, as a representative to the Maharaja, went to India seeking help, leading to Kashmir’s accession India. Before the invasion, the situation in Kashmir was ambivalent. Many wished for Kashmir’s independence, but there was a large population that wished Kashmir would cede to either India or Pakistan. In 1953, Abdullah was arrested for attempting to create an independent Kashmir and having clandestine meetings with foreign powers. In 1954, The Kashmiri Constituent Assembly ratified Kashmir’s accession to India.
Peace did not last long in the region and a divide arose among the people of Kashmir[19]. There are also reports that indicate that many of the Kashmiri officials had become corrupt. In 1965, Pakistan invaded Kashmir, following a military coup that overthrew the democratic government. As a result of this, there was a rise of anti-Pakistan feelings in Kashmir. By this time, Kashmiri leaders seemed to have changed their tone, while many were still content with the accession to India. Beginning in 1980, there was a rapid Islamization of Kashmir. Names of cities were changed and propaganda was spread. Members of other religions were denounced as ‘spies’ or ‘outsiders.’ There is evidence suggesting nations like Saudi Arabia influenced and aided this process. Since this period of Islamization, there has been an increased amount of violence and conflict in the region.
The first large-scale act of violence was the exodus of the Kashmiri Hindus[20]. Thousands of Kashmiri Hindus were killed and forced to flee by Muslim mobs and Hindu temples were destroyed. Before this exodus, there were about 600,000 Hindus living in the region, and by the end only around 2000 to 3000 Hindus remained. There was a spread of radical Islam, where violence was encouraged against members of other religions. Children were recruited by insurgency groups and trained in violence. People were encouraged to sell their belongings to finance the purchases of weapons. These events sparked decades of violence and propaganda led by insurgency groups.
Since the exodus, violence and bloodshed in this region has only continued. Insurgent groups, terrorist organizations, Pakistani forces and Indian forces have consistently found themselves in conflict, leading to the death of thousands of people. As a result, there has been a significant increase in the number of military personnel and equipment in the region. Additionally, there has also been a steady rise of domestic terrorism[21]. This combination of military personnel, insurgents and terrorists has resulted in many human rights violations. Allegations have included the suppression of freedom of speech, mass homicides, kidnappings, torture and sexual violence amongs other violations. Insurgent and terrorist groups, the Pakistani military, and the Indian military share the blame. More recently, the Indian government completely cut off all means of communications and detained political leaders as a preemptive move to maintain law and order after the amendment of Article 370 of the Indian Constitution. While the Indian government attributes their decision to the preservation of peace, many have criticized this act as a violation of human rights. In fact, internet services were eliminated for 213 days. International and domestic actors, including organizations like Amnesty International, have called for an end of human rights abuse in Kashmir [22].
Currently, decades of violence and conflict have led to thousands of Kashmiris remaining desperate for a solution and end to the conflict[23]. There are still constant attacks by insurgent groups and terrorist organizations. Additionally, there remains an increased presence of military troops, who have been attributed to human rights violations. The Kashmiri people want an end to the constant violence by all of the groups present in the region. Increasingly, more Kashmiris are in support of the referendum that was supposed to have taken place during the partition. Additionally, there has been an increase in support for an independent Kashmir.
Recent Events
On the 14th of February, 2019, a convoy of vehicles carrying India’s Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) was attacked by a suicide bomber from the Pakistan based terrorist group Jaish-e-Mohamme in the Pulwama district of Kashmir, killing 40 CRPF troops. India blamed Pakistan to be responsible for the attack, but Pakistan denied any involvement[24]. Immediately, tensions flared between the two countries. In response to the attack, Indian fighter jets crossed the border and bombed the alleged Jaish-E-Mohammed bases in the Pakistani town of Balakot. Pakistan retaliated by conducting an airstrike on India, but there were no casualties. During a dogfight, an Indian fighter plane was shot down and the pilot who landed in Pakistan was captured. The two nations were at the brink of war, but, after negotiations, the tensions were eased and the pilot was returned to India.
In October of 2019, the Indian government led by Narendra Modi revoked Article 370 of the Indian Constitution [25]. Article 370 was intended to be a temporary provision that gave the state of Jammu and Kashmir a special status. According to this article, Jammu and Kashmir were allowed a certain degree of autonomy [26]. Jammu and Kashmir was allowed to have its own constitution, the ability to create its own laws and its own flag. However, the government of India would have control over matters such as defense and foreign affairs. Due to this article, Indians from other states were not allowed to buy land or settle in this state. Additionally, if a woman marries someone from an outside state, she loses her property rights.
The Modi government argued that Article 370 was intended to be a temporary provision and that it has been seven decades since its implementation. The government also claimed that the article is discriminatory in nature and hinders development. After returning for a second term, Prime Minister Modi amended this article. The state of Jammu and Kashmir lost its special rights. The region is now broken up into the ‘union territories’ or federally administered areas of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh.
