Kashmir Conflict: Origins, Exodus, and International Involvement

The provided text is a comprehensive overview of the Kashmir conflict, extracted from a Wikipedia article. It covers the historical background, including the partition, wars between India and Pakistan, and UN mediation attempts. The resource examines internal conflicts, political movements, the rise of separatism, and human rights abuses in the region. The text presents the national stances of India, Pakistan, China, and Kashmiri people regarding the region, alongside efforts to resolve the ongoing dispute. Furthermore, the resource explores Pakistan’s relationship with militants, Al-Qaeda’s involvement, and other recent developments, such as the revocation of Kashmir’s special status by India.

The Kashmir Conflict: A Study Guide

Quiz

Instructions: Answer the following questions in 2-3 sentences each.

1. What was the primary reason given by Maharaja Hari Singh for initially choosing to remain independent in 1947?
2. What was the “Instrument of Accession” and what did it entail?
3. What is the “Dixon Plan” and why did it ultimately fail?
4. Describe Nehru’s initial stance on a plebiscite in Kashmir and how it changed over time.
5. What was “Operation Gibraltar” and what was its goal?
6. What was the initial objective of the Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) and how did other groups change the dynamic of the conflict?
7. What is Article 370 of the Indian constitution, and what did it grant to Jammu and Kashmir?
8. Briefly describe the events of the 1989 popular insurgency and militancy.
9. What roles are associated with the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI)?
10. What impact has militancy had on the demographics of the Kashmir Valley?

Quiz Answer Key

1. Maharaja Hari Singh chose to remain independent initially because he believed that the State’s Muslims would be unhappy with accession to India, and the Hindus and Sikhs would become vulnerable if he joined Pakistan. He hoped to maintain peace and stability within his diverse kingdom.
2. The Instrument of Accession was a legal document signed by Maharaja Hari Singh in October 1947, acceding the State of Jammu and Kashmir to the Union of India. In exchange for military assistance, the Maharaja transferred control of defense, external affairs, and communications to India.
3. The Dixon Plan was proposed by UN mediator Sir Owen Dixon, suggesting a plebiscite be limited to the Kashmir Valley while recognizing the pro-India sentiments in Jammu and Ladakh, and pro-Pakistan sentiments in Azad Kashmir and the Northern Areas. It failed because Pakistan believed that India’s commitment to a plebiscite for the whole state should not be abandoned, and India rejected the plan and wanted to keep troops in Kashmir for security purposes.
4. Nehru initially offered a plebiscite after law and order were restored in Kashmir, promising the people the right to decide their future. However, his stance evolved, and he later withdrew the plebiscite offer, primarily due to Pakistan’s military pact with the United States and skepticism about the plebiscite’s wisdom and practicality.
5. Operation Gibraltar was a covert operation launched by Pakistan in 1965, involving the infiltration of Pakistani soldiers and irregulars into Indian-administered Kashmir. The goal was to incite a local rebellion and destabilize the region, leading to its annexation by Pakistan.
6. The JKLF initially aimed for the complete independence of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir from both India and Pakistan. Later, other groups like Hizbul Mujahideen, supported by Pakistan, emerged with the goal of merging with Pakistan and introducing an Islamist dimension to the conflict.
7. Article 370 granted special autonomous status to the state of Jammu and Kashmir within the Indian constitution. It specified that the State must concur in the application of laws by the Indian parliament, except those that pertain to Communications, Defence and Foreign Affairs.
8. The 1989 insurgency erupted in the Indian-administered Kashmir Valley due to years of political disenfranchisement, alienation, and with logistical support from Pakistan. This insurgency was driven by separatist sentiments and led to widespread violence and displacement.
9. The Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) is Pakistan’s intelligence agency and it has been accused of having provided weapons, training, advice, and planning assistance to militant outfits operating in Jammu and Kashmir, especially in the 1990s and early 2000s. Some believe that the ISI was also coordinating the shipment of arms from the Pakistani side of Kashmir to the Indian side.
10. The militancy in Kashmir resulted in the exodus of Kashmiri Hindus (Pandits) from the predominantly Muslim Kashmir Valley in the early 1990s, significantly altering the region’s demographic composition. A minimum of 506,000 people in the Indian-administered Kashmir Valley are internally displaced due to militancy in Kashmir, about half of whom are Hindu pandits.

