top of page

By:

Dr. V.L. Dharurkar

12 February 2025 at 2:53:17 pm

Pakistan’s Kashmir Crisis

As unrest engulfs Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, economic hardship, political alienation and a forceful state response are exposing the widening cracks in Islamabad’s governance of the region. Pakistan today finds itself confronting multiple internal crises at once. While the world focuses on its troubled ties with Afghanistan and the long-running insurgency in Balochistan, another front has opened within Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). Weeks of sustained protests have exposed a reservoir of...

Pakistan’s Kashmir Crisis

As unrest engulfs Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, economic hardship, political alienation and a forceful state response are exposing the widening cracks in Islamabad’s governance of the region. Pakistan today finds itself confronting multiple internal crises at once. While the world focuses on its troubled ties with Afghanistan and the long-running insurgency in Balochistan, another front has opened within Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). Weeks of sustained protests have exposed a reservoir of public anger that has been building for decades. Political Instability Ever since its creation, Pakistan has struggled with political instability, economic uncertainty and regional discontent. Nowhere is this more evident than in PoK. Although Islamabad has long projected the territory as an integral part of its Kashmir policy, it has failed to provide the region with responsive governance, meaningful political representation or sustained economic development. The present turmoil is the consequence of decades of accumulated neglect. The protests that intensified over the past several weeks did not erupt in a vacuum. According to protest groups and local reports, more than 140 people have died during nearly 50 days of unrest, while many more have been injured. The demonstrations have spread across key towns, including Muzaffarabad and Rawalakot, bringing into sharp focus the widening disconnect between the people and the Pakistani state. At the heart of the agitation lie everyday grievances. Inflation has pushed the prices of essential commodities beyond the reach of ordinary citizens. Electricity tariffs have risen sharply. Shortages of subsidised wheat flour have fuelled public resentment. The public distribution system has steadily deteriorated, while unemployment, poverty and inadequate public services have further deepened the crisis. For many residents, these are not temporary hardships but symptoms of decades of administrative failure. The absence of meaningful dialogue between Islamabad and the people of PoK has created precisely such a vacuum. Genuine demands raised by the Joint Awami Action Committee (JAAC) have, in the opinion of its supporters, been met with indifference rather than engagement. As frustration mounted, demonstrations became the only avenue through which ordinary citizens could express their grievances. Political representation has emerged as another major flashpoint. Critics argue that local institutions possess limited autonomy and that important decisions continue to be dictated from Islamabad. Public anger has intensified following the cancellation of 12 reserved Assembly seats for Kashmiri refugees, a move that many believe has further weakened democratic representation. Coercive Tactics Instead of addressing these concerns through dialogue and reform, Pakistan has largely relied on coercion. Security forces have launched extensive crackdowns against demonstrators, with reports alleging the use of live ammunition and military-grade weapons in densely populated areas. The Pakistani government has responded by banning the Joint Awami Action Committee under anti-terrorism laws. Defence Minister Khawaja Asif has defended the security operations and accused protesters of acting in India's interest. Such accusations, however, do little to address the underlying issues that brought thousands onto the streets. Branding dissent as external conspiracy may serve immediate political purposes, but it cannot substitute for governance. The unrest has also drawn support from Pakistani students, who have organised demonstrations in Islamabad, Lahore and Karachi, demanding justice for the protesters and calling for an impartial investigation into the violence. Their participation indicates that the issue has expanded beyond PoK and now resonates with wider concerns about democratic rights and state accountability within Pakistan itself. The crisis reflects a deeper structural failure. Pakistan’s promise of national unity has repeatedly been tested by ethnic, regional and political fault lines. Balochistan continues to witness insurgency, while unrest in PoK points to another region where the relationship between the state and society has steadily deteriorated. Without inclusive governance and meaningful political participation, such tensions are unlikely to disappear. India should seize this strategic moment to work towards the liberation of PoK from decades of injustice, maladministration and state-sponsored violence. The mistake committed during the early years of the Kashmir dispute should now be corrected through decisive national policy. Such a course would not merely strengthen India's strategic position but also help integrate the entire region of Jammu and Kashmir under the Union of India. Following the abrogation of Article 370, the next logical step is to reclaim PoK, thereby ending Pakistan’s use of the territory for cross-border terrorism. (The writer is a foreign affairs expert. Views personal.)

Selective Outrage

India’s left-liberal media has long prided itself on being the torchbearer of secularism, dissent and moral rectitude. In the aftermath of ‘Operation Sindoor,’ the precision military strike launched by the Modi government against Pakistan-based terror camps, it has revealed its not a principled commitment to peace or truth, but a disturbing penchant for ideological prejudice, performative sanctimony and selective outrage.


The operation itself was a textbook display of calibrated force and geopolitical prudence. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, often caricatured as ‘authoritarian’ by the ‘liberal’ English-language commentariat, chose patience over provocation. He consulted opposition leaders, held detailed discussions with defence chiefs and took key international stakeholders, notably the United States and Russia, into confidence before authorising limited military action. The symbolism of ‘Operation Sindoor’ was also carefully crafted: a pointed reminder that the attack’s real victims were Hindu women widowed by Pakistan-sponsored militants in Kashmir. The government’s briefings were also strategic and symbolic as two ranking female officers, one of them Muslim, were made the public face of the mission, underlining a new Indian confidence that blends military muscle with democratic pluralism.


But this was unacceptable for India’s entrenched ‘left-liberal’ press, steeped in academic jargon, Western validation and a knee-jerk hostility to anything remotely ‘Hindutva.’ That a Muslim officer briefed the nation on ‘Operation Sindoor’ was branded ‘tokenism’ by such commentators. Others crudely alleged that the April 22 Pahalgam massacre was the logical culmination of reported atrocities against Muslims since Modi came to power in 2014.


The semantic nitpicking over ‘Operation Sindoor’ was maddening. An editor of a prominent magazine dubbed the operation’s name as ‘patriarchal’ and coded in Hindutva tropes. In a bizarre case of moral inversion, sindoor was likened to symbols of ‘honour killings’ and gender oppression, ignoring both its cultural resonance and the cruel reality that these women had lost their husbands in cold blood. For years, India’s ‘secular’ commentariat nurtured a preordained binary: the Congress may be flawed but was at least ‘secular’ while the BJP was an inveterate ‘fascist.’ Thus, the 2002 Gujarat riots are always focused upon but the Congress-backed pogrom of the Sikhs in 1984 is either downplayed or rationalised. Terrorism in Kashmir is tragic, but state retaliation is ‘jingoism.’ A strong Muslim voice in government is ‘tokenism’ but its absence is ‘exclusion.’ Even journalistic rigour is selectively applied. When Pakistan claimed to have downed Indian jets, some Indian outlets rushed to amplify the story before verification, inadvertently echoing enemy propaganda.


Dissent is vital in any democracy. But when its becomes indistinguishable from disdain, when editorial choices are dictated by ideological conformity, then the press becomes a caricature of itself. Ironically, many of these journalists enjoy robust free speech and loudly lament India’s supposed slide into ‘fascism’ from the safety of their X handles. Yet they turn a blind eye to Putin’s repression, Erdogan’s purges or Xi Jinping’s camps. In their eyes, Modi remains the greatest threat to democracy even as they broadcast their outrage freely, without fear of censorship or reprisal. ‘Operation Sindoor’ was a statement of cultural self-confidence. That confidence has rattled those who have spent their careers gatekeeping Indian discourse. Today, their monopoly is over. The people are watching and they no longer believe that the emperor has clothes.

Comments

bottom of page