Q.

Discuss the Kashmir problem in its entirety; throwing light in its background and prospects of
its possible solutions to this core issue between Pakistan and India?

Kashmir Problem | Background & Possible Solutions

Introduction:
The Kashmir Problem is a territorial conflict primarily between India and Pakistan over
the Kashmir region. The Kashmir conflict started after the partition of India in 1947 as a dispute
over the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir and escalated into three wars between
India and Pakistan and several other armed skirmishes. China has also been involved in the
Kashmir problem in a third-party role. Both India and Pakistan claim the entirety of the former
princely state of Jammu and Kashmir. India controls approximately 55% of the land area of the
region and 70% of its population, Pakistan controls approximately 30% of the land, while China
controls the remaining 15%. India administers Jammu, the Kashmir Valley, Ladakh, and
the Siachen Glacier. Pakistan administers Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan. China administers
the mostly uninhabited Shaksgam Valley, and the Aksai Chin region.
History of Kashmir Problem:
The Kashmir dispute dates from 1947. The partition of the Indian sub-continent along religious
lines led to the formation of India and Pakistan. However, there remained the problem of over
650 states, run by princes, existing within the two newly independent countries.
In theory, these princely states had the option of deciding which country to join, or of remaining
independent. In practice, the restive population of each province proved decisive.
The people had been fighting for freedom from British rule, and with their struggle about to bear
fruit, they were not willing to let the princes fill the vacuum.
Although many princes wanted to be “independent” (which would have meant hereditary
monarchies and no hope for democracy) they had to succumb to their people’s protests which
turned violent in many provinces.
Because of its location, Kashmir could choose to join either India or Pakistan. Maharaja Hari
Singh, the ruler of Kashmir, was Hindu while most of his subjects were Muslim. Unable to
decide which nation Kashmir should join, Hari Singh chose to remain neutral.
But his hopes of remaining independent were dashed in October 1947, as Pakistan sent in
Muslim tribesmen who were knocking at the gates of the capital Srinagar.
Hari Singh appealed to the Indian government for military assistance and fled to India. He signed
the Instrument of Accession, ceding Kashmir to India on October 26.
Indian and Pakistani forces thus fought their first war over Kashmir in 1947-48. India referred
the dispute to the United Nations on 1 January. In a resolution dated August 13, 1948, the UN
asked Pakistan to remove its troops, after which India was also to withdraw the bulk of its forces.
Once this happened, a “free and fair” plebiscite was to be held to allow the Kashmiri people to
decide their future.
India, having taken the issue to the UN, was confident of winning a plebiscite, since the most
influential Kashmiri mass leader, Sheikh Abdullah, was firmly on its side. An emergency
government was formed on October 30, 1948, with Sheikh Abdullah as the Prime Minister.
Pakistan ignored the UN mandate and continued fighting, holding on to the portion of Kashmir
under its control. On January 1, 1949, a ceasefire was agreed, with 65 percent of the territory
under Indian control and the remainder with Pakistan.
The ceasefire was intended to be temporary but the Line of Control remains the de facto border
between the two countries.
Abrogation of Article 370 by India and the Latest developments in Kashmir
On 5th August 2019, both houses of the Parliament of India passed resolutions to abrogate Article
370 and extend the Constitution of India in its entirety to the state of Kashmir, which was
implemented as a constitutional order by the President of India. At the same time, the parliament
also passed the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization Act, 2019, which would dismiss the state of
Jammu and Kashmir and bifurcate it into union territories: the eponymous union territory
of Jammu and Kashmir, and that of Ladakh. The re-organization act was passed by both houses
of parliament and was assented by the President of India, and will come into effect on 31st
October 2019. Prior to these measures, the union government locked down the Kashmir Valley,
increased security forces, imposed Section 144 that prevented assembly, and placed political
leaders such as former Jammu and Kashmir chief ministers Omar Abdullah and Mehbooba
Mufti under house arrest. Internet and phone services were also blocked.
Article 370 of the Indian constitution gave special status to Jammu and Kashmir, which has been
the subject of dispute between India, Pakistan, and China since 1947 conferring it with the power
to have a separate constitution, a state flag, and autonomy over the internal administration of the
state.
