Conflicts among human societies are as old as civilisation itself. Differences of belief, territory, power, and perception have repeatedly pushed nations and communities into confrontation. History shows that such disputes are resolved in only a few recognised ways: through the imposition of force, through reconciliation by mutual consent, or through impartial mediation supported by law and moral authority. Where none of these paths is followed with sincerity, conflicts harden with time, embedding themselves into collective memory and passing unresolved from one generation to the next.
Since the middle of the twentieth century, the world has witnessed only a few disputes of such longevity, notably the division of the Korean Peninsula, the Arab-Israeli conflict, and the unresolved dispute over Jammu and Kashmir between Pakistan and India. Among these, Kashmir remains one of the most morally troubling, for it is anchored in clear international commitments that have remained unfulfilled for more than seven decades.
The legal and moral foundation of the Kashmir dispute lies in the resolutions adopted by the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan in 1948 and 1949. These resolutions affirmed a simple yet powerful democratic principle: the future of the State of Jammu and Kashmir was to be determined by the free and impartial will of its people, expressed through a plebiscite conducted under United Nations supervision.
Both Pakistan and India accepted these resolutions, which laid down detailed safeguards to ensure fairness, including demilitarisation, the withdrawal or neutralisation of armed forces, the appointment of an internationally respected Plebiscite Administrator, the release of political prisoners, the protection of minorities, freedom of expression and assembly, and the complete absence of coercion or intimidation. A ceasefire came into effect on 1 January 1949, raising hopes that a just settlement was within reach. Yet the plebiscite was never held. Disagreements over procedure, coupled with political reluctance and shifting strategic calculations, froze the process, while the promise itself remained outstanding.
Despite the passage of time, Kashmir continues to figure on the agenda of the United Nations Security Council, a rare acknowledgment that the dispute has neither been resolved nor rendered obsolete. Meanwhile, realities on the ground have steadily deteriorated. In Indian-administered Kashmir, generations have grown up amid heavy militarisation, prolonged states of emergency, restrictions on political activity, and recurring cycles of unrest and repression.
The revocation of the region’s special status in 2019 further deepened Kashmiri anxieties, particularly fears of demographic engineering and the erosion of cultural and political identity. Allegations of human rights violations, curbs on religious practices, and restrictions on communication have reinforced the sense of collective grievance and alienation.
For Pakistan, Kashmir has never been merely a territorial dispute. It occupies a central place in the country’s ideological, historical, and strategic consciousness. Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s description of Kashmir as the “jugular vein of Pakistan” was not a rhetorical flourish but an articulation of an existential reality. The Muslim majority of Kashmir, its cultural and religious affinities with Pakistan, and the logic underpinning the Partition of 1947 made its unresolved status a profound anomaly.
The Two-Nation Theory, which formed the basis of Pakistan’s creation, rested on the recognition of distinct religious, cultural, and political identities. The continued denial of self-determination to the people of Kashmir stands in stark contradiction to that principle and remains a source of enduring instability in South Asia.
Beyond ideology and history, Kashmir’s importance is inseparable from Pakistan’s economic and environmental security. The great rivers that sustain Pakistan’s agriculture and economy—the Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab—originate in the Himalayan region of Kashmir. These waters irrigate fields, generate electricity, and provide drinking water to millions. Control over their sources, therefore, carries implications far beyond cartography.
Repeated disputes over water management and challenges to the Indus Waters Treaty have heightened fears that water, one of the most vital resources of life, could become a tool of political pressure. In this sense, Kashmir is not simply a contested territory; it is a lifeline whose stability directly affects Pakistan’s survival and prosperity.
The strategic dimension of Kashmir further complicates the dispute. Its geography places it at the crossroads of South and Central Asia, making it vital for regional trade, security, and defence. The Line of Control remains one of the most militarised and volatile borders in the world, where even minor incidents carry the risk of escalation between two nuclear-armed states. The continued instability of the region not only threatens bilateral relations but also undermines broader regional peace.
Kashmir…. A Story of Struggle Against Systematic Repression
Every year on 5 February, observed in Pakistan as Kashmir Solidarity Day, the people of Pakistan, Kashmiris on both sides of the Line of Control, and members of the global diaspora reaffirm their support for the Kashmiri right to self-determination. Rallies, seminars, and official statements recall the unfulfilled United Nations resolutions and call upon the international community to honour its commitments. These expressions are peaceful and lawful, rooted in international norms. Yet a sobering question persists: can a people be expected to commemorate an unkept promise indefinitely, carrying the weight of unfulfilled justice from one generation to another?
India maintains that Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of its territory and that the matter is purely bilateral. Pakistan, supported by international law and United Nations resolutions, maintains that the dispute is international in character and that the right to self-determination is inalienable and cannot be nullified by the passage of time or unilateral actions. So long as this fundamental contradiction remains unresolved, peace in South Asia will continue to rest on fragile ground.
Recent regional developments have subtly altered diplomatic perceptions. Pakistan’s conduct during periods of heightened tension, particularly in 2025, demonstrated restraint and responsibility, reinforcing its image as a mature and credible state. Acknowledgements by major international actors regarding ceasefire facilitation underscored this shift. Emerging from internal challenges, Pakistan today speaks with greater confidence and dignity on the world stage. This renewed standing places an added responsibility upon its leadership to move beyond symbolic remembrance and to pursue a principled, sustained, and effective diplomatic campaign for Kashmir.
Kashmir is not merely a political dispute, nor solely a strategic concern. It is a question of justice for a people denied the right to choose their destiny, a test of moral credibility for the international community, and an unfinished chapter of history that continues to shape the future of South Asia. Justice delayed for more than seventy-five years is not only justice denied; it is a continuing indictment of an international order that pledged fairness but failed to deliver it. Until the voices of the Kashmiri people are finally heard, the promise of peace in the region will remain incomplete, and the conscience of the world will remain unsettled.
Today's E-Paper