CONFLICT IN KASHMIR

Background
Map of the area
Kashmir is a geographical region in far north of the Indian subcontinent, China in the far
west and Pakistan in the east. Until the mid-19th century, the term Kashmir geographically
denoted and the Pir Panjal Mountain range. Today, it denotes a larger area that includes the
Indian-administered territories of Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistani-administered territories of Azad
Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan, and Chinese-administered territories of Aksai Chin and
the Trans-Karakoram Tract.

Brief description of the country

In the first half of the 1st millennium, the Kashmir region became an important centre of
Hinduism and later of Buddhist. Later in the ninth century, Shaivism arose. 1 Islamization in
Kashmir took place during 13th to 15th century and led to the eventual decline of the Kashmir
Shaivism in Kashmir. However, the achievements of the previous civilizations were not lost, but
were to a great extent absorbed by the new Islamic polity and culture which gave rise to Modern
Kashmir Sufi Mysticism. In 1339, Shah Mir became the first Muslim ruler of Kashmir,
inaugurating the Salatin-i-Kashmir dynasty. For the next five centuries, Muslim monarchs ruled
Kashmir, including the Mughals, who ruled from 1586 until 1751, and the Afghan Durrani
Empire, which ruled from 1747 until 1819. That year, the Sikhs, under Ranjit Singh, annexed
Kashmir.2 In 1846, after the Sikh defeat in the First Anglo-Sikh War, and upon the purchase of
the region from the British under the Treaty of Amritsar, the Raja of Jammu, Gulab Singh,
became the new ruler of Kashmir. The rule of his descendants, under the paramountcy of the
British Crown, lasted until 1947, when the former princely state became a disputed territory, now
administered by three countries: India, Pakistan, and the People's Republic of China.

1 Basham, A. L. (2005) The wonder that was India, Picador. Pp. 572.
2 Imperial Gazetteer of India, volume 15. 1908. Oxford University Press, Oxford and
London. pp. 9395.
2

Outline history of the conflict

The Kashmir conflict is a territorial conflict between India, Pakistan, and to a limited
degree, China. It started just after the partition of India. 3 India and Pakistan have fought three
wars over Kashmir, including the Indo-Pakistani Wars of 1947 and 1965, as well as the Kargil
War. Furthermore, the two countries have been involved in several skirmishes over control of the
Siachen Glacier. India claims the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir, and, as of 2010,
administers approximately 43% of the region. They control Jammu, the Kashmir Valley, Ladakh,
and the Siachen Glacier. India's claims are contested by Pakistan, which administers
approximately 37% of Kashmir, namely Azad Kashmir and the Northern Areas, or GilgitBaltistan.4 China currently occupies Demchok district, the Shaksgam Valley, and the Aksai Chin
region. China's claim over these territories has been disputed by India since China took Aksai
Chin during the Sino-Indian War of 1962.

3 "Q&A: Kashmir dispute". BBC News. Retrieved 30 April 2016.

4 Durrani, Atiq (4 February 2013). "PAK-INDIA Dialogue: Single-Point-Agenda:
KASHMIR". PKKH. Retrieved 30 June 2016.
3

The root of conflict between the Kashmiri insurgents and the Indian Government is tied
to a dispute over local autonomy.5 Democratic development was limited in Kashmir until the late
1970s and by 1988 many of the democratic reforms provided by the Indian Government had
been reversed. Non-violent channels for expressing discontent were thereafter limited and caused
a dramatic increase in support for insurgents advocating violent secession from India. In 1987, a
disputed state election created a catalyst for the insurgency when it resulted in some of the state's
legislative assembly members forming armed insurgent groups. In July 1988 a series of
demonstrations, strikes and attacks on the Indian Government began the Kashmir Insurgency.

Although thousands of people have died as a result of the turmoil in Jammu and Kashmir,
the conflict has become less deadly in recent years. Protest movements created to voice
Kashmir's disputes and grievances with the Indian government, specifically the Indian Military,
have been active in Jammu & Kashmir since 1989. Elections held in 2008 were generally
regarded as fair by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and had a high voter
turnout in spite of calls by separatist militants for a boycott. The election resulted in the creation
of the pro-India Jammu & Kashmir National Conference, which then formed a government in the
state.6 According to Voice of America, many analysts have interpreted the high voter turnout in
this election as a sign that the people of Kashmir endorsed Indian rule in the state. But in 2010
unrest erupted after alleged fake encounter of local youth by security force. Thousands of youths
pelted security forces with rocks, burned government offices and attacked railway stations and
official vehicles in steadily intensifying violence. The Indian government blamed separatists and
Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistan-based militant group for stoking the 2010 protests.