Essay Questions

Instructions: Choose one of the following questions and write a well-organized essay addressing the prompt, using evidence from the source material.

1. Analyze the role of external actors, specifically Pakistan and the United Nations, in shaping the trajectory of the Kashmir conflict.
2. Discuss the evolution of Kashmiri identity and political movements from the Dogra rule to the rise of separatism in the late 20th century.
3. Evaluate the arguments for and against holding a plebiscite in Kashmir, considering the historical context and contemporary views.
4. Explore the human rights abuses committed by both state and non-state actors in the Kashmir conflict, and their impact on the civilian population.
5. Assess the significance of the revocation of Article 370 in 2019 and its potential implications for the future of the region.

Glossary of Key Terms

• Instrument of Accession: A legal document signed by Maharaja Hari Singh in 1947, acceding the State of Jammu and Kashmir to India.
• Plebiscite: A direct vote by eligible voters to decide on an important question, such as sovereignty or political status.
• Line of Control (LOC): The de facto border between Indian-administered and Pakistani-administered Kashmir, established after the Indo-Pakistani War of 1947.
• Article 370: A provision in the Indian constitution that granted special autonomous status to Jammu and Kashmir, allowing it to have its own constitution and laws.
• Azad Kashmir: A region administered by Pakistan, also known as Pakistan-administered Kashmir.
• Gilgit-Baltistan: A region administered by Pakistan, formerly known as the Northern Areas.
• Kashmiri Pandits: A Hindu minority community native to the Kashmir Valley, many of whom were displaced due to militancy.
• Militancy/Insurgency: Armed resistance or rebellion against a government or authority, often involving guerilla warfare tactics.
• Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI): The primary intelligence agency of Pakistan.
• Dogra Dynasty: The Hindu dynasty that ruled the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir from 1846 to 1947.
• National Conference: A major political party in Jammu and Kashmir, initially led by Sheikh Abdullah.
• Muslim Conference: A political party in Jammu and Kashmir that advocated for the rights of Muslims and later supported accession to Pakistan.
• Operation Gibraltar: A covert operation launched by Pakistan in 1965, involving the infiltration of Pakistani soldiers into Indian-administered Kashmir.
• UN Resolutions: Resolutions passed by the United Nations Security Council regarding the Kashmir dispute, calling for a plebiscite and peaceful resolution.
• Jihad: A religious term referring to a struggle or striving, often interpreted as a holy war by some Islamist groups.
• Razakars: Volunteers.
• Mujahideen: Guerrilla fighters in Islamic countries, especially those who are fighting against non-Muslim forces.
• Aburi Hakoomat: Provisional government.
• Sadr-i-Riyasat: Constitutional Head of State.

The Kashmir Conflict: Historical Background, Stances, and Key Issues

Kashmir Conflict: Briefing Document

This document provides a briefing on the Kashmir conflict based on the provided Wikipedia excerpt. It covers the historical background, key events, national stances, and ongoing issues related to this protracted dispute.

