NAMES: KHADIJA MAZHAR, RAAKIA RANA, SANA SOHAIL,
AQSA TAHIR, SAAD BIN RASHID
CLASS: BBA 6E
SUBJECT: PAKISTAN & GEOPOLITICAL STUDIES
TASK: FINAL PROJECT
TOPIC: KASHMIR ISSUE: BONE OF CONTENTION BETWEEN PAKISTAN & INDIA
SUBMITTED TO: MA’AM NAZISH IQBAL
DATE: 22nd DECEMBER 2023
Table of Contents
Introduction 3
Background 3
The First War (1947-1948) 4
The Second War (1965) 5
1
The Third War (1971) 6
Efforts to Resolve the Conflict & Why They Failed 7
Article 370 & it’s Significance 9
Laws & Human Rights’ Violation 10
Role of UN & Other Countries12
What’s In It for India & Pakistan? 13
Current Scenario 14
Recommendations & Conclusion 15
References 16
2
THE KASHMIR ISSUE: BONE OF CONTENTION
BETWEEN PAKISTAN & INDIA
Introduction
Nestled within the landscapes of the Himalayan region, the Kashmir Valley has long been
admired for its matchless natural beauty. However, beneath this exterior lies an intricate
geopolitical challenge that has ignited tensions and dispute for an extensive seven decades—
known as the Kashmir Issue. Our report thoroughly explores the elaborate historical, political,
and cultural dimensions of the disagreement, scrutinizing its origins and transformation into a
resulting persistent point of contention between Pakistan and India. The roots of the Kashmir
issue trace back to the partition of British India in 1947, in the establishment of two independent
nations—India and Pakistan. The princely state of Jammu and Kashmir faced a pivotal decision
during this division, torn between accession to India or Pakistan. The subsequent accession to
India and the deployment of troops in the region marked the onset of a prolonged and
contentious chapter in the history of South Asia. Today, the Kashmir dispute persists as the
oldest unresolved international conflict in the world.
Background
The historical context of the Kashmir issue traces back to the partition of British India in August
1947, which led to the creation of two independent nations, India, and Pakistan. The division also
necessitated the resolution of the status of princely states that comprised of 40% of the land,
regarding whether they would accede to India or Pakistan. While most princely states were
smoothly allocated, the fate of Jammu and Kashmir remained a contentious issue.
In an agreement reached on June 3rd, 1947 (3rd June Plan), it was decided that the allocation of
princely states would be based on geographical factors, religious dominance, and the choice of
the state subjects themselves. Considering the Muslim majority in Jammu and Kashmir, it was
inclined towards acceding to Pakistan, however, at that time, Maharaja Hari Singh, a Hindu, was
the ruler of this state. Therefore, he reached a Standstill Agreement for initial delay as a
temporary solution that Pakistan approved, however, on 26 th October 1947, during the first Pak-
Indo War, Maharaja Hari Singh (still under this agreement), fraudulently signed the Instrument of
3
Accession to India. Upon acknowledgment of the accession, India sent troops to Kashmir to
suppress the uprising and drive the Pakistani tribesmen out to gain control of the Kashmiri land.
Consequently, the portion India illegally occupied constituted of two-thirds of Kashmir, while
Pakistan retained control over the remaining territory, known as Azad Kashmir. Utilizing both the
principles of the two-nation theory, along with considerations of demographics and geographical
contiguity, it can be asserted that the entirety of Kashmir rightfully belonged to Pakistan. For
example, the region held a majority Muslim population and, beyond its geographical proximity
to Pakistan, maintained crucial economic ties with the territories under Pakistan.
The First War (1947-1948)
First, if we dive into what triggered the first Pak Indo War as well as how India illegally gained
control of Kashmir, it was just after the Standstill Agreement was signed. Not long after this
Agreement, a Muslim genocide unfolded in Jammu and Kashmir, after the uprising and unrest of
its subjects began, as they demanded accession to Pakistan. Instead of adhering to the agreed-
upon principle of religious dominance, the Maharaja sought aid of radical groups and guerrilla
forces, ensuing a brutal campaign against the Muslim population. Thousands of Muslims were
killed, and many others were subjected to violence as they attempted to flee to Pakistan.
Lord Mountbatten, the British Viceroy and Governor-General of India at the time, purposefully
chose to ignore the situation, while thousands of Kashmiri Muslims were methodically killed by
Maharaja's force supported by Hindus and Sikhs, as well as the radical Rastriya Swayamsevak
Sangh (RSS) cadres. While women were subjected to atrocious crimes, the broader Muslim
community faced displacement and violence, attempting to transform Jammu and Kashmir into a
Hindu-majority state.
