Kashmir conflict

Kashmir Conflict
India claims the entire erstwhile princely state of Jammu and Kashmir based on an instrument of accession signed in 1947. Pakistan claims Jammu and Kashmir based on its majority Muslim population, whereas China claims the Shaksam Valley and Aksai Chin.
Date 22 October 1947 – ongoing (68 years, 3 months, 3 weeks and 2 days) Location Kashmir Status Ongoing Indo-Pakistani War of 1947 Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 Insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir Kargil War 1999 India–Pakistan border skirmishes
Belligerents
Pakistan Pakistan Rangers Pakistan Army Inter-Services Intelligence	India Indian Army Border Security Force Central Reserve Police Force Research and Analysis Wing	All Parties Hurriyat Conference Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami Lashkar-e-Taiba Jaish-e-Mohammed Hizbul Mujahideen Harkat-ul-Mujahideen Al-Badr Supported by:  Pakistan[1]
Commanders and leaders
General Raheel Sharif	Pranab Mukherjee General Dalbir Singh Suhag General Pranav Movva Lt Gen P C Bhardwaj Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha Pranay Sahay	Amanullah Khan Hafiz Muhammad Saeed Maulana Masood Azhar Sayeed Salahudeen Fazlur Rehman Khalil Farooq Kashmiri Arfeen Bhai (until 1998) Bakht Zameen

Indo-Pakistani conflicts Kashmir conflict War of 1947 War of 1965 War of 1971 Siachen conflict Kargil War 2001–02 standoff 2008 standoff Border skirmishes 2011 2013 2014–15

The Kashmir conflict is a territorial conflict between India, Pakistan, and to a limited degree, China. It started just after the partition of India.^[2] 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 Gilgit-Baltistan.^[3][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.^[5]

The root of conflict between the Kashmiri insurgents and the Indian Government is tied to a dispute over local autonomy.^[6] 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.^[6] In 1987, a disputed state election^[7] created a catalyst for the insurgency when it resulted in some of the state's legislative assembly members forming armed insurgent groups.^[8][9][10] 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,^[11] the conflict has become less deadly in recent years.^[12][13] 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.^[12][13] 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.^[14][15] 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.^[16] But in 2010 unrest erupted after alleged fake encounter of local youth by security force.^[17] Thousands of youths pelted security forces with rocks, burned government offices and attacked railway stations and official vehicles in steadily intensifying violence.^[18] The Indian government blamed separatists and Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistan-based militant group for stoking the 2010 protests.^[19]

However, elections held in 2014 saw highest voters turnout in 26 years of history in Jammu and Kashmir.^{[20][21][22][23]} 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.^[24][25] 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.^[26][27] 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.^[28]

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.^[29]

Timeline

Early history

According to the mid-12th century text Rajatarangini the Kashmir Valley was formerly a lake. Hindu mythology relates that the lake was drained by the sage Kashyapa, by cutting a gap in the hills at Baramulla (Varaha-mula), and invited Brahmans to settle there. This remains the local tradition and Kashyapa is connected with the draining of the lake in traditional histories. The chief town or collection of dwellings in the valley is called Kashyapa-pura, which has been identified as Kaspapyros in Hecataeus (Apud Stephanus of Byzantium) and the Kaspatyros of Herodotus (3.102, 4.44).^[30] Kashmir is also believed to be the country indicated by Ptolemy's Kaspeiria.^[31]

The Pashtun Durrani Empire ruled Kashmir in the 18th century until its 1819 conquest by the Sikh ruler Ranjit Singh. The Raja of Jammu Gulab Singh, who was a vassal of the Sikh Empire and an influential noble in the Sikh court, sent expeditions to various border kingdoms and ended up encircling Kashmir by 1840. Following the First Anglo-Sikh War (1845–1846), Kashmir was ceded under the Treaty of Lahore to the East India Company, which transferred it to Gulab Singh through the Treaty of Amritsar, in return for the payment of indemnity owed by the Sikh empire. Gulab Singh took the title of the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir. From then until the 1947 Partition of India, Kashmir was ruled by the Maharajas of the princely state of Kashmir and Jammu. According to the 1941 census, the state's population was 77 percent Muslim, 20 percent Hindu and 3 percent others (Sikhs and Buddhists).^[32] Despite its Muslim majority, the princely rule was an overwhelmingly Hindu state.^[33]