Article 35-A protects the demographic status of the Jammu and Kashmir state in its prescribed
constitutional form, which means that a person from other parts of India cannot purchase
property in Kashmir.
The reports of torture and excesses: Despite the complete ban of local and international media
in Kashmir and the communication blackout, authentic reports with videos and photos have
come out on channels such as Aljazeera and BBC which suggest that Indian Armed forces were
sent there to crush the new wave of freedom among the youth of Kashmir by way of extrajudicial
arrests, torture, abductions, sexual abuse, use of pellet guns to bind the protesters and breaking
into the homes of people and harassing them in the name of security check. Kashmiri people
outside the valley have not been able to contact their families back home, creating unbearable
psychological and economic problems. Crimes in occupied Kashmir after imposing a military
curfew in the occupied territory, imprisoning millions of innocent Kashmiris. Fears of an
impending genocide in the valley are being raised across the world. International media is also
reporting torture of detainees by Indian forces.
The Implications: These acts of India government, which are against the major overarching
acts of its own constitution, which are against the bilateral Simla Agreement between India and
Pakistan and which are against the 11 resolutions of the UN that have been passed by the UNSC
since 1948, to resolve the issue in line with the wishes of the people of Jammu and
Kashmir. The BJP-led government has removed the garb of secularism from its face and the
so-called largest democracy of the world has shamelessly deprived the 10 million Kashmiris of
their legitimate human rights. The innocent Kashmiris are practically enslaved since 5th August
2019 and the whole region of J&K has been turned into a jail. The emotions of the people of
Azad Kashmir and Pakistan are extremely disturbing and there is a huge pressure piling up on
the Government of Pakistan to militarily help the oppressed Kashmiris. But the government
understands the gravity of the situation and the negative consequences of war between the two
nuclear states. So far, the government and people of Pakistan are putting as much pressure
through communication and diplomatic channels as possible to pressurize the Indian government
to lift the curfew and bring the life of people in Kashmir to normalcy. Severe shortage of
medicines, food and other necessities of life are being reported from Kashmir.
Response from Pakistan:
Pakistan’s government has not only condemned this act of naked aggression and brutality in the
severest possible terms,
Pakistan immediately brought down the diplomatic ties, calling back half of the staff in Its
embassy in Delhi and
called for an immediate UNSC meeting,
asked OIC, informed all the important world leaders about the grave situation,
DG ISPR declared that Pakistan will go to any lengths to ensure that Kashmiris get their right of
self-determination.
Pakistan’s foreign office briefed the ambassadors from all countries about the situation,
especially the P-5 countries.
Protests were held by Pakistanis all over the world to highlight the Kashmir Problem.
Articles were written by scholars including the one from Prime Minister Imran Khan in
international papers and journals of reputation to inform the intelligentsia and public around the
globe about the ground realities and to sensitize them towards the problems in Kashmir.
Prime Minister Imran Khan in his speech to the 74th UNGA shook the world with a fiery speech
that was marked by historical facts, undeniable brutalities inflicted on Kashmiris by India and
her belligerent attitude to move the region and the whole towards a devastating Kashmir Problem
that can turn into a nuclear one. The effects of his extremely power speech that flowed from not
only his heart but the oppressed people of Kashmir eloquently highlighted Kashmir’s case and
attracted praise from around the world.
Response from the World:
China condemned this act of India in severe terms and called India’s move to abolish Kashmir’s
special status “not acceptable” and not binding, as it challenged Chinese sovereignty. India’s
claim over Ladakh, as part of Kashmir, involved Chinese land. China and India have moved their
forces in the region and have seen a brawl since then. With the diplomatic efforts, Vice Chief of
the PRC’s Army came to Islamabad to show solidarity on this issue towards Pakistan in military
terms.
UN Secretary-General Antonio also condemned this act and stressed multiple times the need for
addressing human rights of the Kashmiri people in order to resolve the ongoing crisis in Indian
Occupied Kashmir. In this regard, he has also read two reports of the U.N. High Commissioner
for Human Rights on the situation of human rights in Kashmir.