Several days after the start of this Muslim massacre, on 22 nd October 1947, around 2000 tribal
Muslim fighters from the North-western province arrived in Kashmir to fight these Hindu and
Sikh forces. Faced with the prospect of losing against the tribal fighters, Maharaja Hari Singh
sought aid from the Indian government, and alongside, signed the Instrument of Accession to
India three days later. The Indian Defense Committee, overseen by Mountbatten, hastily
dispatched arms, and ammunition to Jammu and Kashmir, but Mountbatten stipulated that
4
accession as per inclination of the majority subjects (Muslims) was mandatory once the situation
was taken under control. Adding to the severity, both the Indian National Army and RSS
relocated their headquarters to Jammu and Kashmir, furnished with military weaponry to assert
solid control over the Muslim population in the region. By 1948, the Pakistani armed forces also
arrived in Kashmir, and in consequence to this prevailing war, India was able to illegally occupy
two-thirds of Kashmir, while Pakistan won control over the remaining, recognized as Azad
Kashmir.
The same year, United Nations (UN) intervened, and the UN Security Council passed a
resolution that called to a ceasefire, deciding that the fate of Kashmir must be based upon an
impartial plebiscite of the subjects in the region. Lastly, under this resolution, a Line of Control
was also established between Pakistan’s Azad Kashmir and Illegally Indian Occupied Kashmir.
The Second War (1965)
The 1947-1948 war wasn’t the only war fought over Kashmir between India and Pakistan. The
second war over the same conflict between the two took place in 1965, that initiated from the
Operation Gibraltar, a covert military operation that Pakistan started in August 1965. This
operation involved aid to insurgents or local fighters for independence in the Kashmir region that
was illegally under Indian administration.
Pakistan dispatched armed infiltrators into Illegally-Indian-administered Kashmir as part of
Operation Gibraltar, to incite a local revolution against Indian administration. The procedure,
though, did not proceed as expected. Rather than receiving broad local support, it heightened
tensions between Pakistan and India, which ultimately escalated into the Indo-Pakistani War of
1965.
India reacted right away, viewing Operation Gibraltar as an infringement on its sovereignty. By
mid-August 1965, the violence had spread beyond Kashmir, resulting in fierce fighting in areas
like Punjab and Rajasthan. The battle continued, on several fronts, during September 1965, with
both countries involved in fierce combat. Concerned about the conflict's escalation, the United
5
States, and the United Kingdom attempted mediation, while Soviet Union (USSR) was
instrumental in promoting dialogue to call for a ceasefire as well.
The war's outcome had a long-lasting effect and fueled ongoing hostilities between India and
Pakistan, especially regarding Kashmir, and South Asia's geopolitics are still reverberating from
the 1965 conflict.
Conflicts came to an end on January 10, 1966, when the Tashkent Agreement was signed where
Lal Bahadur Shastri, the Indian leader, and Pakistani leader, Ayub Khan, convened for a
momentous summit in Tashkent. This accord, which was mediated by USSR, sought to restore
the pre-war situation, wherein both nations decided to put an end to their hostilities. Moreover,
they made the decision to cede any lands they may have taken during the fighting and return to
their pre-conflict borders, as well as return any prisoners of the war. The goal of the agreement
was to restore normalcy to their diplomatic and business ties. This meant that instead of fighting,
they would converse with one another like normal nations and resolve differences through
dialogue.
The Third War (1971)
The year 1971 marked a significant chapter in South Asian history, with another Indo-Pakistani
War unfolding against the backdrop of political turmoil, aspirations for independence, and once
again, the Kashmir dispute.
East Pakistan, culturally distinct from the western part of the country, longed for autonomy
beyond the control of West Pakistan, and the quest for their rights commenced soon after the
formation of Pakistan. The initial years witnessed resistance to recognizing Bengali as an official
language of Pakistan, economic imbalances between East and West Pakistan, dominance of the
West Pakistani ruling class over the entire country, and a derogatory stance towards East
Pakistani culture and its people. These factors contributed to a strained relationship between the
two regions, and the growing discontent erupted into a full-scale independence movement,
fueling what is known as the 1971 Indo-Pakistani War.