This act was largely controversial and anticipating negative reactions, the Indian government mobilized large numbers of military personnel into the region. Communication systems, including the internet were shut down. The chief minister of the state and other prominent political leaders were detained preemptively. News agencies were curfewed and the entire region was placed under a lockdown. Human rights groups have criticized these acts as human rights violations. Pakistan strongly condemned this decision and stated its intent to counter the illegal steps by withdrawing its ambassador to India and suspending trade.
India’s actions strained their already tense relationship with Kashmir. Many Kashmiris were enraged by the restrictions placed on them, leading to more anti-India sentiments. Additionally, many Kashmiris believed that this is the Hindu nationalist government’s attempt to make Kashmir a Hindu state. The international response to these events was largely favorable to India. Many nations expressed their support for India and remarked that this was solely a domestic Indian matter.
Future Outlook and Conflict Resolution
Both India and Pakistan present strong evidence that Kashmir rightfully belongs to them, making it difficult to discredit either side’s arguments. Additionally, Kashmir is incredibly valuable to both the nations and neither country would willingly surrender Kashmir. Thousands of soldiers and civilians have faced violence and conflict and there are numerous reports of human rights violations in the region. In both Pakistan and India there is increasing sympathy for the Kashmiris, however, at the current moment, there is little hope for change in the region.
Recently, India has gained a lot of international support. Rapidly growing as an economy and as a military power, India has become a desirable ally and trade partner for many nations. The positive international response to the amendment of Article 370 is an example of this inclination. Most nations, including the United States, Australia and UAE supported India’s decision. Going forward, this international support will likely only continue. India faces little international pressure to renegotiate the terms of Kashmir with Pakistan. Multiple nations have scrutinized Pakistan, calling for Pakistan to withdraw its support of terrorist activities and funding terrorist organizations. Pakistan certainly faces the brunt of international scrutiny in this matter.
India has little reason to withdraw from conflict given that Kashmir is very valuable to the nation. Apart from national security, future plans of channeling hydroelectricity and the abundance of natural resources make the region critical. Additionally, with nationalist and anti -Pakistan sentiments rising in India, a majority of the people do not wish to lose Kashmir to Pakistan. The nationalist Modi government’s persona of hard negotiation and decisive mannerism in foreign relations was a significant factor in their triumph in the Indian elections. Many political analysts have credited Modi’s overwhelming victory for his second term to his swift and decisive retaliation on the terrorist camps in Pakistan. Additionally, India has not faced severe economic or political repercussions due to the Kashmiri conflict. Given the current events, India is unlikely to give up its claim on Kashmir. On the contrary, India seems to be moving towards completely integrating Kashmir.
Similarly, Pakistan is unlikely to change its stance given that Kashmir is very valuable. The country’s beneficial relationship with China depends on the region. Kashmir also provides vital access to rivers that fuel Pakistani agriculture. Although Pakistan has been under international scrutiny, there has not been significant internal or external pressure to resolve the conflict. While Pakistan may be weaker in terms of military strength, it is still a nuclear power. In the events of war, mutually assured destruction is guaranteed. China also has a strained relationship with India and is an ally of Pakistan, so the chances of an Indian invasion are low. Additionally, the Pakistani economy is already declining, losing Kashmir would only serve to damage the economy.
Although there is some demand for independence in Kashmir, it is unclear as to whether a majority of Kashmiris would want an independent nation instead of an accession to one of the two nations. Additionally, there are fears around the world that an independent Kashmir would not last. An independent Kashmir would be surrounded by three nuclear states and plagued with multiple terrorist organizations. Given these threats, Kashmir would be forced to rely on one of the three surrounding nations for military protection. Analysts such as T.V Paul predict that an independent Kashmir would quickly crumble under anarchy and terrorism. There are fears that such a nation would simply become another terrorist-ruled state. Hence, both India and Pakistan are unlikely to allow the creation of an independent Kashmir and risk the creation of a terrorist-ruled state near national borders.
It is unlikely that there will be a referendum either[27]. A fair referendum would be hard to achieve, especially given that the Kashmiri sentiments seem not to have changed. During the partition, a sizable portion of Kashmiri people were pro-India. However, given the current events and the surge of anti-India sentiments amongst the Kashmiris, it is difficult to determine which side the Kashmiris support. India has no incentive to alter its position on Kashmir and their victory is not guaranteed through a referendum. Therefore, India has little reason to call for a referendum.
The plight of the Kashmiris is heard now more than ever before. In both India and Pakistan, there is a rising demographic that wants to end the constant loss of lives and sorrow due to conflict that has plagued Kashmir. As the world increases anti-terrorist activity, there is hope that Kashmir will experience peace. The global stage is keeping a close watch on Kashmir and many organizations are determined to improve the situation. Some experts are calling to make the LOC the official border. Although this option is more plausible than either India or Pakistan giving up Kashmir, the odds of achieving agreement still remain low, especially in the absence of a mutually hurting stalemate. Although the future looks bleak, the hope for improvement remains given growing international sympathy for the Kashmiris’ plight.