The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) raised concerns over reports that India had
blocked Muslims in Indian-occupied Kashmir from exercising their religious freedoms, a policy
the pan-Islamic group said is an affront to Muslims around the world. That included the
imposition of a “complete lockdown” of the area even on the auspicious occasion of Eid, as well
as denying Eid Al-Adha congregation. The same restrictions prevailed during Muharram as well
and no processions were allowed to be held during this holy month. But unfortunately, these
efforts were marred by UAE and Bahrain which conferred upon Mr. Modi, the highest civilian
awards a few days after this barbaric act of enslaving Kashmiris, and that was synonymous to
pouring salt into Kashmiris’ wounds.
The European Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET) also demanded from the
Indian government to immediately lift the draconian curfew in occupied Kashmir that has
created a humanitarian crisis in the valley.
On September 25, the United Kingdom’s Labour Party in a conference in Brighton passed a
resolution that supported “international intervention in Kashmir and a call for UN led-
referendum.” Crucially, it calls on the Labour Party, the government in waiting, to clearly and
vocally support the Kashmiri people’s right to self-determination and for international observers
to be sent to the region immediately. The resolution also calls for an intervention of the party at
the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC).
Turkey has come out openly and condemned the annexing Kashmir tantamount to waging war
against the innocent unarmed people.
Malaysian President Mahatir Mohammad also mentioned in his speech to the 74th UNGA that
India had invaded Kashmir, despite the UN resolutions proposing a plebiscite, which is a clear
violation of the UN Charter.
Russian Foreign Minister met with Prime Minister Imran Khan on the sidelines of the
74th UNGA in New York and expressed his support for the sensible stance of Pakistan. Russia’s
close ties with China and India’s growing ties with the US are pushing Russians to move away
from the stand of India on this issue, as that might compromise CPEC and OBOR projects as
well.
Israel is playing an extremely negative role in this whole scenario and, according to the senior
journalists like David Frost, is actually the mastermind of the moves that India is making during
the past few years. The steps taken by India resemble starkly with the steps taken by the rash and
brutal Israel in Gaza against Palestinians.
Although United States officially expressed its concern over the abrogation of Article 370 , the
actions taken by Donald Trump in showing an out-of-the-way welcome to Mr. Modi at the
Howdy Modi congregation and the ineffective passive way of not putting the slightest of
pressures on the Indian Government shows that the US government, despite declaring many
times that it wishes to become a mediator in this Kashmir Problem between Pakistan and India,
is only limited to lip service.
Possible Solutions of Kashmir Problem:
Scenario 1
The status quo
Kashmir has been a flashpoint between India and Pakistan for more than 60 years. Currently a
boundary – the Line of Control – divides the region in two, with one part administered by India
and one by Pakistan. India would like to formalize this status quo and make it the accepted
international boundary. But Pakistan and Kashmiri activists reject this plan because they both
want greater control over the region.
Scenario 2
Kashmir joins Pakistan
Pakistan has consistently favored this as the best solution to the dispute. In view of the state’s
majority Muslim population, it believes that it would vote to become part of Pakistan. However,
a single plebiscite held in a region that comprises peoples that are culturally, religiously and
ethnically diverse, would create disaffected minorities. The Hindus of Jammu and the Buddhists
of Ladakh have never shown any desire to join Pakistan and would protest at the outcome.
Scenario 3
Kashmir joins India
Such a solution would be unlikely to bring stability to the region as the Muslim inhabitants of
Pakistani-administered Jammu and Kashmir, including the Northern Areas, have never shown
any desire to become part of India.
Scenario 4
Independent Kashmir
The difficulty of adopting this as a potential solution is that it requires India and Pakistan to give
up territory, which they are not willing to do. Any plebiscite or referendum likely to result in a
majority vote for independence would therefore probably be opposed by both India and Pakistan.
It would also be rejected by the inhabitants of the state who are content with their status as part
of the countries to which they already owe allegiance.
Scenario 5
A smaller independent Kashmir
An independent Kashmir could be created from the Kashmir Valley – currently under Indian
administration – and the narrow strip of land which Pakistan calls Azad Jammu and Kashmir.
This would leave the strategically important regions of the Northern Areas and Ladakh,
bordering China, under the control of Pakistan and India respectively. However, both India and
Pakistan would be unlikely to enter into discussions that would have this scenario as a possible
outcome.