I. Historical Background and Key Events:

• Princely State and Partition: From 1846 to 1947, Kashmir was a princely state ruled by the Dogra dynasty under British paramountcy. “According to the 1941 census, the state’s population was 77 percent Muslim, 20 percent Hindu and 3 percent others (Sikhs and Buddhists).” Despite the Muslim majority, the Hindu Maharaja Hari Singh initially chose to remain independent after the partition of India and Pakistan.
• Accession to India: Faced with a tribal invasion from Pakistan in 1947, the Maharaja signed the Instrument of Accession to India. “Accordingly, the Maharaja signed an instrument of accession on 26 October 1947, which was accepted by the Governor General the next day.” India accepted the accession but with the “proviso that it would be submitted to a ‘reference to the people’ after the state is cleared of the invaders.”
• Indo-Pakistani Wars: The conflict triggered the first Indo-Pakistani War in 1947. Further wars in 1965 and 1971, and the Kargil conflict in 1999, were also linked to the Kashmir dispute.
• Internal Conflict and Insurgency: “In 1989, an armed insurgency erupted against Indian rule in Indian-administered Kashmir Valley, after years of political disenfranchisement and alienation, with logistical support from Pakistan.” This insurgency, initially driven by Kashmiri separatists, was later fueled by Pakistan-backed Jihadist groups. The insurgency led to the exodus of Kashmiri Hindus (Pandits) and increased militarization in the region.
• Article 370: The Indian Constitution included Article 370, granting special autonomous status to Jammu and Kashmir. This article has been a point of contention, with some advocating for its abrogation and full integration of Kashmir into India. It specified that the State must concur in the application of laws by Indian parliament, except those that pertain to Communications, Defence and Foreign Affairs. Central Government could not exercise its power to interfere in any other areas of governance of the state.
• Post 2000s: “The 2010s were marked by civil unrest within the Kashmir Valley, fuelled by unyielding militarisation, rights violations, mis-rule and corruption,” demonstrating the ongoing tensions. Further unrest in the region erupted after the 2019 Pulwama attack.

II. National Stances:

• India: Considers Kashmir an “integral part” of India, based on the Instrument of Accession. India does not accept the two-nation theory and considers that Kashmir, despite being a Muslim-majority region, is in many ways an “integral part” of secular India. Willing to grant autonomy within the Indian constitution if there was consensus among political parties on this issue.
• Pakistan: Maintains that Kashmir is a disputed territory and the “jugular vein of Pakistan”, whose final status should be determined by the Kashmiri people. Pakistan’s claims to the disputed region are based on the rejection of Indian claims to Kashmir, namely the Instrument of Accession.
• China: China has a secondary role, controlling Aksai Chin and the Shaksgam Valley.
• Kashmiri Views: A significant portion of Kashmiris desire independence or accession to Pakistan, while others support remaining with India with greater autonomy.

III. UN Involvement and Settlement Formulas:

• UN Mediation: The UN has been involved since 1948, passing resolutions calling for a plebiscite to determine the future of Kashmir. The UNCIP appointed its successor, Sir Owen Dixon, to implement demilitarisation prior to a statewide plebiscite.
• Dixon Plan: Sir Owen Dixon proposed that a plebiscite be limited to the Valley, agreeing that people in Jammu and Ladakh were clearly in favor of India; equally clearly, those in Azad Kashmir and the Northern Areas wanted to be part of Pakistan. Pakistan did not accept this plan because it believed that India’s commitment to a plebiscite for the whole state should not be abandoned.
• Contemporary Views: The article notes that, many neutral parties to the dispute have noted that the UN resolution on Kashmir is no longer relevant.

IV. Pakistan’s Relation with Militants:

• Support for Militancy: Several sources, including Pakistani officials, acknowledge Pakistan’s support for militant groups operating in Kashmir. “In 2009, the President of Pakistan Asif Zardari asserted at a conference in Islamabad that Pakistan had indeed created Islamic militant groups as a strategic tool for use in its geostrategic agenda and ‘to attack Indian forces in Jammu and Kashmir.’”
• ISI Involvement: The British Government have formally accepted that there is a clear connection between Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and three major militant outfits operating in Jammu and Kashmir, Lashkar-e-Tayiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed and Harkat-ul-Mujahideen, provided with “weapons, training, advice and planning assistance”.

V. Human Rights Abuses:

• Indian-Administered Kashmir: Accusations of human rights violations by Indian security forces, including extrajudicial killings, arbitrary arrests, and sexual violence. Popular perception holds that the Indian Armed Forces are more to blame for human rights violations than the separatist groups.
• Pakistan-Administered Kashmir: Concerns regarding political freedoms, electoral credibility, and the status of women. “UNCR reports that the status of women in Pakistani-administered Kashmir is similar to that of women in Pakistan. They are not granted equal rights under the law, and their educational opportunities and choice of marriage partner remain ‘circumscribed’”.
• Gilgit-Baltistan: The main demand of the people of Gilgit-Baltistan is constitutional status for the region as a fifth province of Pakistan. “Almost six decades after Pakistan’s independence, the constitutional status of the Federally Administered Northern Areas (Gilgit and Baltistan), once part of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir and now under Pakistani control, remains undetermined, with political autonomy a distant dream.”