Partition and invasion

British rule in India ended in 1947 with the creation of a new state: the Dominion of Pakistan alongside the Union of India, the successor state to British India, while British suzerainty over the 562 Indian princely states ended. According to the Indian Independence Act 1947, "the suzerainty of His Majesty over the Indian States lapses, and with it, all treaties and agreements in force at the date of the passing of this Act between His Majesty and the rulers of Indian States".^[34] States were thereafter 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.

Pakistan made various efforts to persuade the Maharaja of Kashmir to join Pakistan. In July 1947, Jinnah is believed to have written to the Maharaja promising "every sort of favourable treatment," followed by Muslim League leaders lobbying with the Prime Minister of the State. Faced with the Maharaja's indecision, the Muslim League agents clandestinely worked in Poonch to encourage the local Muslims to revolt. The authorities in Pakistani Punjab waged a `private war' by obstructing supplies of fuel and essential commodities to the State. Later in September Muslim League officials in the Northwest Frontier Province, including the Chief Minister Abdul Qayyum Khan, assisted and possibly organized a large-scale invasion of Kashmir by Pathan tribesmen.^[35]:61

The Jammu division of the state got caught up in the Partition violence. Large flocks of Hindus and Sikhs from Rawalpindi and Sialkot started arriving in March 1947 bringing "harrowing stories of Muslim atrocities." This proviked counter-violence on Jammu Muslims which had "many parallels with that in Sialkot." However, scholar Illyas Chattha states that the Maharaja of Kashmir ordered the massacre of Muslims in the Jammu division with political motivations to ethnically cleanse the Muslim population and to ensure a non-Muslim majority in the Jammu region of the state.^[36]

Hari Singh, the Maharaja of Kashmir, initially believed that by delaying his decision he could maintain the independence of Kashmir, but, caught up in a train of events that included a revolution among his Muslim subjects along the western borders of the state and the invasion by Pashtun tribesmen, he signed an instrument of accession on 25 October 1947^[37] to the Indian union in return for military aid.^[38] The National Conference, the largest political party in the State, endorsed the accession. In the words of the National Conference leader Syed Mir Qasim, India had the "legal" as well as "moral" justification to send in the army through the Maharaja's accession and the people's support to it.^{[39][note 1]}

Meanwhile, the rebel forces in the western districts of Jammu organized themselves under the leadership of Sardar Ibrahim, a Muslim Conference leader, and took control of most of the western parts of the State by 22 October. On 24 October, they formed a provisional Azad Kashmir (free Kashmir) government based in Palandri.^[40]

Indo-Pakistani War of 1947

Rebel forces from the western districts of the State and the Pakistani Pakhtoon tribesmen^{[note 2][note 3]} made rapid advances into the Baramulla sector. In the Kashmir valley, National Conference volunteers worked with the Indian Army to drive out the `raiders'.^{[note 4]} The resulting First Kashmir War lasted until the end of 1948.