5 Conflict Summary, India: Kashmir, "Roots of Conflict and the emergence of

Kashmir Insurgents" Uppsala Conflict Data Program Conflict Encyclopedia, Retrieved
1 June 2016
6 "Freedom in the World 2009 Kashmir (India)". UNHCR. 16 July 2009. Retrieved 1
June 2016.
4

However, elections held in 2014 saw highest voters turnout in 26 years of history in
Jammu and Kashmir.7 However analysts explain that the high voter turnout in Kashmir is not an
endorsement of Indian rule by the Kashmiri population, rather most people vote for daily issues
such as food and electricity. An opinion poll conducted by Chatham House found that in the
Kashmir valley - the mainly Muslim area In Indian Kashmir at the centre of the insurgency support for independence varies between 74% to 95% in its various districts. Support for
remaining with India was however extremely high in predominantly Hindu Jammu and Buddhist
Ladakh.

According to Amnesty International, as of June 2015 no member of the security forces

deployed in Jammu and Kashmir has been tried for human rights violations in a civilian court. 8
In October 2015 Jammu and Kashmir High Court said that article 370 is "permanent" and
Jammu & Kashmir did not merge with India the way other princely states merged but retained
special status and limited sovereignty under Indian constitution.

7 "Jammu and Kashmir registers highest voter turnout in 25 years, Jharkhand breaks
records". Deccan Chronicle. Retrieved 1 June 2016.
8 "India: "Denied": Failures in accountability for human rights violations by security
force personnel in Jammu and Kashmir". Amnesty International. 30 June 2015.
Retrieved 4 June 2016.
5

The conflict parties and issues

Who are the core conflict parties?
The Partition of British India came about in the aftermath of World War II, when both Great
Britain and British India were dealing with the economic stresses caused by the war and its
demobilisation. It was the intention of those who wished for a Muslim state to come from British
India to have a clean partition between independent and equal "Pakistan" and "Hindustan" once
independence came.

The partition itself, according to leading politicians such as Mohammed Ali Jinnah, leader of the
All India Muslim League, and Jawaharlal Nehru, leader of the Indian National Congress, should
have resulted in peaceful relations. As the Hindu and Muslim populations were scattered
unevenly in the whole country, the partition of British India into India and Pakistan in 1947 was
not possible along religious lines. Nearly one third of the Muslim population of British India
remained in India.9 Inter-communal violence between Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims resulted in
between 500,000 to 1 million casualties.

Princely-ruled territories, such as Kashmir and Hyderabad, were also involved in the Partition.
Rulers of these territories had the choice of joining India or Pakistan. Both India and Pakistan
laid claim on Kashmir and thus it became the main point of conflict. The ruler of Kashmir, which
had a Muslim majority population, joined India by signing the Instrument of Accession.
9 Dixit, Jyotindra Nath (2002). India-Pakistan in War & Peace. Routledge. p. 13.
6

Since the partition of British India in 1947 and creation of modern republics of India and
Pakistan, the two South Asian countries have been involved in four wars, including one
undeclared war, and many border skirmishes and military stand-offs.

What are their internal sub-groups, on what constituencies do they depend?

The insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir or the Kashmiri Insurgency is a conflict between
various Kashmiri separatists and nationalists sometimes known as "ultras and the Government
of India.10 Some of the ultras favour Kashmiri accession to Pakistan, while others seek Kashmir's
complete "independence".11 Since 2002, skirmishes with the local insurgents have constituted the
main conflict in the Kashmir region. The conflict in Jammu and Kashmir has strong Islamist
elements among the insurgents, with many of the "ultras" identifying with Jihadist movements
and supported by such.

The roots of the conflict between the Kashmiri insurgents and the Indian Government are
tied to a dispute over local autonomy. Democratic development was limited in Kashmir until the
late 1970s and by 1988 many of the democratic reforms provided by the Indian Government had
been reversed and non-violent channels for expressing discontent were limited and caused a
dramatic increase in support for insurgents advocating violent secession from India. In 1987, a
disputed State election12 created a catalyst for the insurgency when it resulted in some of the
state's legislative assembly members forming armed insurgent groups. In July 1988 a series of
demonstrations, strikes and attacks on the Indian Government began the Kashmir Insurgency
which during the 1990s escalated into the most important internal security issue in India.

