The Partition of British India and the unfinished story of Kashmir in 1947 was one of the most significant and traumatic events in South Asian history. It led to the creation of two sovereign states: India and Pakistan. However, the status of the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir, a Muslim-majority region, remained unresolved and continues to fuel tensions between the two countries to this day.
Kashmir’s Ambiguous Position in 1947
Unlike most princely states that acceded promptly to either India or Pakistan, Kashmir’s Maharaja, Hari Singh, initially chose neither. At the time of Partition, Jammu and Kashmir was not part of either dominion and hence, contrary to India’s later claims, was never an integral part of India. According to the British plan for Partition, rulers of princely states were given the choice to join either India or Pakistan, ideally aligning with the wishes of their people. In Kashmir’s case, this principle strongly favoured accession to Pakistan due to its overwhelmingly Muslim population.
However, Maharaja Hari Singh delayed the decision, reportedly willing to stay independent. His refusal to decide created a power vacuum and growing instability within the state.
Gilgit-Baltistan’s Decision to Join Pakistan
It is important to mention here, an often-overlooked part of this historical episode is the region of Gilgit-Baltistan. Strategically located and culturally distinct, Gilgit-Baltistan had been leased to the British by the Dogra rulers of Kashmir. When the British left, they handed control back to the Maharaja, but this was short-lived.
On 31st October 1947, Major William Brown, commander of the Gilgit Scouts, staged a local revolt (Operation Datta Khel), declaring martial law the following day and arresting Ghansara Singh, the Maharaja’s governor. By 2nd November, the Pakistani flag was raised in Gilgit, and the region voluntarily aligned with Pakistan, a decision reflecting the local people’s political sentiment.
This event occurred well before India’s formal involvement in Kashmir, indicating that Gilgit-Baltistan’s accession to Pakistan was not the result of the broader Kashmir conflict, but a separate, localised decision based on geography, religion, and politics.
The Maharaja’s Accession to India
The critical turning point occurred in late October 1947, when tribal fighters from Pakistan’s North-West Frontier Province entered Kashmir, claiming to protect the region’s Muslim population from the Maharaja’s forces. In response, the Maharaja appealed to India for military assistance. India, however, initially refused, as Kashmir had not acceded to India and was considered a foreign territory. Reluctant to intervene in what was, at the time, considered a foreign territory so soon after gaining independence, India made its assistance conditional that it would only provide military support if Kashmir formally acceded to the Indian Union. The Maharaja agreed and signed the Instrument of Accession on 26 October 1947, following which Indian troops were airlifted into Srinagar.
Role of United Nations
Soon after, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru publicly acknowledged Kashmir as a disputed territory and affirmed India’s commitment to allowing the people of Kashmir to determine their future through a plebiscite. India subsequently took the matter to the United Nations, requesting intervention and a ceasefire. This led to the establishment of the ceasefire line on 1st of January 1949, now known as the Line of Control, dividing the region between India and Pakistan, pending a final settlement that has yet to occur.
The United Nations has played a central yet limited role in the Kashmir dispute. In 1948, the UN Security Council called for a ceasefire and a plebiscite to allow Kashmiris to choose between India and Pakistan. Resolutions such as UNSC Resolution 47 laid out clear steps for both sides to demilitarise the region in preparation for the vote.
However, the plebiscite was never conducted, largely due to disputes over demilitarisation conditions. Over the decades, the UN’s role has been reduced to observing and reporting, with limited success in resolving the core issue. Nevertheless, Pakistan continues to refer to these UN resolutions as the legal foundation of its stance on Kashmir.
The Legacy of Conflict
The ceasefire brokered by the United Nations left Kashmir divided, India controlled two-thirds of the territory, while Pakistan retained the remaining third. This ceasefire line, now known as the Line of Control (LoC), has remained largely unchanged. Importantly, the promised plebiscite to determine Kashmir’s future, agreed upon by both India and Pakistan has never been held. The Kashmiri people have never had the opportunity to vote on whether they wish to join Pakistan or India.
Reflections on Later Conflicts
Tensions have continued through wars in 1965, 1971, and 1999 and various conflicts in 1984, 2001, 2008, 2016, 2019 and the 2025 standoff.
Cultural and Religious Ties Between Kashmir and Pakistan
Kashmir’s Muslim-majority identity naturally aligns with Pakistan, a state created to represent Muslim interests in South Asia. Religious festivals, Islamic practices, and even political sympathies often mirror those in Pakistan. Urdu, Pakistan’s national language, is widely understood and used in the Kashmir Valley, where Pakistani media and religious broadcasts are often preferred over Indian channels.
Cultural commonalities ranging from cuisine and clothing to religious education and Sufi traditions link Kashmir more closely with Pakistan than with much of India. Public expressions of solidarity, including displays of the Pakistani flag and pro-Pakistan slogans, reflect the emotional and ideological bonds shared by many Kashmiris.
Human Rights in Indian-Administered Kashmir
The region has seen widespread reports of human rights violations, especially in the wake of insurgencies and military crackdowns since 1989. Allegations include arbitrary detentions, enforced disappearances, use of pellet guns against civilians, restrictions on freedom of expression, and denial of due process.
International human rights organisations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have consistently raised concerns, while India has either denied the allegations or justified them as necessary for national security. The heavy military presence and repeated internet shutdowns have further deepened public alienation.
Pakistan’s Official Position on Kashmir
Pakistan maintains that Kashmir is a disputed territory whose final status must be decided by its people in accordance with UN resolutions. It argues that India’s continued control of the region is illegitimate, particularly in light of the unfulfilled promise of a plebiscite.
Pakistan supports diplomatic efforts and raises the Kashmir issue in international forums, while also maintaining political and moral support for the Kashmiri people. Pakistan considers the Kashmir cause central to its national identity and foreign policy.
India’s Revocation of Article 370 and Its Implications
On 5 August 2019, the Indian government revoked Article 370 of its Constitution, which granted Jammu and Kashmir a special autonomous status. This move was accompanied by a heavy security lockdown, mass detentions, and communication blackouts.
The revocation was widely condemned in Pakistan and viewed as an attempt to alter the demographic and political character of the region. It also drew international criticism and increased tensions between the two nuclear-armed neighbours.
Kashmiri Voices and Resistance Movements
Resistance in Kashmir has taken many forms of armed militancy, political mobilisation, and civil disobedience. Since the 1980s, insurgent groups like Hizbul Mujahideen and Lashkar-e-Taiba have emerged, advocating either independence or accession to Pakistan. The killing of Burhan Wani, a young Hizbul Mujahideen commander, in 2016 sparked widespread protests and is often seen as a turning point in the recent wave of Kashmiri resistance.
The All Parties Hurriyat Conference (APHC), a coalition of various political and religious groups, has played a key role in voicing the political aspirations of Kashmiris. Prominent figures such as Syed Ali Shah Geelani, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, and Yasin Malik have long campaigned for the right to self-determination. Geelani was known for his firm pro-Pakistan stance until his death in 2021, while Yasin Malik, leader of the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF), has been imprisoned and charged with terrorism-related offences by Indian authorities.
In recent years, peaceful civilian protests have often been met with force, leading to cycles of unrest. Despite state crackdowns, a growing number of Kashmiri youth have turned to activism and social media to highlight their grievances. Resistance also takes cultural forms, such as poetry, music, and graffiti, reflecting a deeply-rooted desire for dignity, justice, and the right to self-expression.
