- By: Muhammad Mutahir Khan Singhanvi
Once celebrated as “Paradise on Earth,” the valley of Kashmir with its pristine lakes, snow-capped peaks, and lush meadows now stands as one of the most militarized and disputed regions in the world. The transformation of this heavenly landscape into a theatre of political and human struggle encapsulates a story of colonial legacies, broken promises, and an enduring quest for self-determination.
The Kashmir dispute traces its origins to the 1947 partition of British India, when princely states were given the choice to accede to either India or Pakistan. The Hindu ruler of Muslim-majority Jammu and Kashmir, Maharaja Hari Singh, initially sought independence but later signed the Instrument of Accession to India under contested circumstances. Pakistan rejected the accession as illegitimate, and the first Indo-Pak war broke out shortly thereafter. In 1948, the United Nations intervened, passing resolutions that called for a ceasefire and a plebiscite to determine Kashmir’s future. The ceasefire line, later known as the Line of Control (LoC), effectively divided the region into two parts. Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir, and Azad Jammu and Kashmir under Pakistan’s administration. More than seven decades later, the promised plebiscite remains unfulfilled.
The most dramatic shift in recent decades came in August 2019, when India revoked Articles 370 and 35A of its constitution, stripping Jammu and Kashmir of its semi-autonomous status. The move, announced without consultation, dissolved the region’s separate constitution and legislative autonomy. It was followed by a communications blackout, a surge of troops, and mass detentions of local leaders and activists. For many Kashmiris, this act symbolized the final blow to their political identity. International human rights groups, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, condemned the lockdown, reporting arbitrary arrests, restrictions on movement, and suppression of dissent. Despite global criticism, New Delhi maintained that the move was aimed at “integrating” Kashmir and ensuring development a claim yet to be substantiated by ground realities.
As the region entered 2025, tensions once again flared on both sides of the Line of Control. In October, widespread protests broke out across several towns of Azad Jammu and Kashmir including Muzaffarabad, Bagh, and Rawalakot under the banner of the Jammu and Kashmir Awami Action Committee (JAAC). The movement, while peaceful in nature, called for justice for victims of violence across the divide, greater socio-economic rights, and an end to human rights violations in Indian-administered areas. The protests, marked by clashes between demonstrators and police, have reignited the Kashmir debate on international platforms. Pakistan’s government reaffirmed its long-standing position, emphasizing political, moral, and diplomatic support for the Kashmiri people. The Director General of the Inter-Services Public Relations (DG ISPR) reiterated that Pakistan seeks a peaceful solution in accordance with UN resolutions, rejecting any notion of armed escalation.
Meanwhile, India dismissed the demonstrations as “Pakistan-sponsored unrest,” a claim Pakistan firmly denies. Interestingly, even within India’s civil society and independent media, questions are being raised about the sustainability of New Delhi’s hardline approach. Beyond the politics and borders lies the human dimension often overshadowed by diplomatic rhetoric. Generations of Kashmiris have grown up amid curfews, checkpoints, and the constant presence of soldiers. Reports by various rights groups highlight enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings, and the psychological toll of living under siege. Economically, the valley’s tourism-driven economy has been devastated. Once a thriving destination for both domestic and international travelers, Kashmir’s hospitality sector now struggles to survive amid instability. Educational institutions frequently shut down during unrest, depriving students of continuity, while thousands of families continue to search for missing relatives, their voices drowned by the geopolitical stalemate.
Analysts warn that Kashmir has become a flashpoint in South Asia, with potential to ignite a wider conflict between two nuclear-armed neighbors. Occasional skirmishes and ceasefire violations along the LoC remain a grim reminder of how fragile peace truly is. While international bodies such as the United Nations and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) have expressed concern, tangible diplomatic progress remains elusive. The reluctance of major Western powers particularly the United States and the European Union to pressure India stems largely from economic and strategic interests. This selective approach to human rights has eroded faith in the global justice system among many Kashmiris.
Despite decades of bloodshed and political fatigue, the Kashmiri spirit of resistance endures. From student activists to elderly citizens, people continue to demand their right to self-determination a principle enshrined in international law. The valley’s streets still echo with the slogan: “Hum kya chahte? Azadi!” (What do we want? Freedom!). Civil society across both parts of Kashmir is increasingly calling for peaceful dialogue and an end to militarization. There is a growing realization that stability in South Asia home to nearly two billion people hinges on a just and lasting resolution of the Kashmir dispute.
Kashmir’s tragedy is not just a regional conflict; it is a moral question confronting the world. It challenges the credibility of international institutions and the global community’s commitment to justice and human rights. If the world continues to look away, the human cost will only deepen, and the region’s fragile peace may crumble under the weight of neglect. Yet, amid despair, Kashmir’s struggle remains a symbol of endurance a reminder that even in the darkest nights of oppression, the flame of hope refuses to die. As history has shown time and again, when a people’s spirit awakens, no force however powerful can silence their demand for freedom.