10 "India funded militants in Kashmir to counter ISI: ex-RAW chief". The Express
Tribune. 4 July 2015. Retrieved 4 July 2015.
11 Social Studies S5 Ab. Pearson Education. p. 70.
12 "Elections in Kashmir". Kashmirlibrary.org. Retrieved 8 June 2016
7

Thousands of people have died during fighting between insurgents and the government as
well as thousands of civilians who have died as a result of being targeted by the various armed
groups. The Inter-Services Intelligence of Pakistan has been accused by India of supporting and
training mujahideen to fight in Jammu and Kashmir. In October 2015, former President of
Pakistan Pervez Musharraf admitted Pakistan had supported and trained insurgent groups to fight
in Kashmir during the 1990s, resulting in the ongoing insurgency. According to official figures
released in Jammu and Kashmir assembly, there were 3,400 disappearance cases and the conflict
has left more than 47,000 people dead which also includes 7,000 police personnel as of July
2009. However, the number of insurgency-related deaths in the state have fallen sharply since the
start of a slow-moving peace process between India and Pakistan.

What are the conflict issues?

Few issues rose from the territorial dispute between India and Pakistan. Indo-Pakistani
War of 1947 also known as the First Kashmir War started in October 1947 when Pakistan feared
that the Maharajah of the princely state of Kashmir and Jammu would accede to India. Following
partition, states were left to choose whether to join India or Pakistan or to remain independent.
Jammu and Kashmir, the largest of the princely states, had a predominantly Muslim population
ruled by the Hindu Maharaja Hari Singh. Tribal forces with support from the army of Pakistan
attacked and occupied parts of the princely state forcing the Maharajah to sign the Agreement to
the accession of the princely state to the Dominion of India to get Indian military aid. The UN
Security Council passed the Resolution 47 on 22 April 1948. The fronts solidified gradually
along what came to be known as the Line of Control. A formal cease-fire was declared at 23:59
on the night of 1 January 1949. India gained control of about two-third of the state including
Kashmir valley, Jammu and Ladakh. Whereas Pakistan gained roughly a third of Kashmir and
those are Azad Kashmir and GilgitBaltistan.

The Indo-Pakistani War continued on as the 2nd Kashmir War on 1965 started following
Pakistan's Operation Gibraltar, which was designed to infiltrate forces into Jammu and Kashmir
to precipitate an insurgency against rule by India. India retaliated by launching a full-scale
military attack on West Pakistan. The seventeen-day war caused thousands of casualties on both
sides and witnessed the largest engagement of armored vehicles and the largest tank battle since
World War II. The hostilities between the two countries ended after a ceasefire was declared

following diplomatic intervention by the Soviet Union and USA and the subsequent issuance of
the Tashkent Declaration. Both India and Pakistan claimed victory.13

The 3rd Kashmir War or Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 was unique in the way that it did not
involve the issue of Kashmir, but was rather precipitated by the crisis created by the political
battle between Sheikh Mujib, Leader of East Pakistan and Yahya-Bhutto, leaders of West
Pakistan brewing in erstwhile East Pakistan culminating in the declaration of Independence of
Bangladesh from the state system of Pakistan. Following Operation Searchlight and the 1971
Bangladesh atrocities, about 10 million Bengalis in East Pakistan took refuge in neighbouring
India.14 India intervened in the ongoing Bangladesh liberation movement. After a large scale preemptive strike by Pakistan, full-scale hostilities between the two countries commenced.

Pakistan attacked at several places along India's western border with Pakistan, but the
Indian Army successfully held their positions. The Indian Army quickly responded to the
Pakistan Army's movements in the west and made some initial gains, including capturing around
5,795 square miles of Pakistan territory (land gained by India in Pakistani Kashmir, Pakistani
Punjab and Sindh sectors but gifted it back to Pakistan in the Simla Agreement of 1972, as a
gesture of goodwill). Within two weeks of intense fighting, Pakistani forces in East Pakistan
surrendered to the joint command of Indian and Bangladeshi forces following which the People's
Republic of Bangladesh was created. This war saw the highest number of casualties in any of the
India-Pakistan conflicts, as well as the largest number of prisoners of war since the Second
World War after the surrender of more than 90,000 Pakistani military and civilians. In the words
of one Pakistani author, "Pakistan lost half its navy, a quarter of its air force and a third of its
army".