The Pakistan army made available arms, ammuniton and supplies to the rebel forces who were dubbed the `Azad Army'. Pakistani army officers `conveniently' on leave and the former officers of the Indian National Army were recruited to command the forces. In May 1948, the Pakistani army officially entered the conflict, in theory to defend the Pakistan borders, but it made plans to push towards Jammu and cut the lines of communications of the Indian forces in the Mehndar Valley.^[41]

On 1 November 1947, Mountbatten flew to Lahore for a conference with Jinnah, proposing that, in all the princely States where the ruler did not accede to a Dominion corresponding to the majority population (which would have included Junagadh, Hyderabad as well Kashmir), the accession should be decided by an `impartial reference to the will of the people'. Jinnah rejected the ofer, thereby "squandering his leverage" according to the scholar A. G. Noorani.<sup>[42]</sup> Nehru and Liaquat Ali Khan met again in December, where Nehru informed Khan of India's intention to refer the dispute to the United Nations under article 35 of the UN Charter, which allows the member states to bring to the Security Council attention situations `likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace'.^[43]

India sought resolution of the issue at the UN Security Council, despite Sheikh Abdullah's opposition to it.^{[note 4]} Following the set-up of the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP), the UN Security Council passed Resolution 47 on 21 April 1948. The measure imposed an immediate cease-fire and called on the Government of Pakistan 'to secure the withdrawal from the state of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistani nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the state for the purpose of fighting.' It also asked Government of India to reduce its forces to minimum strength, after which the circumstances for holding a plebiscite should be put into effect 'on the question of Accession of the state to India or Pakistan.' However, it was not until 1 January 1949 that the ceasefire could be put into effect, signed by General Gracey on behalf of Pakistan and General Roy Bucher on behalf of India.^[44] However, both India and Pakistan failed to arrive at a truce agreement due to differences over interpretation of the procedure for and the extent of demilitarisation. One sticking point was whether the Azad Kashmiri army was to be disbanded during the truce stage or at the plebiscite stage.^[45]

UN mediation

The UNCIP made three visits to the subcontinent between 1948 and 1949, trying to find a solution agreeable to both India and Pakistan.^[46] It reported to the Security Council in August 1948 that "the presence of troops of Pakistan" inside Kashmir represented a "material change" in the situation. A two-part process was proposed for the withdrawal of forces. In the first part, Pakistan was to withdraw its forces as well as other Pakistani nationals from the state. In the second part, "when the Commission shall have notified the Government of India" that Pakistani withdrawal has been completed, India was to withdraw the bulk of its forces. After both the withdrawals were completed, a plebiscite would be held.^[47] The resolution was accepted by India but effectively rejected by Pakistan.^{[note 5]}

The Indian government considered itself to be under legal possession of Jammu and Kashmir by virtue of the accession of the state. The assistance given by Pakistan to the rebel forces and the Pakhtoon tribes was held to be a hostile act and the further involvement of the Pakistan army was taken to be an invasion of Indian territory. From the Indian perspective, the plebiscite was meant to confirm the accession, which was in all respects already complete, and Pakistan could not aspire to an equal footing with India in the contest.^[48]

The Pakistan government held that the state of Jammu and Kashmir had executed a Standstill Agreement with Pakistan which precluded it from entering into agreements with other countries. It also held that the Maharaja had no authority left to execute accession because his people had revolted and he had to flee the capital. It believed that the Azad Kashmir movement as well as the tribal incursions were indigenous and spontaneous, and Pakistan's assistance to them was not open to criticism.^[49]

In short, India required an asymmetric treatment of the two countries in the withdrawal arrangements regarding Pakistan as an `aggressor', whereas Pakistan insisted on parity. The UN mediators tended towards parity, which was not to India's satisfaction.^[50] In the end, no withdrawal was ever carried out, India insisting that Pakistan had to withdraw first, and Pakistan contending that there was no guarantee that India would withdraw afterwards.^[51] No agreement could be reached between the two countries on the process of demilitarisation.^{[note 6]}

Scholars have commented that the failure of the Security Council efforts of mediation owed to the fact that the Council regarded the issue as a purely political dispute without investigating its legal underpinnings.^{[note 7]} Declassified British papers indicate that Britain and US have let their cold war calculations inlfuence their policy in the UN disregarding the merits of the case.^{[note 8]}