Scenario 6
Independent Kashmir Valley
An independent Kashmir Valley has been considered by some as the best solution because it
would address the grievances of those who have been fighting against the Indian Government
since the insurgency began in 1989. But critics say that, without external assistance, the region
would not be economically viable.
Scenario 7
The Chenab formula
This plan, first suggested in the 1960s, would see Kashmir divided along the line of the River
Chenab. This would give the vast majority of land to Pakistan and, as such, a clear victory in its
longstanding dispute with India. The entire valley with its Muslim majority population would be
brought within Pakistan’s borders, as well as the majority Muslim areas of Jammu.
Conclusion:
The key to any solution lies not in territorial compromises between states but focusing on the
needs of the people on both sides of the border. The Kashmiri people should be made to feel free
and able to run their own lives. “There does not have to be territorial change. There needs to
changes in the liberties that are exercised by the people of the region whether they be in the area
that is in Pakistan or in India,” Habibullah stated in closing.
It can be said that after the 5th August 2019 act of abrogation of the Article 370 by India, the
Kashmir problem has been highlighted by this illegal and immoral act more than ever before and
people around the globe have been successfully alerted to the possible horrors of a nuclear
conflict in the region. Pakistan needs to devise and effectively implement a comprehensive
strategy with its close allies like China, Turkey, and Malaysia to counter India’s malicious
designs at all fronts, be it diplomatic, information and media or defense. Besides, Pakistan needs
to honestly point out and remove the weaknesses in its democracy and governance to ensure that
this nation grows to its potential and Pakistan moves up the ladder on all important indicators of
the human development index. Nations, like men, must consistently review their conduct and
improve in all important respects to change the situation.

The Kashmir Conflict Is A Political Problem History

The Kashmir conflict is a political problem that has existed since 1947 consisting of a territorial
dispute between Pakistan and India regarding the “princely” state of Jammu and Kashmir. India
claims sovereignty over what is Kashmir mainly due to the document “Instrument Of
Accession”, which the Maharajah Hari Singh (Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir at the time) signed
on the 26th of October of 1947. Pakistan claims that, it should either be and independent state or
part of the same. This is because the population of Kashmir does not wish to be part of India, as
could be considered after viewing the Kashmiri insurgencies. The reason being, according to the
Pakistanis, that when the document “Instrument of Accession” was signed, it was signed by what
the Kashmiris considered a tyrant. As such, the document was only signed because the
Maharajah suppressed the population by force. The main dispute about the territory was first
originally about the religious views, and the resources that were to be found there. But since
then, this ever changing world has changed, and it is no longer just that, but a show of strength
from both countries. Neither is willing to cede, because of all the resent and suffering that the
conflict has caused. Niether can afford to look weak in the other’s eyes. All due to economic
privileges and political trade-offs with rivals.
In 1947, Lord Mountbatten (the last viceroy of India) divided what was once British India into
two countries, India and Pakistan. This was done based largely on religious grounds. The
religious demographics were divided between a Muslim population, and a Hindu population.
Kashmir had Sikh rulers and a Muslim population, so there was no obvious place to go for the
Muslim population once the partition had taken place. The rulers opted to join India when most
of the population would have chosen Pakistan. Because of this, Both Pakistan and India claimed
the territory.
That event started the first Indo-Pakistan war. India and Pakistan had agreed upon not
intervening in the decision of Kashmir. The maharajah asked for help from India, who answered
that Kashmir needed to be part of India to receive military aid. The annexation was then signed
by the Maharajah and Lord Mountbatten. After this, the Indian army, aided by National
Conference volunteers, drove out the Pakistanis. The resulting war lasted until 1948, until the
UN was asked to intervene, which put into effect a plebiscite. Both states were supposed to not
intervene during the plebiscite, and India withdrew its troops, but Pakistan did not. The
conditions of the plebiscite were not complied with. India reentered militarily, and there became
a standoff. Pakistan suggested both states remove any military presence unilaterally, but India
rejected this suggestion. India also rejected 11 more proposals of demilitarization of the zone, all
of which Pakistan accepted. So, no agreement was reached.