VI. Key Issues and Themes:

• Self-determination vs. Territorial Integrity: The conflict revolves around the Kashmiri people’s right to self-determination versus India’s claim to territorial integrity.
• Role of Pakistan: Pakistan’s involvement, both overt and covert, has significantly shaped the conflict.
• Human Rights: The conflict has resulted in widespread human rights abuses on both sides.
• Regional Instability: The Kashmir dispute remains a major source of tension between India and Pakistan, with the potential to escalate into larger conflicts.

This briefing provides a foundation for understanding the complexities of the Kashmir conflict. Further research into specific events, political figures, and socio-economic factors is recommended for a more comprehensive analysis.

The Kashmir Conflict: Frequently Asked Questions

Frequently Asked Questions: The Kashmir Conflict

• What are the historical roots of the Kashmir conflict?
• The Kashmir conflict stems from the 1947 partition of British India into India and Pakistan. Princely states were given the choice to join either nation or remain independent. Jammu and Kashmir, a princely state with a Muslim-majority population ruled by a Hindu Maharaja, Hari Singh, initially chose to remain independent. However, an invasion by Pakistani tribesmen, combined with internal revolts, led the Maharaja to accede to India in October 1947. This accession is disputed by Pakistan, which argues that the Maharaja was an unpopular ruler who used force to suppress the Kashmiri population. The conflict has its origins in the tensions surrounding Partition, the indecision of the Maharaja, and the competing claims of India and Pakistan over the region. Also of note is that From 1846 till the 1947 partition of India, Kashmir was ruled by maharajas of Gulab Singh’s Dogra dynasty, as a princely state under British Paramountcy. The British Raj managed the defence, external affairs, and communications for the princely state and stationed a British Resident in Srinagar to oversee the internal administration. According to the 1941 census, the state’s population was 77 percent Muslim, 20 percent Hindu and 3 percent others (Sikhs and Buddhists).[ 56 ] Despite its Muslim majority, the princely rule was an overwhelmingly a Hindu-dominated state.[ 57 ] The Muslim majority suffered under the high taxes of the administration and had few opportunities for growth and advancement.
• What is the Instrument of Accession and why is it significant?
• The Instrument of Accession is the legal document signed by Maharaja Hari Singh in October 1947, acceding the state of Jammu and Kashmir to India. India considers this document the legal basis for its claim over Kashmir. The Indian government accepted the accession but stated that it would be submitted to a “reference to the people” (a plebiscite) after the state was cleared of invaders. Pakistan disputes the validity of the Instrument of Accession, arguing that it was obtained through “fraud and violence” and did not reflect the will of the Kashmiri people. They insist states should accede according to their majority population. The instrument, and its contested validity, remain central to the dispute.
• What are the main positions of India and Pakistan regarding Kashmir?
• India considers Kashmir an integral part of India by virtue of the Instrument of Accession. While willing to grant autonomy to the region, India rejects any external interference and views cross-border militancy as terrorism sponsored by Pakistan. Pakistan maintains that Kashmir is a disputed territory whose final status must be determined by the Kashmiri people through a plebiscite, citing the UN resolutions and the initial Indian promise of a reference to the people. Pakistan accuses India of human rights abuses and suppression of the Kashmiri population. They insist that the Maharaja was not a popular leader, and was regarded as a tyrant by most Kashmiris. Pakistan maintains that the Maharaja used brute force to suppress the population.
• What role have UN resolutions played in the Kashmir conflict?
• The United Nations has passed several resolutions on Kashmir, primarily calling for a plebiscite to determine the future of the region. These resolutions are based on the premise of allowing the Kashmiri people to exercise their right to self-determination. However, due to disagreements between India and Pakistan over the conditions for holding a plebiscite, such as troop withdrawal, the resolutions have never been implemented. Some argue that these resolutions are no longer relevant, as the conditions for a free and fair plebiscite can no longer be met.
• What has been the impact of militancy and insurgency in Kashmir?