Sino-Indian War

In 1962, troops from the People's Republic of China and India clashed in territory claimed by both. China won a swift victory in the war, resulting in Chinese annexation of the region they call Aksai Chin and which has continued since then. Another smaller area, the Trans-Karakoram, was demarcated as the Line of Control (LOC) between China and Pakistan, although some of the territory on the Chinese side is claimed by India to be part of Kashmir. The line that separates India from China in this region is known as the "Line of Actual Control".^[52]

1965 and 1971 wars

In 1965 and 1971, heavy fighting again broke out between India and Pakistan. The Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 resulted in the defeat of Pakistan and the Pakistani military's surrender in East Pakistan, leading to the creation of Bangladesh. The Simla Agreement, signed in 1972 between India and Pakistan, allowed both countries to settle all issues by peaceful means through mutual discussion within the framework of the UN Charter.

1989 popular insurgency and militancy

In the years since 1990, the Kashmiri Muslims and the Indian government have conspired to abolish the complexities of Kashmiri civilization. The world it inhabited has vanished: the state government and the political class, the rule of law, almost all the Hindu inhabitants of the valley, alcohol, cinemas, cricket matches, picnics by moonlight in the saffron fields, schools, universities, an independent press, tourists and banks. In this reduction of civilian reality, the sights of Kashmir are redefined: not the lakes and Mogul gardens, or the storied triumphs of Kashmiri agriculture, handicrafts and cookery, but two entities that confront each other without intermediary: the mosque and the army camp.

— British journalist James Buchan^[53]

In 1989, a widespread popular and armed insurgency^[54][55] started in Kashmir. After the 1987 state legislative assembly election, some of the results were disputed. This resulted in the formation of militant wings and marked the beginning of the Mujahadeen insurgency, which continues to this day.^[56] India contends that the insurgency was largely started by Afghan mujahadeen who entered the Kashmir valley following the end of the Soviet-Afghan War.^[57] Yasin Malik, a leader of one faction of the Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front, was one of the Kashmiris to organise militancy in Kashmir, along with Ashfaq Majid Wani and Farooq Ahmad Dar (alias Bitta Karatay). Since 1995, Malik has renounced the use of violence and calls for strictly peaceful methods to resolve the dispute. Malik developed differences with one of the senior leaders, Farooq Siddiqui (alias Farooq Papa), for shunning demands for an independent Kashmir and trying to cut a deal with the Indian Prime Minister. This resulted in a split in which Bitta Karatay, Salim Nanhaji, and other senior comrades joined Farooq Papa.^[58][59] Pakistan claims these insurgents are Jammu and Kashmir citizens, and are rising up against the Indian army as part of an independence movement. Amnesty International has accused security forces in Indian-controlled Kashmir of exploiting an Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act that enables them to "hold prisoners without trial". The group argues that the law, which allows security forces to detain individuals for up to two years without presenting charges violates prisoners' human rights.^[60][61] In 2011, the state humans right commission said it had evidence that 2,156 bodies had been buried in 40 graves over the last 20 years.^[61] The authorities deny such accusations. The security forces say the unidentified dead are militants who may have originally come from outside India. They also say that many of the missing people have crossed into Pakistan-administered Kashmir to engage in militancy.^[61] However, according to the state human rights commission, among the identified bodies 574 were those of "disappeared locals", and according to Amnesty International's annual human rights report (2012) it was sufficient for "belying the security forces' claim that they were militants".^[62]

India claims these insurgents are Islamic terrorist groups from Pakistan-administered Kashmir and Afghanistan, fighting to make Jammu and Kashmir a part of Pakistan.^[61][63] They claim Pakistan supplies munitions to the terrorists and trains them in Pakistan. India states that the terrorists have killed many citizens in Kashmir and committed human rights violations whilst denying that their own armed forces are responsible for human rights abuses. On a visit to Pakistan in 2006, former Chief Minister of Kashmir Omar Abdullah remarked that foreign militants were engaged in reckless killings and mayhem in the name of religion.^[64] The Indian government has said militancy is now on the decline.^[13]