6
If we first look closely into the last push towards the war, in December 1970, tensions escalated
as the Awami League, under the leadership of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, emerged victorious in
the national elections. However, West Pakistan parties, particularly the Pakistan People’s Party
(PPP), declined to transfer power. This situation intensified tensions between the two, resulting
in an unrest in East Pakistan. In March 1971, the Pakistan Army stepped in, using the ongoing
violence as a reason, to suppress the rising desire for independence in the eastern part of the
country. As the violence continued into the summer, many refugees fled to India. New Delhi
cited this influx as a reason to militarily intervene in early December 1971.
Indian tanks rolled into East Pakistan, alongside 250,000 soldiers from the Indian Army, and
200,000 Mukti Bahini members (the Bengali liberation fighters), all against the Pakistan Army of
34000 soldiers only. Pakistanis were caught off guard as they did not perceive an existential
threat from India at that moment, as the only conflict with India was seen in Kashmir; a matter
being discussed at the UN Security Council. Therefore, the Indian attack implied an expansion of
hostilities between Pakistan and India.
When Bangladesh got independence, Kashmir’s unresolved status cast a long shadow, continuing
to be a source of contention and a potential flashpoint. The 1971 war further strained relations
between India and Pakistan, and Pakistan's defeat in the eastern order weakened its overall
position, leading to a temporary shift in the geopolitical dynamics of South Asia.
Efforts to Resolve the Conflict & Why They Failed
As we all know, the Kashmir issue has been a long-standing point of contention between India
and Pakistan since the partition of British India in 1947. Although many efforts have been made
to solve this problem, a comprehensive and permanent solution has not been achieved yet. The
following are efforts that were made throughout the years by both countries to resolve the
dispute:
i. UN Intervention: After the First India-Pakistan War in 1947-1948, the United Nations
intervened and a ceasefire was negotiated through UN Security Council Resolution 47. The
resolution called for a plebiscite in Jammu and Kashmir to determine its future. The failure of the
7
plebiscite was mainly due to mutual mistrust, disagreements over preconditions/requirements,
and lack of implementation mechanisms. Due to this, the envisioned plebiscite to determine the
future of Jammu and Kashmir never took place, and the region became a longstanding point of
contention between India and Pakistan.
ii. Simla Agreement: After the 1971 India-Pakistan war that led to the creation of Bangladesh,
the Simla Agreement was signed in 1972 between the Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and
Pakistani President Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. The Simla Agreement was an important diplomatic
initiative to resolve disputes between two neighboring states through bilateral negotiations and
mutual understanding.
Despite the agreement`s intention to usher in a new era of stability and cooperation, subsequent
disputes, and conflicts, particularly over the long-standing Kashmir issue persisted. Both India
and Pakistan had different views on the status of Kashmir, and the Simla Agreement did not lead
to a final resolution of the issue. The complexity of historical grievances, differing national
narratives, and geopolitical considerations continued to hinder the achievement of a
comprehensive and durable solution to the Kashmir conflict which was the Simla agreement.
iii. Agra Summit: In July 2001, Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Pakistani
President Pervez Musharraf met in Agra for a summit aimed at addressing a range of issues, with
the long-standing Kashmir conflict at the forefront of the event. This summit was an important
attempt to promote dialogue between the two countries to resolve tense relations. However, the
meeting collapsed because of disagreements over the interpretation of the joint statement that
was intended to outline the discussions and the agreements that were to be reached during the
summit.
The failure of these efforts made by India and Pakistan can be a result of a combination of
historical mistrust, different national interests, domestic political considerations, and the ongoing
threat of terrorism from both sides. The two countries have been unable to find common ground
on the issues, and various attempts at dialogue and negotiation have been hindered by
geopolitical complexities and the domestic dynamics of regions.
8
The 2008 Mumbai attacks had a significant impact on the dynamics of India-Pakistan relations,
especially regarding the Kashmir issue. The attack, carried out by terrorists that India linked to
Pakistan-based militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba, resulted in the loss of many lives and heightened
tensions between the two countries. India has accused Pakistan of harboring and supporting the
terrorist group responsible for the attack, further complicating efforts to resolve the long-running
Kashmir conflict. The occurrence of the Mumbai attacks has redirected the focus from
diplomatic dialogue and confidence-building measures to counter-terrorism efforts.
Currently, India-Pakistan relations remain strained with minimal official engagement on the
Kashmir issue. For now, both sides focus on internal priorities and managing the LoC situation.