The second Indo-Pakistan war was in 1965 took place between April and September of the same
year. The war began as a consequence of India’s Operation Gibraltar, which was an operation to
move military forces into the region of Jammu and Kashmir to control an insurgency against
Hindu rule. The war lasted 5 weeks, in which thousands of people died from both countries. The
confrontation escalated quickly , relatively no time passed, and it was soon a full scale aerial war
and naval war as well. During this war, there were some extremely large tank confrontations.
The Pakistani army had a numerical advantage regarding tanks, as well as equipment. Despite
these advantages, Pakistan was outfought by India in a number of confrontations. Both countries
made relative progress during the war, but were both held back by small, yet efficient defensive
forces. At an effort to peace, the United Sates and the Soviet Union, both hosted ceasefire
negotiations. Pakistan, worried about the lack of war supplies, accepted the ceasefire readily.
India, on the other hand, was more opposed to the ceasefire, but finally ceded to it, due to the
growing diplomatic pressure from other countries. The post war aftermath involved a series of
ceasefire violations which were constituted mainly to the exchange of small arms and artillery
fire. This ceasefire was in effect until the renewal of military exchanges in 1971.
The third Indo-Pakistan war was in 1971. This war is considered one of the shortest wars in
history due to its duration of only 13 days. It started with of Pakistan’s “preemptive” strike on 11
Indian airbases titled Operation Chengiz Khan. The war was fought mainly on the eastern and
western fronts. The conflict was sparked by the Bangladeshi Liberation War, which was, in
short, the fight for the liberation of East Pakistan from the whole. The Pakistani army, which was
made up of Western Pakistanis in its majority attacked the eastern population leading millions of
Pakistanis to go into exile or refuge to the open arms of India. India appealed several times to the
international community, but failed to get a response. After these attempts, the Indian
government decided that it was more convenient for the population if the Indian military
intervened rather than just open its borders to refugee camps. Western Pakistan was becoming
extremely agitated towards eastern Pakistan and India. India started amassing troops on the
border with East Pakistan. Due to this, on December 3rd, the Pakistani government issued
operation Operation Chengiz Khan. The Indian government retaliated that very night, with its
own aerial strike. These turned into massive retaliatory air strikes in between both countries. This
marked the start of the third war. In contrast to the second war, which was slow in advancement,
“blitzkrieg” strategy was used (in great success) in the form of three different assaults, that
rapidly converged on Dhaka (the capital of East Pakistan). Due to the massive losses, the
Western Pakistani army surrendered on December 16th. India took a huge number of prisoners
of war in the aftermath. For Pakistan, it was a complete defeat, which established India’s military
dominance in that part of the subcontinent. In 1972, the Simla agreement was signed, which
ensured that Pakistan recognize the freedom of Bangladesh in exchange for the return of the
prisoners of war.
The most recent conflict in between Pakistan and India was in 2001-02 standoff. This consisted
of the amassing of troops on either side of the the international border. This was due to a terrorist
attack on Indian Parliament on December 13th, 2001. The attack was orchestrated by Pakistan
based terrorist groups, Let (Lashkar-e-Taiba) and JeM (Jaish-e-Mohammed), both of which wish
to free Kashmir from Indian rule. There was speculation as to nuclear war during this time. Both
countries moved ballistic missiles and extremely large numbers of infantry to the border. As both
countries possess nuclear weapons, the main worry about bordering states was the use of them.
As was the world.
Most of these conflicts have started to kindle up due to the threat to one countries sense of safety.
Both countries feel threatened by the other. Of course this is not the only reason, but it plays an
important role in the escalation between Pakistan and India. Mainly because of the lack of
communication and cooperation from both countries, there is a relative instability in the region.
Due to the fact that if one country isn’t willing to do something for fear of losing face or power,
they remain at a standoff. Neither of them escalates the conflict without cause, yet both countries
are unable to cede.
First of all, we should clearly define the difference between a preemptive strike, and a preventive
strike. A preemptive strike is that strike which is done in face of an imminent attack. While there
is no measure as to when an attack becomes imminent, there should be enough evidence to prove
it before the UN. A preventive strike, is similar but differs from a preemptive strike in that which
an attack doesn’t have to be imminent. A preventive strike is a safety measure just in case things
escalate. During these conflicts, both Pakistan and India have started a conflict with either a
preemptive strike or a preventive strike. This in itself is dangerous due to both countries being
nuclearly active.