The Pakistani government calls these insurgents "Kashmiri freedom fighters", and claims that it provides them only moral and diplomatic support, although India^[65] believes they are Pakistan-supported terrorists from Pakistan Administered Kashmir. In October 2008, President Asif Ali Zardari of Pakistan called the Kashmir separatists "terrorists" in an interview with The Wall Street Journal.^[66] These comments sparked outrage amongst many Kashmiris, some of whom defied a curfew imposed by the Indian army to burn him in effigy.^[67]

In 2008, pro-separatist leader Mirwaiz Umar Farooq told the Washington Post that there has been a "purely indigenous, purely Kashmiri"^[12] peaceful protest movement alongside the insurgency in Indian-administered Kashmir since 1989. The movement was created for the same reason as the insurgency and began after the disputed election of 1987. According to the United Nations, the Kashmiris have grievances with the Indian government, specifically the Indian Military, which has committed human rights violations, .^[12][13][68]

1999 Conflict in Kargil

In mid-1999, alleged insurgents and Pakistani soldiers from Pakistani Kashmir infiltrated Jammu and Kashmir. During the winter season, Indian forces regularly move down to lower altitudes, as severe climatic conditions makes it almost impossible for them to guard the high peaks near the Line of Control. This practice is followed by both India and Pakistan Army. The terrain makes it difficult for both sides to maintain a strict border control over Line of Control. The insurgents took advantage of this and occupied vacant mountain peaks in the Kargil range overlooking the highway in Indian Kashmir that connects Srinagar and Leh. By blocking the highway, they could cut off the only link between the Kashmir Valley and Ladakh. This resulted in a large-scale conflict between the Indian and Pakistani armies.

Fears of the Kargil War turning into a nuclear war provoked the then-United States President Bill Clinton to pressure Pakistan to retreat. The Pakistan Army withdrew their remaining troops from the area, ending the conflict. India reclaimed control of the peaks, which they now patrol and monitor all year long.

2000s Al-Qaeda involvement

In a 'Letter to American People' written by Osama bin Laden in 2002, he stated that one of the reasons he was fighting America was because of its support for India on the Kashmir issue.^[69][70] While on a trip to Delhi in 2002, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld suggested that Al-Qaeda was active in Kashmir, though he did not have any hard evidence.^[71][72] An investigation by a Christian Science Monitor reporter in 2002 claimed to have unearthed evidence that Al-Qaeda and its affiliates were prospering in Pakistan-administered Kashmir with tacit approval of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency (ISI).^[73] In 2002, a team comprising Special Air Service and Delta Force personnel was sent into Indian-administered Kashmir to hunt for Osama bin Laden after reports that he was being sheltered by the Kashmiri militant group Harkat-ul-Mujahideen.^[74] US officials believed that Al-Qaeda was helping organise a campaign of terror in Kashmir to provoke conflict between India and Pakistan. Their strategy was to force Pakistan to move its troops to the border with India, thereby relieving pressure on Al-Qaeda elements hiding in northwestern Pakistan. US intelligence analysts say Al-Qaeda and Taliban operatives in Pakistan-administered Kashmir are helping terrorists trained in Afghanistan to infiltrate Indian-administered Kashmir.^[75] Fazlur Rehman Khalil, the leader of the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen, signed al-Qaeda's 1998 declaration of holy war, which called on Muslims to attack all Americans and their allies.^[76] In 2006 Al-Qaeda claim they have established a wing in Kashmir, which worried the Indian government.^[77] Indian Army Lieutenant General H.S. Panag, GOC-in-C Northern Command, told reporters that the army has ruled out the presence of Al-Qaeda in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir. He said that there no evidence to verify media reports of an Al-Qaeda presence in the state. He ruled out Al-Qaeda ties with the militant groups in Kashmir including Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed. However, he stated that they had information about Al Qaeda's strong ties with Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed operations in Pakistan.^[78] While on a visit to Pakistan in January 2010, US Defense secretary Robert Gates stated that Al-Qaeda was seeking to destabilise the region and planning to provoke a nuclear war between India and Pakistan.^[79]