• In 1989, an armed insurgency erupted against Indian rule in Indian-administered Kashmir Valley, after years of political disenfranchisement and alienation, with logistical support from Pakistan. The insurgency was actively opposed in Jammu and Ladakh, where it revived long-held demands for autonomy from Kashmiri dominance and greater integration with India. Spearheaded by a group seeking creation of an independent state based on demands for self-determination, the insurgency was taken over within the first few years of its outbreak by Pakistan-backed Jihadist groups striving for merger with Pakistan. The militancy has resulted in tens of thousands of casualties, including both combatants and civilians. It has also led to human rights abuses by both state and non-state actors, including extrajudicial killings, torture, and sexual violence. The militancy also resulted in the exodus of Kashmiri Hindus (Pandits) from the predominantly Muslim Kashmir Valley in the early 1990s. Counterinsurgency by the Indian government was coupled with repression of the local population and increased militarisation of the region, while various insurgent groups engaged in a variety of criminal activity. The 2010s were marked by civil unrest within the Kashmir Valley, fuelled by unyielding militarisation, rights violations, mis-rule and corruption, wherein protesting local youths violently clashed with Indian security forces, with large-scale demonstrations taking place during the 2010 unrest triggered by an allegedly staged encounter, and during the 2016 unrest which ensued after the killing of a young militant from a Jihadist group, who had risen to popularity through social media. Further unrest in the region erupted after the 2019 Pulwama attack.
• What is the role of external actors, particularly China and the United States, in the Kashmir conflict?
• China has a secondary role in the Kashmir conflict, administering the Aksai Chin region and the Shaksgam Valley, both of which are claimed by India. China officially opposes “unilateral actions” to resolve the Kashmir issue. The United States, while not directly involved in the dispute, has urged India and Pakistan to seek a bilateral solution. The US has also expressed concerns about the presence of Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups in the region and their potential to destabilize the region and provoke conflict between India and Pakistan.
• What are some of the human rights concerns in the region?
• Both Indian-administered and Pakistani-administered Kashmir have been subject to significant human rights concerns. In Indian-administered Kashmir, these concerns include excessive use of force by security forces, extrajudicial killings, arbitrary arrests and detentions, torture, and restrictions on freedom of expression and assembly. Some surveys have found that in the Kashmir region itself (where the bulk of separatist and Indian military activity is concentrated), popular perception holds that the Indian Armed Forces are more to blame for human rights violations than the separatist groups. In Pakistani-administered Kashmir, concerns include restrictions on political freedoms, lack of an independent judiciary, and discrimination against women. UNCR reports that the status of women in Pakistani-administered Kashmir is similar to that of women in Pakistan. They are not granted equal rights under the law, and their educational opportunities and choice of marriage partner remain “circumscribed”. Domestic violence, forced marriage, and other forms of abuse continue to be issues of concern.
• What are some of the proposed solutions to the Kashmir conflict?
• Various solutions have been proposed over the years, including:
• Plebiscite: Holding a plebiscite under UN supervision to allow the Kashmiri people to choose between joining India or Pakistan or becoming independent.
• Partition: Dividing the territory along the Line of Control, with adjustments to reflect demographic realities and strategic considerations. The Chenab formula is also one of these.
• Autonomy: Granting greater autonomy to both Indian-administered and Pakistani-administered Kashmir, with guarantees of human rights and democratic governance.
• Joint Control: Establishing a joint Indo-Pakistani mechanism to manage the region, with the possibility of eventual self-governance.
• No Solution: Maintaining the status quo, which neither side is willing to do.

The Kashmir Conflict: History, Perspectives, and Resolution Efforts

The Kashmir conflict is a territorial dispute over the Kashmir region, primarily between India and Pakistan, but also involving China. The conflict began after the partition of India in 1947, with both India and Pakistan claiming the entire former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir. The conflict has led to multiple wars and skirmishes between India and Pakistan.