13 "Asia: Silent Guns, Wary Combatants". Time. 1 October 1965. Retrieved 9 June
2016. Quote: India, by contrast, is still the big gainer in the war.
14 Christophe Jaffrelot, Gillian Beaumont. A History of Pakistan and Its Origins.
Anthem Press, 2004.
10

The Kargil War is a conflict between the two countries where it is mostly limited. During
early 1999, Pakistani troops infiltrated across the Line of Control and occupied Indian territory
mostly in the Kargil district. India responded by launching a major military and diplomatic
offensive to drive out the Pakistani infiltrators. Two months into the conflict, Indian troops had
slowly retaken most of the ridges that were encroached by the infiltrators. According to official
count, an estimated 75%80% of the intruded area and nearly all high ground was back under
Indian control. Fearing large-scale escalation in military conflict, the international community,
led by the United States, increased diplomatic pressure on Pakistan to withdraw forces from
remaining Indian territory. Faced with the possibility of international isolation, the already fragile
Pakistani economy was weakened further. The morale of Pakistani forces after the withdrawal
declined as many units of the Northern Light Infantry suffered heavy casualties. The government
refused to accept the dead bodies of many officers, an issue that provoked outrage and protests in
the Northern Areas. Pakistan initially did not acknowledge many of its casualties, but Nawaz
Sharif later said that over 4,000 Pakistani troops were killed in the operation and that Pakistan
had lost the conflict.15 By the end of July 1999, organized hostilities in the Kargil district had
ceased.

15 Kapur, S. Paul (2007). Dangerous Deterrent: Nuclear Weapons Proliferation and

Conflict in South Asia (23rd ed.). Stanford University Press. p. 227
11

Is it possible to distinguish between positions, interests (material interests, values,

relationships) and needs?
Indian view
India claims that the Maharaja Hari Singh signed the Instrument of Accession in October
1947, handing control of the Kingdom of Jammu and Kashmir over to India, the region is theirs,
having been validated by the Indian Independence Act and the departing British Empire.
India also claims that the UN Resolution 1172 in 1948 accepted Indias stand regarding
all outstanding issues between India and Pakistan. Other than that India claims that Pakistan has
not removed its military forces, which India views as one of the first steps in implementing a
resolution.
India accused Pakistan of funding military groups in the region to create instability, and
accuses Pakistan of waging a proxy war by spreading anti-India sentiment among the people of
Kashmir, through the media, to alter Kashmiri opinion.
According to India, most regions of Pakistani Kashmir, especially northern areas,
continue to suffer from lack of political recognition, economic development and basic
fundamental rights.
Pakistani view

12

Pakistan claims that according to the two-nation theory Kashmir should have been with Pakistan,
because it has a Muslim majority. Pakistan also argues that India has shown disregard to the
resolutions of the UN Security Council, and the United Nations Commission in India and
Pakistan, by failing to hold a plebiscite.
On the other hand, Pakistan rejects Indian claims to Kashmir, centring around the Instrument of
Accession. Pakistan insists that the Maharaja did not have the support of most Kashmiris.
Pakistan also claims that the Maharaja handed over control of Jammu and Kashmir under duress,
thus invalidating the legitimacy of the claims.
Other than that, Pakistan claims that India violated the Standstill Agreement and that Indian
troops were already in Kashmir before the Instrument of Accession was signed.
Between 1990-1999 the Indian Armed Forces, its paramilitary groups, and counter-insurgent
militias have been responsible for the deaths of 4,501 Kashmiri civilians. Also from 1990 to
1999, there are records of 4,242 women between the ages of 7-70 that have been raped. Similar
allegations were also made by some human rights organisations.
Lastly, Pakistan claims that the Kashmiri uprising demonstrates that the people of Kashmir no
longer wish to remain part of India. Pakistan suggests that this means that either Kashmir wants
to be with Pakistan or independent.
Kashmiri view
It is difficult to assess Kashmiri public opinion, and the region contains supporters of various
different solutions to the conflict. Alongside those who align more closely to either the Pakistani
or Indian government views, there are also those who favour independence for Kashmir.
According to one survey of Kashmiri public opinion:

43% of the total adult population want complete independence for Kashmir.
1% of Azad Kashmir (in Pakistan-administered Kashmir) want to join India compared to

28% in Jammu and Kashmir (in Indian-administered Kashmir).

50% of Azad Kashmir want to join Pakistan compared to 2% in Jammu and Kashmir.
14% of the total population want to make the Line of Control a permanent border.