In June 2011, a US Drone strike killed Ilyas Kashmiri, chief of Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami, a Kashmiri militant group associated with Al-Qaeda.^[80][81] Kashmiri was described by Bruce Riedel as a 'prominent' Al-Qaeda member,^[82] while others described him as the head of military operations for Al-Qaeda.^[83] Waziristan had by then become the new battlefield for Kashmiri militants fighting NATO in support of Al-Qaeda.^[84] Ilyas Kashmiri was charged by the US in a plot against Jyllands-Posten, the Danish newspaper at the center of the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy.^[85] In April 2012, Farman Ali Shinwari a former member of Kashmiri separatist groups Harkat-ul-Mujahideen and Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami, was appointed chief of al-Qaeda in Pakistan.^[86]

Reasons behind the dispute

The Kashmir Conflict arose from the Partition of British India in 1947 into modern India and Pakistan. Both countries subsequently made claims to Kashmir, based on the history and religious affiliations of the Kashmiri people. The princely state of Jammu and Kashmir, which lies strategically in the north-west of the subcontinent bordering Afghanistan and China, was formerly ruled by Maharaja Hari Singh under the paramountcy of British India. In geographical and legal terms, the Maharaja could have joined either of the two new countries. Although urged by the Viceroy, Lord Mountbatten of Burma, to determine the future of his state before the transfer of power took place, Singh demurred. In October 1947, incursions by Pakistan took place leading to a war, as a result of which the state of Jammu and Kashmir remains divided between India and Pakistan.

Administered by	Area	Population	% Muslim	% Hindu	% Buddhist	% Other
India	Kashmir valley	~4 million	95%	4%	–	–
	Jammu	~3 million	30%	66%	–	4%
	Ladakh	~0.25 million	46%	–	50%	3%
Pakistan	Gilgit-Baltistan	~1 million	99%	–	–	–
	Azad Kashmir	~2.6 million	100%	–	–	–
China	Aksai Chin	–	–	–	–	–
Statistics from the BBC report "In Depth" *There are roughly 1.5 million refugees from Indian-administered Kashmir in Pakistan administered Kashmir and Pakistan UNHCR A minimum of 506,000 people in the Indian Administered Kashmir valley are internally displaced due to militancy in Kashmir about half of who are Hindu pandits CIA Muslims form the majority in the Poonch, Rajouri, Kishtwar, and Doda districts of the Jammu region. Shia Muslims make up the majority in the Kargil district in the Ladakh region. India does not accept the two-nation theory and considers that Kashmir, despite being a Muslim-majority state, is in many ways an "integral part" of secular India.[87] It is also worth noting that India has a Muslim population close to 177 Million very close to Pakistan which has a Muslim population of 178 Million.[88] In fact, as per 2001 Census Muslim population in the State of Uttar Pradesh (in India) alone was around 30 million more than Jammu & Kashmir which is at around 6 million.[89]

Two-thirds of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir, comprising Jammu, the Kashmir Valley, and the sparsely populated Buddhist area of Ladakh are controlled by India while one-third is administered by Pakistan. The latter includes a narrow strip of land called Azad Kashmir and the Northern Areas, comprising the Gilgit Agency, Baltistan, and the former kingdoms of Hunza and Nagar. Attempts to resolve the dispute through political discussions have been unsuccessful. In September 1965, war again broke out between Pakistan and India. The United Nations called for another cease-fire, and peace was restored following the Tashkent Declaration in 1966, by which both nations returned to their original positions along the demarcated line. After the 1971 war and the creation of independent Bangladesh under the terms of the 1972 Simla Agreement between Prime Minister Indira Gandhi of India and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto of Pakistan, it was agreed that neither country would seek to alter the cease-fire line in Kashmir, which was renamed as the Line of Control, "unilaterally, irrespective of mutual differences and legal interpretations".