Pranav Astoori is a student studying at the University of Southern California.
[1] Korbel, Josef. “Danger in Kashmir.” Foreign Affairs, vol. 32, no. 3, 1954, p. 482., doi:10.2307/20031046.
[2] Ali, Rao Farman. “Kashmir: A Century Struggle (1846-1948).” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2015. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2625479.
[3] Lorne J. Kavic (1967). India's Quest for Security: Defence Policies, 1947-1965. University of California Press. pp. 32–. GGKEY:FN05HYT73UF.
[4] Raghavan, War and Peace in Modern India 2010, p. 108.
[5] Ankit, Rakesh (April 2010), "Pandit Ramchandra Kak: The Forgotten Premier of Kashmir", Epilogue, Epilogue -Jammu Kashmir, 4 (4): 36–39
[6] Copland, Ian (February 1991), "The Princely States, the Muslim League, and the Partition of India in 1947", The International History Review, 13 (1): 38–69, doi:10.1080/07075332.1991.9640572, JSTOR 40106322
[7] Who changed the face of '47 war?". Times of India. 14 August 2005. Archived from the original on 1 June 2014. Retrieved 14 August 2005.
[8] Bose, Kashmir: Roots of Conflict, Paths to Peace 2003, pp. 27–28.
[9]Chandra, S. (2011). Addressing Kashmir. Strategic Analysis, 35(2), 304-307. doi:10.1080/09700161.2011.542928
[10] Patricia Bauer. "Indus Waters Treaty:India-Pakistan [1960]". Encyclopedia Britannica website
[11] Water Sharing Conflicts Between Countries, and Approaches to Resolving Them" (PDF). Honolulu: Global Environment and Energy in the 21st century. p. 98.
[12] "CPEC investment pushed from $55b to $62b - The Express Tribune". 12 April 2017. Archived from the original on 13 April 2017.
[13] Dhall, Pinky. “Strategic Importance of Kashmir: A Conflict between India and Pakistan.” Strategic Importance of Kashmir: a Conflict Between India and Pakistan - Ignited Minds Journals, ignited.in/a/56157.
[14] Ahmed, Ishtiaq (1998), State, Nation and Ethnicity in Contemporary South Asia, A&C Black, p. 148, ISBN 978-1-85567-578-0: "As a friendly gesture some territory in the northern areas was surrendered to China and a treaty was signed which stated that there were no border disputes between the two countries."
[15] "Lok Sabha Election results 2019: EC declares results of all 542 seats, BJP wins 303". Zee News. 25 May 2019.
[16] "Pakistan, India meet on Kashmir". CNN. 18 April 2005. Retrieved 2 February 2010.
[17] "Kashmir jugular vein of Pakistan: Durrani". DAWN.COM. 16 December 2006. Retrieved 9 April 2018.
[18] Brush, J. E. (1949). "The Distribution of Religious Communities in India". Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 39 (2): 81–98. doi:10.1080/00045604909351998
[19] Ganguly, Šumit. “Explaining the Kashmir Insurgency: Political Mobilization and Institutional Decay.” International Security, vol. 21, no. 2, 1996, pp. 76–107., doi:10.1162/isec.21.2.76.
[20] “The Exodus of Kashmiri Pandits.” EFSAS, www.efsas.org/publications/study-papers/the-exodus-of-kashmiri-pandits/.
[21] Hajni, Mehraj. “The Kashmir Conflict: A Kashmiri Perspective.” ResearchGate, Unknown, 1 Jan. 2008, www.researchgate.net/publication/43645724_The_Kashmir_Conflict_A_Kashmiri_Perspective.
[22] Munshi, Miraj-U-Din. “A Kashmiri Perspective I.” Asian Affairs, vol. 22, no. 1, 1995, pp. 20–27. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/30172267. Accessed 20 June 2020.
[23] Whitehead, Andrew (Autumn 2004), "Kashmir's Conflicting Identities (Book Reviews)", History Workshop Journal, 58: 335–340, doi:10.1093/hwj/58.1.335, JSTOR 25472773
[24] "Pulwama attack: India will 'completely isolate' Pakistan". BBC. 16 February 2019.
[25] K. Venkataramanan (5 August 2019), "How the status of Jammu and Kashmir is being changed", The Hindu
[26] Akhtar, Rais; Kirk, William, Jammu and Kashmir, State, India, Encyclopaedia Britannica
[27] Wolpert, Stanley. “Potential Solutions to the Kashmir Conflict.” India and PakistanContinued Conflict or Cooperation?, 2010, pp. 94–105., doi:10.1525/california/9780520266773.003.0011.