13

The All Parties Hurriyat Conference represent the main separatist movement in Kashmir.
However, it has multiple branches, each holding differing views on how Kashmir should proceed
independently, which is indicative of the vast array of opinions that exist across the territory.
Whether it be due to religion or region, Kashmir is not a unified voice on the matter of its future.
Apart from the unending call for democracy and human rights standards, Kashmiris differ in
their opinions all over the territory, and this must be taken into account when discussing
solutions.16

What are the relationships between the conflict parties?

Are there qualitative and quantitative asymmetries?
Relations between India and Pakistan have been complex due to a number of historical
and political events. Relations between the two states have been defined by the violent partition
of British India in 1947, the Kashmir conflict and the numerous military conflicts fought
between the two nations. Consequently, even though the two South Asian nations share
linguistic, cultural, geographic, and economic links, their relationship has been plagued by
hostility and suspicion.

After the dissolution of the British Raj in 1947, two new sovereign nations were formed
the Dominion of India and the Dominion of Pakistan. The subsequent partition of the former
British India displaced up to 12.5 million people, with estimates of loss of life varying from
several hundred thousand to 1 million. India emerged as a secular nation with a Hindu majority
population and a large Muslim minority while Pakistan was established as an Islamic republic

16 Retrieved from http://www.insightonconflict.org/conflicts/kashmir/conflict-profile/

14

with an overwhelming Muslim majority population, although its constitution guarantees freedom
of religion to people of all faiths.17

Soon after their independence, India and Pakistan established diplomatic relations but the
violent partition and numerous territorial claims would overshadow their relationship. Since their
independence, the two countries have fought three major wars, one undeclared war and have
been involved in numerous armed skirmishes and military standoffs. The Kashmir conflict is the
main centre-point of all of these conflicts with the exception of the Indo-Pakistan War of 1971
and Bangladesh Liberation War, which resulted in the secession of East Pakistan (now
Bangladesh).

What are the different perceptions of the causes and nature of the conflict among the
conflict parties?
The Line of Control refers to the military control line between the Indian and Pakistani
controlled parts of the former princely state of Kashmir and Jammu. It is a line which, to this
day, does not constitute a legally recognized international boundary but is the de facto border.
Originally known as the Cease-fire Line, it was redesignated as the Line of Control following the
Simla Agreement, which was signed on 3 July 1972. The part of the former princely state that is
under Indian control is known as the state of Jammu and Kashmir. The two parts of the former
princely state that are under Pakistani control are known as GilgitBaltistan and Azad Kashmir.

For the Pakistani, The Pakistan Declaration of 1933 had envisioned the princely state of
Jammu and Kashmir as one of the "five Northern units of India" that were to form the new nation

17 World and Its Peoples by Marshall Cavendish

15

of Pakistan, on the basis of its Muslim majority. Pakistan still claims the whole of Kashmir as its
own territory, including Indian-controlled Kashmir.

India has a different perspective on this interpretation. Maharaja Hari Singh, King of the
princely state of Kashmir and Jammu agreed to Governor-General Mountbatten's 18 suggestion to
sign the Instrument of Accession India demanded accession in return for assistance. India
claimed that the whole territory of the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir had become Indian
territory due to the accession, it claims the whole region, including Azad Kashmir territory, as its
own.

Besides that, another ceasefire line separates the Indian-controlled state of Jammu and
Kashmir from the Chinese-controlled area known as Aksai Chin. Lying further to the east, it is
known as the Line of Actual Control and has been referred to as one of the most dangerous
places in the world.

The Line of Control divided Kashmir into two parts and closed the Jehlum valley route,
the only entrance and exit of the Kashmir Valley at that time. This territorial division, which to
this day still exists, severed many villages and separated family members from each other.

18 Stein, Burton. 1998. A History of India. Oxford University Press. 432 pages.
16

What is the current behaviour of the parties (is the conflict in an escalatory or
deescalatory phase?)?
There have been numerous attempts to improve their relationship. Notably, the Shimla
summit, the Agra summit and the Lahore summit. Since the early 1980s, relations between the
two nations soured particularly after the Siachen conflict, the intensification of Kashmir
insurgency in 1989, Indian and Pakistani nuclear tests in 1998 and the 1999 Kargil war. Certain
confidence-building measures such as the 2003 ceasefire agreement and the DelhiLahore Bus
service were successful in deescalating tensions. However, these efforts have been impeded by
periodic terrorist attacks. The 2001 Indian Parliament attack almost brought the two nations to
the brink of a nuclear war. The 2007 Samjhauta Express bombings, which killed 68 civilians
(most of whom were Pakistani), was also a crucial point in relations. Additionally, the 2008
Mumbai attacks carried out by Pakistani militants resulted in a severe blow to the ongoing IndiaPakistan peace talks