Numerous violations of the Line of Control have occurred, including incursions by insurgents and Pakistani armed forces at Kargil leading to the Kargil war. There have also been sporadic clashes on the Siachen Glacier, where the Line of Control is not demarcated and both countries maintain forces at altitudes rising to 20,000 ft (6,100 m), with the Indian forces serving at higher altitudes.

Indian view

India has officially stated that it believes that Kashmir to be an integral part of India, though the then Prime Minister of India, Manmohan Singh, stated after the 2010 Kashmir Unrest that his government was willing to grant autonomy to the region within the purview of Indian constitution if there was consensus on this issue.^[90] The Indian viewpoint is succinctly summarised by Ministry of External affairs, Government of India^[91][92] —

• India holds that the Instrument of Accession of the State of Jammu and Kashmir to the Union of India, signed by Maharaja Hari Singh (erstwhile ruler of the State) on 25 October 1947^[93][94] and executed on 27 October 1947^[94] between the ruler of Kashmir and the Governor General of India was a legal act and completely valid in terms of the Government of India Act (1935), Indian Independence Act (1947) as well as under international law and as such was total and irrevocable.^[92]
• The Constituent assembly of Jammu and Kashmir had unanimously ratified the Maharaja's Instrument of Accession to India and adopted a constitution for the state that called for a perpetual merger of Jammu and Kashmir with the Union of India. India claims that the constituent assembly was a representative one, and that its views were those of the Kashmiri people at the time.^{[note 4][95]}
• United Nations Security Council Resolution 1172 tacitly accepts India's stand regarding all outstanding issues between India and Pakistan and urges the need to resolve the dispute through mutual dialogue without the need for a plebiscite in the framework of UN Charter.^[96][97]
• United Nations Security Council Resolution 47 cannot be implemented since Pakistan failed to withdraw its forces from Kashmir, which was the first step in implementing the resolution.^[98] India is also of the view that Resolution 47 is obsolete, since the geography and demographics of the region have permanently altered since it adoption.^[99] The resolution was passed by United Nations Security Council under Chapter VI of the United Nations Charter and as such is non-binding with no mandatory enforceability, as opposed to resolutions passed under Chapter VII.^[100][101]
• India does not accept the two-nation theory that forms the basis of Pakistan's claims and considers that Kashmir, despite being a Muslim-majority state, is in many ways an "integral part" of secular India.^[87]
• The state of Jammu and Kashmir was provided with significant autonomy under Article 370 of the Constitution of India.^[102]
• All differences between India and Pakistan, including Kashmir, need to be settled through bilateral negotiations as agreed to by the two countries under the Simla Agreement signed on 2 July 1972.^[103]

Additional Indian viewpoints regarding the broader debate over the Kashmir conflict include –

• In a diverse country like India, disaffection and discontent are not uncommon. Indian democracy has the necessary resilience to accommodate genuine grievances within the framework of India's sovereignty, unity, and integrity. The Government of India has expressed its willingness to accommodate the legitimate political demands of the people of the state of Kashmir.^[91]
• Insurgency and terrorism in Kashmir is deliberately fuelled by Pakistan to create instability in the region.^[104] The Government of India has repeatedly accused Pakistan of waging a proxy war in Kashmir by providing weapons and financial assistance to terrorist groups in the region.^{[105][106][107][108]}
• Pakistan is trying to raise anti-India sentiment among the people of Kashmir by spreading false propaganda against India.^[109] According to the state government of Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistani radio and television channels deliberately spread "hate and venom" against India to alter Kashmiri opinion.^[110]
• India has asked the United Nations not to leave unchallenged or unaddressed the claims of moral, political, and diplomatic support for terrorism, which were clearly in contravention of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373. This is a Chapter VII resolution that makes it mandatory for member states to not provide active or passive support to terrorist organisations.^[111][112] Specifically, it has pointed out that the Pakistani government continues to support various terrorist organisations, such as Jaish-e-Mohammad and Lashkar-e-Taiba, in direct violation of this resolution.^[113]
• India points out reports by human rights organisations condemning Pakistan for the lack of civic liberties in Pakistan-administered Kashmir.^[109][114] 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.^[115]
• Karan Singh, the son of the last ruler of the princely state of Kashmir and Jammu, has said that the Instrument of Accession signed by his father was the same as signed by other states. He opined that Kashmir was therefore a part of India, and that its special status granted by Article 370 of the Indian Constitution stemmed from the fact that it had its own constitution.^[116]