Background:

• From 1752, the Afghan Durrani Empire ruled Kashmir until 1819 when the Sikh Empire conquered it.
• After the First Anglo-Sikh War (1845–1846), Kashmir was ceded to the East India Company, which then transferred it to Gulab Singh, the Raja of Jammu, who became the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir.

Internal Conflict & Political Movements:

• In 1932, Sheikh Abdullah and Chaudhry Ghulam Abbas founded the All-Jammu and Kashmir Muslim Conference to advocate for the rights of Muslims in the state.
• In 1938, the party was renamed the National Conference to represent all Kashmiris regardless of religion.

National Stances:

• India’s View:
• The Instrument of Accession signed by Maharaja Hari Singh in 1947 was a legal and irrevocable act.
• The Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir ratified the accession to India and called for a permanent merger.
• India considers Kashmir an integral part of its secular nation, despite the Muslim-majority population.
• India accuses Pakistan of fueling insurgency and terrorism in Kashmir.
• Pakistan’s View: Pakistan views Kashmir as its “jugular vein” and believes the issue should be resolved according to UN resolutions, suggesting a plebiscite to allow Kashmiris to decide their future.
• China’s View: China is also party to the Kashmir conflict, holding approximately 15% of the land area.

Efforts to Resolve the Dispute:

• Proposed solutions have included independence for Kashmir, formal partition between India and Pakistan, and greater autonomy for Azad Kashmir and Jammu and Kashmir.
• The Simla Agreement of 1972 stipulates that all differences, including Kashmir, should be settled through bilateral negotiations between India and Pakistan.
• As of 2024, there has been little meaningful dialogue to end the conflict, and India holds the territorially advantageous position.

Human Rights Abuses:

• There are concerns over human rights abuses in both Indian-administered and Pakistan-administered Kashmir.
• In the Muslim-majority Kashmir Valley, there is a high rate of concern over human rights abuses, whereas, in the Hindu and Buddhist majority areas, concerns are low.

The Kashmir Conflict: An Overview of India and Pakistan’s Dispute

The Kashmir conflict is a major point of contention in India-Pakistan relations. The conflict began after the partition of India in 1947 when both countries claimed the entirety of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir. This dispute has led to multiple wars and skirmishes between the two nations.

Historical Context:

• The conflict’s roots trace back to the end of British rule in the Indian subcontinent in 1947, which led to the creation of India and Pakistan.
• The British Paramountcy over the 562 Indian princely states ended and these states were left to decide whether to join India, Pakistan, or remain independent.
• Jammu and Kashmir, the largest of these princely states, had a predominantly Muslim population ruled by a Hindu Maharaja, Hari Singh, who initially decided to remain independent.

Accession and War:

• After the partition of India and a rebellion in the western districts of the state, Pakistani tribal militias invaded Kashmir, leading the Hindu ruler of Jammu and Kashmir to join India.
• The resulting Indo-Pakistani War ended with a UN-mediated ceasefire along a line that was eventually named the Line of Control.

Points of contention for India:

• India considers itself to be in legal possession of Jammu and Kashmir due to the accession of the state.
• India views Pakistan’s assistance to rebel forces as a hostile act and the involvement of the Pakistani army as an invasion of Indian territory.
• From India’s perspective, a plebiscite was meant to confirm the accession, which it considered already complete.
• India accuses Pakistan of fueling instability through proxy wars.

Points of contention for Pakistan:

• Pakistan maintains that Kashmir is its “jugular vein” and that its final status should be determined by the Kashmiri people.
• Pakistan rejects India’s claim to Kashmir, arguing that the Maharaja was unpopular and used force to suppress the population.
• Pakistan holds that the popular Kashmiri insurgency demonstrates that the Kashmiri people no longer wish to remain within India and that Kashmir either wants to be with Pakistan or independent.
• Pakistan views India as disregarding UN Security Council resolutions by not holding a plebiscite.

Attempts to resolve the conflict:

• Numerous attempts have been made to resolve the conflict, including UN mediation and bilateral agreements such as the Simla Agreement of 1972.
• The Simla Agreement stated that the countries would settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations while maintaining the sanctity of the Line of Control.