17

Since the election of new governments in both India and Pakistan in the early 2010s,
some steps have been taken to improve relations, in particular developing a consensus on the
agreement of Non-Discriminatory Market Access on Reciprocal Basis status for each other,
which will liberalize trade.19 In late 2015, meetings were held between the foreign secretaries and
the national security advisers of both nations, at which both sides agreed to thoroughly discuss
hurdles remaining in the relationship. In November 2015, the new Indian Prime Minister,
Narendra Modi and Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif agreed to the resumption of bilateral
talks; the following month, Prime Minister Modi made a brief, unscheduled visit to Pakistan
while en route to India, becoming the first Indian Prime Minister to visit Pakistan since 2004.
Despite those efforts, relations between the countries have remained frigid, following repeated
acts of cross-border terrorism. According to a 2014 BBC World Service Poll, 17% of Indians
view Pakistan's influence positively, with 49% expressing a negative view, while 21% of
Pakistanis view India's influence positively, with 58% expressing a negative view.

Who are the leaders of the parties? At the elite/individual level, what are their objectives,
policies, interests, and relative strengths and weakness?
These are the main political parties involved in the Kashmir conflict:
1. The Jammu and Kashmir Democratic Freedom Party was founded in 1998 by
Hashim Qureshi and Shabir Ahmad Shah as a separatist party that advocates self-rule for
Jammu and Kashmir.

2. The Jammu and Kashmir Peoples Democratic Party was founded in 1999 by Mufti
Mohammed Sayeed and is a separatist party that advocates self-rule for Jammu and
Kashmir.

19 "Non-discriminatory market access: Pakistan, India all but sign trade

normalisation deal". The Express Tribune. 15 March 2014.
18

3. The All Parties Hurriyat Conference was founded in 1993 and is a political front
formed as an alliance of 26 political, social and religious organisations in Kashmir. One
of the main objectives of the APHC is ascend the Indian controlled regions of Kashmir to
Pakistan and to instate Islamic governance.

4. The Indian National Congress is one of the two major political parties in India and is
considered centre-left in the Indian political spectrum. In the 2009 general election it
formed a coalition with a number of allies called the UPA and was able to form a majority
and form a government.

5. The Bharatiya Janata Party is Indias second largest political party and is considered
centre-right in the Indian political spectrum and is the Hindu-National party. They were
in power from 1998 to 2004 when Atal Bihari Vajpayee was Prime Minister.

6. The Jammu and Kashmir National Conference Party was founded by Sheikh
Abduallah in 1939 and dominated electoral politics for many decades in the state, it is
now being led by his grandson Omar Abdullah. They are a moderate separatist party and
call for Jammu and Kashmirs right to self-determination and autonomy.

Militant Groups involved in Kashmir conflict:

1. Jaish-e-Mohammed is a militant organisation that operates in Kashmir but is based in
Pakistan. The groups main aim is to ascend the Indian controlled regions of Kashmir to
Pakistan and to instate Islamic governance. It has carried out several attacks. It has been
banned in Pakistan since 2002 and its Commander-inChief Masood Azhar is currently
imprisoned in Pakistan, however, the group continues to operate.
2. Hizb-ul-Mujahideen is a militant organisation that has operated in Kashmir since 1989
and is the militant wing of the Kashmiri political and religious group Jamaat-e-Islami.
19

The current leader of the group is a Kashmiri known as Sayeed Salahudeen who resides
in Pakistan. The group is considered by many to be the most widely supported and
populist militant group active in the conflict.
3. Lashkar-e-Taiba was founded in 1994 as the militant wing of the Marqaz, a centre
which was founded in the 1980s by Hafiz Mohammed Saeed and is one the largest and
most active of the militant operations. They have taken responsibility for a number of
violent attacks including the Red Fort attacks in Delhi in 2000. India has also accused
them of being responsible for the 2009 Mumbai attacks. They differ from the other main
militant groups as most of their members are non-Kashmiri. They are an extremely wellknown and prominent group in Pakistan. They have been banned since 2002 in Pakistan,
but they continue to operate and include different factions.