Article 370 & it’s Significance
Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, which granted special autonomy to the region of Jammu
and Kashmir, has been a topic of historical significance. It was a provision that granted Jammu
and Kashmir special autonomy to have its own constitution and decision-making powers, except
in matters related to defense, communications, and foreign affairs. Not only did it enable Jammu
and Kashmir to have its own constitution, but also a separate flag, alongside safeguarding the
native Kashmiris by preventing displacement or attempts to alter the state's demographics. This
was achieved by restricting individuals from the rest of India from purchasing properties,
obtaining certification as permanent residents of Jammu and Kashmir, or securing employment
in local government jobs.
On August 5, 2019, the Modi government took the step of revoking Article 370 and integrating
the Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir into the Indian Union. This action was
executed through the Jammu & Kashmir Reorganization Bill, which was passed in the Indian
Parliament. The abolition of Article 370 had a dual impact because firstly, it extinguished the
state's autonomy and secondly, it nullified Article 35-A, the provision that safeguarded native
Kashmiris by preventing displacement and any attempts to alter the state's demographics. This
abolition aligns with the systematic strategies of the Modi government, aiming to alter the
demographic composition of Kashmir. This implies granting citizenship and property rights to
9
other ethnicities, primarily Hindus, resulting in a shift in population dynamics and undermining
the claims of Kashmiri Muslims.
Since August 2019, the residents of the Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK)
have been enduring a persistent curfew. Their fundamental rights, including the freedom to
move, communicate, earn a living, and lead a free life, have been seized by the Indian
government.
It is crucial to note that constitutionally, Article 370 could only be revoked by the decision of the
Jammu and Kashmir Constituent Assembly, which had been dissolved in 1956. In 2018,
Kashmir's legislative body was also dismantled, leading to the imposition of governor rule in the
state. This wasn't the first attempt to revoke Jammu and Kashmir's special status; in 1963, Indian
Home Minister Gulzari Lal Nanda had proposed its abrogation before the Indian parliament.
However, this move materialized only after Narendra Modi's re-election as Prime Minister,
fulfilling a promise made in the BJP election strategy.
To preempt any protests and potential backlash, an additional 450,000 troops were deployed, and
mainstream Kashmiri leaders were placed under house arrest. Internet and communication
services were curtailed, and a curfew was imposed in Kashmir that persists to this day. This
situation has pushed the internationalization of the Kashmir issue, as this unilateral action has
invalidated India's assertion that Jammu and Kashmir is a bilateral matter.
Laws & Human Rights’ Violation
International law plays a role in guiding the behavior of nations. It's essential to recognize that
interpretations of international law can vary, and the complexities of the Kashmir dispute make it
a highly debated and sensitive topic.
i. United Nations Resolutions & International Human Right Laws: India's reluctance to
implement certain United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolutions related to Kashmir is a
violation of international law, for instance, violation of the principle of self-determination. The
UNSC has addressed the Kashmir issue through several resolutions, the most notable being
10
Resolution 47 adopted in 1948. The UN resolutions call for a fair and impartial vote from the
subjects of Kashmir to determine the future status of their region, which has been avoided by
India throughout the decades.
Under all circumstances, it is illegal under international human rights law to arbitrarily deny
someone their life. India's government is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights (ICCPR), and despite the role, has been violating rights of thousands of
Kashmiris. The right to life cannot be violated, as stated clearly in Article 6 of the ICCPR,
therefore, even in an emergency, "no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life."
The main government forces in Jammu and Kashmir are the Indian army, Special Task Force,
Border Security Force, state-sponsored paramilitary groups, and village defense committees, and
these have consistently violated basic standards of international human rights law. The
imposition of curfews and mass detentions during periods of unrest has been criticized as a
violation of the right to freedom of movement and assembly. These measures are
disproportionate and restrict the basic civil liberties of the population.
Instances of communication blackouts, including internet shutdowns and restrictions on mobile
networks, have been cited as violations of the right to freedom of expression. These measures
hinder the free flow of information and impede the ability of residents to communicate.
Reports of torture and inhumane treatment in detention have been raised, with concerns about the
lack of accountability for such actions. Human rights organizations contend that such practices
violate international laws prohibiting torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. In the
end, the Indian government holds responsibility for all these acts.
ii. Geneva Conventions: There have been allegations of extrajudicial executions, torture, and
other violent acts in Kashmir, which led people to contend that India is in breach of the Geneva
Conventions that set forth guidelines for protecting civilians and prisoners of war during combat.
iii. Armed Forces Special Powers Act: Allegations of violations of human rights have dogged
the situation in Kashmir, with the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) often referred to
as a contributing factor. The Act was passed in 1990 and grants the armed forces special powers
deployed in "disturbed areas," including Jammu and Kashmir. Security forces can operate with
11
little accountability because of the vast discretionary powers provided by AFSPA, leading to a
culture of liberty. In simpler words, armed services members are legally free from prosecution
for actions carried out while performing their duties unless prior authorization is obtained.
