Dr Bilawal Kamran
The events following the recent Pahalgam tragedy have once again laid bare a stark truth: the Kashmir issue is not a frozen conflict but a ticking time bomb. Unless it is resolved in a peaceful, just, and inclusive manner, the region will remain a constant source of volatility between Pakistan and India—and by extension, a permanent thorn in South Asia’s side. This is not merely a bilateral irritant; it’s a deeply rooted political crisis with the capacity to derail peace efforts, fuel militancy, and provoke conflict between two nuclear-armed states.
As is now routine, India was quick to blame Pakistan for the incident—this time without offering even a shred of credible evidence. Such knee-jerk accusations, rooted in political opportunism more than facts, only exacerbate tensions and distract from the real issue: the unresolved status of Kashmir and the unending suffering of its people.
It is encouraging, of course, that foreign powers moved swiftly to de-escalate tensions. In an era of nuclear overhang, even a rhetorical flare-up can trigger real consequences. Washington and other capitals have tried, often quietly, to cool tempers and prevent a flashpoint from spiraling out of control. Pakistan’s Ambassador to the United States, Rizwan Sheikh, rightly highlighted to Newsweek that Kashmir remains “a higher or flashier flash point” for any leader, especially one like Donald Trump, who once proclaimed a goal of solving global disputes. But let’s be honest—Kashmir is not at the top of Washington’s to-do list. Nor is it on the priority agenda of other global powers. Their involvement is tactical, not transformational.
That is the reality Pakistan and India must confront. Foreign mediation may help reduce immediate risk, but durable peace can only come from within the region—between Islamabad, New Delhi, and most crucially, the people of Kashmir. Outsiders can nudge and cajole, but they won’t (and can’t) force a final settlement.
Pakistan, for its part, has consistently advocated for a negotiated solution. From the floor of the UN to bilateral overtures, Islamabad has called for dialogue rooted in international law and the aspirations of the Kashmiri people. However, New Delhi has repeatedly spurned such proposals, particularly under the hardline Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government. The most egregious move came in 2019, when India revoked Article 370, stripping Indian-held Kashmir of its already limited autonomy. This unilateral action shattered decades of uneasy calm and exposed New Delhi’s intentions to erase Kashmir’s identity rather than resolve its grievances.
Since that decision, India has intensified its occupation—militarizing the region to an unprecedented degree, silencing dissent, detaining political leaders, throttling media, and converting the region into an open-air prison. For a country that claims to be the world’s largest democracy, this colonial-style crackdown is not only hypocritical, but also politically self-defeating. Repression never breeds peace. It merely pushes people toward desperation.
Post-Pulwama, the crackdown grew even more brutal. Whether it is Kashmiri civilians or Indian Muslims who dare raise their voices, the BJP regime has increasingly embraced an authoritarian playbook. Critics of the government are labeled anti-national, and calls for Kashmiri rights are met with force, censorship, or incarceration. With every door to peaceful dissent slammed shut, is it any surprise that some turn to violence, however misguided?
Let’s not pretend Kashmir is a black-and-white problem of terrorism versus sovereignty. It is a human tragedy, political failure, and moral quagmire all rolled into one. As long as Kashmiris are denied the right to self-determination, and as long as their legitimate demands are treated as criminal acts, the cycle of violence will continue.
Yet it doesn’t have to be this way. History offers us templates for peace. The backchannel diplomacy between Tariq Aziz and Satinder Lambah under Musharraf and Manmohan Singh was a promising step in the early 2000s. The so-called “Four-Point Formula” may not have been perfect, but it showed that both countries could talk pragmatically about shared sovereignty, demilitarization, and economic integration. These efforts were halted not because the issues were too complex—but because political will evaporated.
That political will must now be resurrected.
But first, New Delhi must acknowledge a basic, uncomfortable truth: there is a problem. Denying the existence of the Kashmir dispute does not resolve it; it aggravates it. Labeling the entire population as a security threat will not yield peace; it will only radicalize more youth. India’s refusal to engage with Pakistan diplomatically, and its persistent attempts to frame the Kashmir issue as an internal affair, are not just dishonest—they’re dangerous.
Islamabad too has responsibilities. While supporting the Kashmiri cause is its moral and diplomatic duty, Pakistan must continue to root its advocacy in peaceful, legal, and political frameworks. Any ambiguity around non-state actors must be erased. It must reaffirm that the Kashmiri struggle is not about terrorism—it is about political rights and historical justice. In doing so, Pakistan strengthens its global credibility and the moral clarity of its stance.
Please subscribe to the YouTube channel of republicpolicy.com for quality podcasts:
The time has come to move beyond slogans and grandstanding. Kashmiris don’t need more promises—they need a political roadmap. They need inclusion, dignity, and most of all, a voice. No resolution is legitimate without Kashmiri participation. Any process that sidelines them is doomed to fail, no matter how well-packaged it appears diplomatically.
There is no quick fix. But the ingredients for a long-term solution are clear: restoration of autonomy, demilitarization of the region, cross-border dialogue, and a structured peace process with Kashmiri representation at the table. There must be truth and reconciliation—not just between nations, but between states and their people.
South Asia cannot afford another war. The region is home to nearly two billion people, most of whom are still grappling with poverty, climate change, and underdevelopment. Continued hostility over Kashmir drains resources, diverts attention from real issues, and holds the entire region hostage to nationalism and militarism.
In the end, peace in Kashmir is not just about ending a territorial dispute—it’s about redefining what kind of region South Asia wants to be. Do we want to be forever known as a nuclear flashpoint? Or can we rise above the politics of hate and mistrust to build a future based on justice, dialogue, and mutual respect?
The choice lies with Islamabad, New Delhi—and the courage of leaders on both sides.