Leaders involved in Kashmir conflict:

1. Farooq Abdullah has dominated local politics for years and is the son of Sheikh
Mohammed, who founded the National Conference Party. While he has accepted that
Kashmir should remain part of the Indian Union, he has campaigned for its greater
autonomy. He has been criticised for shifting his allegiances to political parties, but is
currently an ally of the BJP.
2. Omar Abdullah is the son of Farooq Abdullah and was made head of the National
Conference in 2008, he resigned in 2009 amid allegations of a sex scandal, however he is
currently still in the party and is Chief Minister for Jammu and Kashmir.
3. Shabir Shah is a high profile campaigner for Kashmiri independence since the late
1960s, and has spent much of his life in Indian jails. However, he was suspended from
the All Parties Hurriyat Conference due to political disagreements and went on to found
his own party in 1998 called the Jammu Kashmir Democratic Freedom Party.
4. Abdul Gani Bhat is another key player in Kashmiri politics and advocates for Kashmirs
accession to Pakistan. In 1993 his party, the Muslim Conference, became part of the main
Kashmiri separatists alliance, the All Parties Hurriyat Conference. He recently claimed

20

that other separatists involved in the conflicts had assassinated some high profile leaders
in the separatist movement and his own brother.20

The context: global, regional and factors

At the regional level: how do relations with neighbouring states and societies affect the
conflict? Do the parties have external regional supporters? Which regional actors might be
trusted by the parties?
Since Kashmir is not a legitimate state, the region is divided amongst three countries in a
territorial dispute and those are, Pakistan controling the northwest portion (Northern Areas and
Kashmir), India controling the central and southern portion (Jammu and Kashmir) and Ladakh,
and the People's Republic of China controling the northeastern portion (Aksai Chin and the
Trans-Karakoram Tract). India controls the majority of the Siachen Glacier area, including the
Saltoro Ridge passes, whilst Pakistan controls the lower territory just southwest of the Saltoro
Ridge. India controls 39,127 sq mi of the disputed territory, Pakistan controls 33,145 sq mi, and
the People's Republic of China controls the remaining 14,500 sq mi.

20 Retrieved from http://www.insightonconflict.org/conflicts/kashmir/conflictprofile/key-people-and-parties/

21

Jammu and Azad Kashmir lie outside Pir Panjal range, and are under Indian and Pakistani
control respectively. These are populous regions. The main cities are Mirpur, Dadayal, Kotli,
Bhimber Jammu, Muzaffarabad and Rawalakot. GilgitBaltistan, formerly known as the
Northern Areas, is a group of territories in the extreme north, bordered by the Karakoram, the
western Himalayas, the Pamir, and the Hindu Kush ranges. With its administrative centre in the
town of Gilgit, the Northern Areas cover an area of 28,174 sq mi and have an estimated
population approaching 1 million. The other main city is Skardu.

Ladakh is a region in the east, between the Kunlun mountain range in the north and the
main Great Himalayas to the south. Main cities are Leh and Kargil. It is under Indian
administration and is part of the state of Jammu and Kashmir. It is one of the most sparsely
populated regions in the area and is mainly inhabited by people of Indo-Aryan and Tibetan
descent. Aksai Chin is a vast high-altitude desert of salt that reaches altitudes up to 5,000 metres.
Geographically part of the Tibetan Plateau, Aksai Chin is referred to as the Soda Plain. The
region is almost uninhabited, and has no permanent settlements.

Though these regions are in practice administered by their respective claimants, neither
India nor Pakistan has formally recognised the accession of the areas claimed by the other. India
claims those areas, including the area ceded to China by Pakistan in the Trans-Karakoram Tract
in 1963, are a part of its territory, while Pakistan claims the entire region excluding Aksai Chin
and Trans-Karakoram Tract. The two countries have fought several declared wars over the
territory. The Indo-Pakistani War of 1947 established the rough boundaries of today, with
Pakistan holding roughly one-third of Kashmir, and India one-half, with a dividing line of
control established by the United Nations. The Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 resulted in a
stalemate and a UN-negotiated ceasefire.21

21 Retrieved from http://www.yarikul.com/jammu-and-kashmir/133-current-statusand-political-divisions-of-kashmir

22

At the global level: are there outside geopolitical interests in this conflict? What are the
external factors that fuel the conflict and what could change them?
U.S. President Barack Obama has defined the elimination of terrorist networks in
Pakistan and Afghanistan as crucial to U.S. national security interests. Yet some analysts say the
territory of Kashmir could pose a problem to the administration's counterterrorism efforts in the
region. Often called one of the world's most dangerous flashpoints, Kashmir has been at the root
of two large-scale wars and one limited conflict between India and Pakistan since the August
1947 partition. Tensions between the countries escalated in the 1990s with a rise in militancy in
the Indian-administered region. India accuses Pakistan's premier intelligence service, InterServices Intelligence, of supporting militant groups in Kashmir, a charge Pakistan denies.