In Kashmir, security personnel have been accused of extrajudicial executions. The AFSPA may
have contributed to a situation where human rights breaches, such as extrajudicial murders, take
place without sufficient accountability by providing the armed forces legal protection.
The disproportionate use of pellet guns with the use of force is inconsistent with international
standards, particularly when dealing with civilian populations during protests. Serious injuries
from these shotguns include blindness and disfigured faces.
Role of UN & Other Countries
i. United Nations (UN): The UN has, at times, expressed a willingness to mediate between India
and Pakistan to find a peaceful resolution to the Kashmir dispute and has voiced concerns
regarding violations of human rights in the region. Moreover, independent investigations into
allegations of inappropriate use of force, arbitrary detentions, and restrictions on freedom of
expression in the region have been demanded by several UN bodies.
However, India has consistently indicated that the Kashmir issue is a bilateral matter to be
resolved through dialogue with Pakistan, and the 1990 prohibition prevents UN and International
Amnesty from entering Kashmir. It also contends that any solution must preserve India's
territorial integrity, and that the UN resolutions are out of date and ineffective. On the contrary,
Pakistan has made diplomatic attempts to win support of other countries about its position on
Kashmir by internationalizing the conflict.
ii. Other Countries: The world took notice of the injustices committed against Kashmiri
Muslims by India as well as its unilateral step of rescinding Jammu and Kashmir's special status.
The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), comprising of 57 countries, has urged for the
implementation of UN resolutions, and has expressed solidarity with the people of Kashmir. It
also maintains a Contact Group in Jammu and Kashmir that coordinates efforts to address the
12
concerns of the Kashmiri people to hold frequent discussions on the matter alongside seeking to
advance the Kashmir dispute on a global scale.
Despite condemning Indian injustices in Jammu & Kashmir, the Organization of Islamic
Cooperation (OIC) appeared to be lenient due to trade and economic ties with India, and
consequently, Pakistan rejected the UAE's invitation to attend alongside India at the OIC meeting
in March 2019. Saudi Arabia defended multiple billions of dollars in investments made in India
through a collaboration between Armco and Reliance, referring to the Kashmir dispute as an
“internal matter of India”. Similarly, Oman, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Qatar; all refrained from
making an official comment regarding the abrogation of Article 370. On the bright side,
however, Pakistan received complete diplomatic and moral assistance from Turkey.
- United States: The US has shown concern and called for peace over the situation in
Kashmir. To resolve the matter, it has underlined how crucial it is for India and Pakistan to
have bilateral talks.
- China: China has expressed interest in the Kashmir dispute being the neighbor of both
Pakistan and India. It has voiced concerns about the current situation of the state, calling for
discussion and a peaceful resolution on occasion.
- European Union (EU): To resolve the Kashmir dispute, the EU has urged Pakistan and India
to engage in negotiations. It generally emphasizes the significance of a peaceful resolution,
though individual EU member states may have different opinions.
In general, the international world has not responded much to India's unilateral change of the
disputed territory's constitutional and demographic status, despite UNSC resolutions to the
contrary. Kashmiri Muslims are still being deliberately cleansed by the Indian government,
despite their persistent demand for their right to self-determination. Ironically, even being the
defenders of freedom, peace, and human rights, the west is blind to the suffering of the
Kashmiris.
What’s In It For India & Pakistan?
13
The conflict is a long-standing and contentious territorial dispute between India and Pakistan, but
the question remains- why do India and Pakistan want Kashmir, and what is in it for them?
i. Strategic Location: The core of the ongoing conflict between India and Pakistan is primarily
based on the geopolitical significance of Kashmir. Kashmir, situated on the border between the
two countries, is vital for military strategy since it acts as a buffer zone. Kashmir's geographical
position offers strategic advantages in defense by acting as a natural barrier influencing military
deployment. Control over Kashmir is precious in monitoring and controlling important mountain
passes and routes; it is not just a matter of territorial sovereignty. Therefore, Kashmir's
geopolitical significance goes beyond its physical borders, influencing the overall security
dynamics.