Other considerations:

• China also claims portions of the Kashmir region.
• The conflict has had a significant impact on the people of Kashmir, with many becoming refugees or internally displaced.
• Both India and Pakistan have been accused of human rights abuses in the region.

Kashmir Conflict: Human Rights Concerns and Allegations

The Kashmir conflict has a significant human rights dimension, with accusations against both India and Pakistan.

Reports and Findings:

• The OHCHR (Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights) has released reports on the human rights situation in both Indian-Administered Kashmir and Pakistan-Administered Kashmir.
• Freedom House categorizes both Indian-administered Kashmir and Pakistani-administered Kashmir as “not free”.
• A 2010 Chatham House opinion poll found that concern over human rights abuses varied across the region, with high concern in the Muslim-majority Kashmir Valley and low concern in the Hindu and Buddhist-majority areas.

Human Rights Abuses in Indian-Administered Kashmir:

• Scholars and organizations have reported human rights abuses by Indian forces, including extrajudicial killings, rape, torture, and enforced disappearances.
• Amnesty International has accused the Indian government of refusing to prosecute perpetrators of abuses and notes that no member of the Indian military in Jammu and Kashmir had been tried in a civilian court as of June 2015.
• Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA): This act grants broad powers to the military, including the right to shoot to kill and detain individuals without charge, leading to concerns about human rights violations. Some human rights organizations have asked the Indian government to repeal the Public Safety Act, since “a detainee may be held in administrative detention for a maximum of two years without a court order”.
• Enforced Disappearances and Mass Graves: The State Human Rights Commission (SHRC) has found thousands of unmarked graves believed to contain victims of unlawful killings and enforced disappearances.
• Sexual Violence: Reports indicate a high incidence of sexual abuse and rape, with allegations that security forces use rape as a cultural weapon of war.
• Kashmiri Pandits: There have been killings and displacement of Kashmiri Pandits (Hindus) due to the conflict.

Human Rights Abuses in Pakistan-Administered Kashmir:

• There have been instances of human rights abuses in Azad Kashmir, including political repressions and forced disappearances.
• Lack of Freedoms: Residents of Azad Kashmir are reportedly not free, with Pakistani authorities exercising strict controls on basic freedoms.
• Human Rights Watch has accused the ISI (Pakistan’s intelligence agency) and the military of torture.
• Religious Discrimination: Claims of religious discrimination and restrictions on religious freedom in Azad Kashmir have been made against Pakistan.
• Lack of Representation: Criticisms have been raised regarding the lack of human rights, justice, democracy, and Kashmiri representation in the Pakistan National Assembly.

Kashmiri Perspectives:

• Kashmiri scholars claim that India’s military occupation inflicts violence and humiliation, with Indian forces responsible for human rights abuses.
• There are assertions that the Kashmiri people have not been able to exercise the right to self-determination.

Kashmiri Perspectives on the Kashmir Conflict

Kashmiri views on the Kashmir conflict are varied and complex, with a central theme of a desire for self-determination.

Key aspects of Kashmiri perspectives include:

• Historical Grievances: Kashmiris feel they have been ruled by various empires and governments, fostering a sense of not being in control of their own fate for centuries.
• Right to Self-determination: Since the 1947 accession of Kashmir to India was provisional and conditional, Kashmiris maintain their right to determine their future. They assert that state elections do not satisfy this requirement.
• Desire for a Plebiscite: Many Kashmiris want a plebiscite to achieve freedom. A constitutional expert, A. G. Noorani, says the people of Kashmir are very much a party to the dispute.
• Rejection of Indian Rule: A significant portion of Kashmiris oppose Indian rule, citing broken promises of a plebiscite, violations of autonomy, and subversion of the democratic process as reasons for the 1989-1990 rebellion. Some Kashmiris believe that they were better off under Dogra rule than under Indian rule.
• Views on Elections: Kashmiris assert that except for the 1977 and 1983 elections, no state election has been fair. The Hurriyat parties do not want to participate in elections under the framework of the Indian Constitution, viewing them as a diversion from self-determination.
• Impact of Military Presence: Opponents of Indian rule say that India has a large military presence in Kashmir, resulting in violence, human rights abuses, and a sense of humiliation among Kashmiris.
• Divergent Regional Views:
• A 2007 poll indicated that 87% of people in Srinagar wanted independence.
• In contrast, 95% of people in Jammu city felt the state should be part of India.
• Economic Considerations: Some, like Markandey Katju, argue that secession would harm Kashmir’s economy due to its dependence on Indian markets.
• Identity and Religion: Kashmiris have a distinct sense of identity, with Islam being an integral part of it. Some Kashmiris might prefer Pakistan due to religious affinity and socio-economic links if India and Pakistan cannot guarantee the existence and peaceful development of an independent Kashmir.
• Views on Voter Turnout: High voter turnout is not necessarily an endorsement of Indian rule, as voters may be motivated by factors such as development and local governance.
• Settlement Formulas: Kashmiris seek an “honourable solution” that ensures their dignity without necessarily signifying a victory for either India or Pakistan.

Al-Qaeda and the Kashmir Conflict: Involvement and Claims

Al-Qaeda’s involvement in the Kashmir conflict is a complex issue with various reports and claims.

Key points regarding Al-Qaeda’s involvement:

• Osama bin Laden’s Stance: In a 2002 “Letter to American People,” Osama bin Laden stated that one of the reasons he was fighting America was its support for India on the Kashmir issue.
• US Intelligence Assessments: In 2002, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld suggested Al-Qaeda was active in Kashmir, though without hard evidence. US officials believed Al-Qaeda aimed to provoke conflict between India and Pakistan, potentially forcing Pakistan to move troops to the Indian border and relieving pressure on Al-Qaeda elements in Pakistan. US intelligence analysts also suggested that Al-Qaeda and Taliban operatives in Pakistani-administered Kashmir were assisting terrorists trained in Afghanistan to infiltrate Indian-administered Kashmir.
• Al-Qaeda’s Claims: In 2006, Al-Qaeda claimed to have established a wing in Kashmir, raising concerns for the Indian government.
• Counterclaims: In 2007, the Indian Army stated that there was no evidence to verify media reports of an Al-Qaeda presence in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir. They also ruled out Al-Qaeda ties with militant groups in Kashmir, including Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed, though they had information about Al-Qaeda’s strong ties with these groups’ operations in Pakistan.
• Destabilization Efforts: In 2010, US Defense Secretary Robert Gates stated that Al-Qaeda was seeking to destabilize the region and planning to provoke a nuclear war between India and Pakistan.
• Links to Militant Groups: Fazlur Rehman Khalil, leader of Harkat-ul-Mujahideen, signed al-Qaeda’s 1998 declaration of holy war, which called on Muslims to attack all Americans and their allies.
• Killing of Ilyas Kashmiri: In June 2011, a US drone strike killed Ilyas Kashmiri, chief of Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami, a Kashmiri militant group associated with Al-Qaeda. He was described as a “prominent” Al-Qaeda member and the head of military operations for Al-Qaeda.
• New Battlefields: Waziristan became a new battlefield for Kashmiri militants fighting NATO in support of Al-Qaeda.
• Appointment of Farman Ali Shinwari: In April 2012, Farman Ali Shinwari, a former member of Kashmiri separatist groups Harkat-ul-Mujahideen and Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami, was appointed chief of al-Qaeda in Pakistan.
• Investigation Findings: A 2002 investigation by a Christian Science Monitor reporter claimed that Al-Qaeda and its affiliates were prospering in Pakistani-administered Kashmir with the tacit approval of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency (ISI).

By Amjad Izhar
Contact: amjad.izhar@gmail.com
https://amjadizhar.blog

Affiliate Disclosure: This blog may contain affiliate links, which means I may earn a small commission if you click on the link and make a purchase. This comes at no additional cost to you. I only recommend products or services that I believe will add value to my readers. Your support helps keep this blog running and allows me to continue providing you with quality content. Thank you for your support!