There is little doubt that normalized relations between India and Pakistan, including a
regionally acceptable settlement on Kashmir, would offer tremendous benefits to the United
States. Indo-Pak tensions are especially dangerous because they bring two nuclear states toe-totoe. They distract Islamabad from the urgent task of combating terrorists and militants on its own
23

soil and they contribute to Pakistani suspicions about India's activities in Afghanistan. Thus, the
long-standing dispute over Kashmir is one part of a wider regional dynamic that has direct
implications for Washington's ability to support a stable Afghan state and to address the threat
posed by terrorist groups in South Asia.

As it understood the costs to America's blossoming ties with India, the Obama
administration quickly stepped back from the initial impulse to reinject itself into Kashmir. The
administration must nevertheless persist in building on Obama's one important insight: The
conflicts on the eastern and western borders of Pakistan are interconnected.

At the source of the trouble in Kashmir and Afghanistan has been the Pakistani army's
decades-old policy of nurturing extremist groups as strategic assets against New Delhi and
Kabul. Under Obama, Washington has come to recognize that defeating al-Qaeda and the Taliban
involves getting the Pakistani army to end its deliberate support of violent extremism. This, in
turn, is possible only if the United States can help Pakistan's civilian leaders wrest control over
national security policy from the army. If and when he makes progress on these two objectives,
Obama will find it no problem at all to convince Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to sign
off on the Kashmir deal that he has already negotiated.22

22 Retrieved from http://www.cfr.org/terrorism/kashmir-dispute-affects-securitysouth-asia/p19805

24

Conclusion
At the end of British occupation in 1947, two countries stood where there once was one.
Pakistan divided with the intention of being the nation for the Muslims of India. Kashmir, the
roots of the boundary dispute between the two nations, was an autonomous state under British
rule and remained so post-partition, when initially given a choice between Pakistan and India.
Eventually though, in October of 1947, the ruling prince of Kashmir decided in India favor. This
decision was viewed as fraudulent, unfair, and completely unrecognized by the Pakistani
government.

Due to its strategic position and unique and exquisite nature, Kashmir has been of
particular interest to both countries. The main goal of Islamabad is to gain control of this region,
thus completing the vision of an independent Muslim state outside of India considering that
Kashmir is majority Muslim. New Delhi, on the other hand, has the goal of retaining Kashmir in
order to support the portrayal of India as a secular nation.

25

There is no military solution to end the conflict in Kashmir. India has waged an enormous
and costly counter-insurgency campaign in Jammu and Kashmir but has failed to eradicate the
insurgency. It is clear that India cannot win this battle in militarily terms, even though the
insurgency movement has had its ups and downs over the years. The reason being is that
guerrillas can always keep the conflict alive at a military level due to cross border support. On
either side there is no military solution to this conflict. India cannot pacify the population
through military means. Pakistan cannot undermine Indian morale, due to the fact that India sees
Jammu and Kashmir as a vital component to its own sense of identity as a nation.

Although the referendum demand is historically legitimate, the Indian government would
never allow a referendum to be held, and Pakistan is only interested in utilizing the unfulfilled
promised referendum as a way to attack India. Independence is also not an option, simply
because neither India nor Pakistan has any intention of giving up control of their respective parts
of Jammu and Kashmir.

It is going to take years of difficult bargaining and negotiations to resolve this

complicated problem. At this stage what is most important is that the primary parties involved in
the conflict, the governments of India and Pakistan, and important armed groups like the Hizb'ul
Muja hideen, commit to a process of dialogue. Furthermore Pakistan should committ itself to
stopping or at least not encouraging the infiltration of guerrilla fighters from its side of the
border. As the Kashmir Conflict is a great burden for India, Pakistan and the people of Jammu
Kashmir and the whole of South Asia, it is very important to find a resolution for the conflict.

With this perspective, analysis of the ongoing conflict in Kashmir becomes even grayer.
Should Kashmir have a role in choosing its government? Are India and Pakistan justified in their
pursuit of abolishing cartographic anxiety? Does the true problem lie in cultural history or
modern governmental tactics? Regardless of the answers to these questions, Kashmir will remain
disputed as long as mirror maps encourage divisive cartographic imaginaries within India and
Pakistan.
26

27