ii. Water Resources: The water resources originating from the Himalayan region of Kashmir,
particularly the Indus River, hold profound significance in the geopolitical context between India
and Pakistan. The Indus River, one of the major rivers in the Indian subcontinent, is a lifeline for
Pakistan's agriculture, sustaining the irrigation needs of its agricultural heartland. The waters
from the Indus support the livelihoods of millions of people, making it an indispensable resource
for the nation's food security. Control over the headwaters of the Indus in Kashmir provides India
with potential leverage over these vital water resources crucial for Pakistan's agricultural
productivity. This control could be wielded as a diplomatic tool, allowing India to influence
water-related agreements, or in a worst-case scenario, it could become a strategic pressure point,
impacting the agricultural and economic stability of Pakistan.
iii. Religious Significance: Kashmir's religious demographics, with a Muslim-majority
population, carry deep significance in the context of the Islamic identity shared by Pakistan. The
predominantly Muslim population of Kashmir resonates with Pakistan's self-perception as an
Islamic state. The cultural and religious ties between the people of Kashmir and Pakistan
contribute to a sense of shared identity, fostering a connection that extends beyond geographical
and political boundaries. The affinity based on religious commonality has been a driving force in
Pakistan's support for the Kashmiri cause, asserting that the Muslim-majority region should align
with the larger Muslim nation.
14
Today’s Scenario
The present-day Kashmiri youth openly express aspirations for Azadi (freedom) and often
engage in acts of defiance, such as marching to Muzaffarabad and raising the Pakistani flag.
Funerals of resistance fighters are seen as celebrations, with women and children chanting songs
of Azadi and coffins draped in the Pakistani flag. Despite decades of heavy Indian investment in
lobbying and perception-building efforts, the Kashmiri youth remain steadfast in their resistance.
i. Military Standoff: The Line of Control (LoC) between India and Pakistan remains a heavily
militarized zone, with both countries deploying significant forces. Ceasefire violations and cross-
border firing incidents occur sporadically, contributing to heightened tensions. The military
standoff is a manifestation of the longstanding territorial dispute over Kashmir, with both nations
maintaining a state of military readiness along the de facto border.
ii. Political Deadlock: Despite international calls for dialogue and diplomatic resolution of the
Kashmir issue, there has been limited progress in meaningful negotiations between India and
Pakistan. The political deadlock reflects the deep-seated historical and ideological differences,
making it challenging for the two nations to find common ground. The lack of significant
diplomatic breakthroughs contributes to the persistence of the status quo and sustains the broader
regional instability.
iii. Human Rights Concerns: Allegations of human rights abuses by security forces on both
sides of the Line of Control persist, further complicating the Kashmir issue. Reports of
extrajudicial killings, disappearances, and restrictions on civil liberties have been documented.
The human rights situation adds a layer of complexity to the conflict, drawing international
attention and condemnation. The unresolved human rights concerns contribute to the region's
volatility and impede efforts toward a peaceful resolution.
Recommendations & Conclusion
In conclusion, the Kashmir issue remains a complex and sensitive geopolitical challenge that
demands careful consideration, diplomatic engagement, and a commitment to finding a just and
lasting solution. The historical and cultural significance of the region, coupled with the
15
aspirations and rights of its people, necessitate an inclusive dialogue involving all relevant
stakeholders. International mediation efforts and a genuine willingness to address the concerns of
both India and Pakistan, as well as the aspirations of the Kashmiri people, are crucial for
fostering a peaceful resolution.
The international community must encourage confidence-building measures, promote dialogue,
and respect the human rights of the Kashmiri population. Sustainable peace in the region requires
a comprehensive approach that goes beyond short-term political considerations and addresses the
socio-economic development of the region. In the absence of such considerations, the Kashmir
issue will continue to cast a long shadow over the stability and security of the region.
REFERENCES
https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2022/12/16/bitter-truths-about-the-1971-indo-pak-war/
https://www.hilal.gov.pk/eng-article/detail/mji5nq==.html
https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2019/12/16/remembering-the-war-of-1971-in-east-pakistan
https://www.dailysabah.com/opinion/op-ed/steps-to-take-for-a-peaceful-kashmir
https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/546971-indian-occupation-of-kashmir-in-1947-kashmiris-observe-black-day-today
https://www.pw.live/exams/defence/indo-pakistani-war-of-1947-1948/
https://ciaotest.cc.columbia.edu/olj/sa/sa_apr02pas01.html
https://history.state.gov/milestones/1961-1968/india-pakistan-war
https://www.bbc.com/news/10537286
https://www.aa.com.tr/en/asia-pacific/pakistan-says-no-change-in-stance-on-kashmir/2194440
https://www.pakun.org/kashmir/history.php
16
17