If India or Pakistan decide to attack each other with nuclear weapons, there won’t be time to
respond. All the neighboring countries will instantly come awake. It is not simply a matter of
monitoring the progress of a missile and guess where it is going. If a missile is in the air, it could
easily go to any place on earth and that is what is so delicate. A missile from the United States to
Russia takes approximately 45 min, to an hour in arriving, and if a missile were to be launched in
this area, neighboring countries would lose it. Having less than 15 minutes to try to defuse the
situation is taxing and almost impossible. It gives no reaction time during which you can confirm
the missile is not meant for your country. The neighboring countries won’t wait to see if the
missile is meant for India or Pakistan. The state will be watching the safety of its own
population. This conflict has to be resolved quickly before India or Pakistan make the decision to
use their nuclear armament. The consequences could be disastrous for the region. Kashmir would
be in the middle of it, and probably where the escalation would start.
The Kashmiri people live in constant fear of war. The wars that have already taken place have
already devastated the border. But it has all been with normal warfare. To put nuclear warfare
into the conflict would only mean a quick demise for the people of Kashmir. They would have
no means of fighting back, to protect their homeland.
The UN plays an important role in all of this because of the control it has to put into effect
between both countries. As a mediator of the whole conflict, it has to be able to stay neutral. This
of course is extremely difficult, as it is only an international court. There can be any number of
ways one state can bypass international law. Countries around the conflict are also tense due to
the nuclear armaments of India and Pakistan, yet the best thing they can do is hope for India and
Pakistan to be able to sort out their differences peacefully.
This whole conflict has become a lot more complicated than it really should be. A person could
compare India and Pakistan as two brothers fighting over a piece of candy. The candy (Kashmir)
is not necessary to either of them, yet they want the privilege of it. And because of this, they
quarrel over who wants the treat more, or who deserves it more. They size each other up, and
decide that they can hold their own, even if the possibility of the candy becoming lost or broken
is ever present during the struggle for ownership of it. The candy should be the one to decide if it
prefers one brother over the other, or if it deems that neither of them is the most convenient. The
taste of this candy is unique as it it a mixture between rivers (Jhelum, Indus, Tawi and Chenab),
woodland, and a variety of minerals. All of these resources are of great economic value, reason
why the region is even more desirable. Neither sibling wishes to cede, because this candy looks
extremely juicy and luscious. And yet, while the quarreling continues, the candy is slowly
breaking into little pieces. Its losing what once made it so tasty.
There has been a lot of talk of peace during the last years. These movements have been
organized mainly by the Kashmiri people who have been extremely affected by this conflict.
Kashmir literally means “desiccated land”, and during these confrontations, it has become more
and more so. The people have been affected in a variety of ways. These people are sick and tired
of the continued conflict around them. In the last years, there have been nationalist Kashmiri
protests against both Pakistan and India. These people are witnessing harsh repressions , which
can be seen in the startling news that, on average, one person a day has been killed since June
2010. Their story has become one of tragedy during the years. These people were turned against
each other by the intervention of India and Pakistan. There were Muslims and Hindus, instead of
the actual Muslims vs. Hindus. These people psyches have been divided into two because of the
way they are raised. Segments of Kashmiri Hindus have grown up to call themselves Hindus
before Kashmiri. And equally, there are segments of Kashmiri Muslims who have been raised to
call themselves Muslims before Kashmiris. This itself is tearing apart Kashmirs history and
identity. The people of this region share languages, beliefs, and even some traditional festivities.
Since the beginning of the conflict, Kashmir has been a war zone, and in all this time, its
majority has been controlled by Indian governments which have failed to do something about the
problem. What the Kashmiri people want, and what is probably best for the region is, in their
words; “Azaadi” (Freedom). Kashmir is no longer a region, but the border point between China,
India, and Pakistan. They disclaim being Indians, and want to be Kashmiris in the purest sense of
the word. The Indian government continuously downplays all the suffering that there is, and
promises more jobs and commodities to the people here. The Kashmiri people no longer want
that. They want to be heard, to be recognized, to know that what they say is worth something to
the bordering countries rather than just being a prize to be quarreled over.