In 2008, the death toll from the last 20 years was estimated by Indian authorities to be over 47,000.^[117]

Pakistani view

Pakistan maintains that Kashmir is the "jugular vein of Pakistan"^[118] and a currently disputed territory whose final status must be determined by the people of Kashmir. Pakistan's claims to the disputed region are based on the rejection of Indian claims to Kashmir, namely the Instrument of Accession. Pakistan insists that the Maharaja was not a popular leader, and was regarded as a tyrant by most Kashmiris. Pakistan maintains that the Maharaja used brute force to suppress the population.^[119]

Pakistan claims that Indian forces were in Kashmir before the Instrument of Accession was signed with India, and that therefore Indian troops were in Kashmir in violation of the Standstill Agreement, which was designed to maintain the status quo in Kashmir (although India was not signatory to the Agreement, which was signed between Pakistan and the Hindu ruler of Jammu and Kashmir).^[120][121]

From 1990 to 1999, some organisations reported that the Indian Armed Forces, its paramilitary groups, and counter-insurgent militias were responsible for the deaths of 4,501 Kashmiri civilians. During the same period, there were records of 4,242 women between the ages of 7–70 being raped.^[122][123] Similar allegations were also made by some human rights organisations.^[124]

In short, Pakistan holds that –

• The popular Kashmiri insurgency demonstrates that the Kashmiri people no longer wish to remain within India. Pakistan suggests that this means that Kashmir either wants to be with Pakistan or independent.^[125]
• According to the two-nation theory, one of the principles that is cited for the partition that created India and Pakistan, Kashmir should have been with Pakistan, because it has a Muslim majority.
• India has shown disregard for the resolutions of the UN Security Council and the United Nations Commission in India and Pakistan by failing to hold a plebiscite to determine the future allegiance of the state.^[126]
• The reason for India's disregard of the resolutions of the UN Security Council was given by India's Defense Minister, Kirshnan Menon, who said: "Kashmir would vote to join Pakistan and no Indian Government responsible for agreeing to plebiscite would survive.''^[127]
• Pakistan was of the view that the Maharaja of Kashmir had no right to call in the Indian Army, because it held that the Maharaja of Kashmir was not a hereditary ruler and was merely a British appointee, after the British defeated Ranjit Singh who ruled the area before the British conquest.^[128]
• Pakistan has noted the widespread use of extrajudicial killings in Indian-administered Kashmir carried out by Indian security forces while claiming they were caught up in encounters with militants. These encounters are commonplace in Indian-administered Kashmir. The encounters go largely uninvestigated by the authorities, and the perpetrators are spared criminal prosecution.^[129][130]

Human rights organisations have strongly condemned Indian troops for widespread rape and murder of innocent civilians while accusing these civilians of being militants.^{[131][132][133]}

• The Chenab formula was a compromise proposed in the 1960s, in which the Kashmir valley and other Muslim-dominated areas north of the Chenab river would go to Pakistan, and Jammu and other Hindu-dominated regions would go to India.^[134]

Former Pakistani president General Pervez Musharraf on 16 October 2014 said that Pakistan needs to incite those fighting in Kashmir,^[135][136] "We have source (in Kashmir) besides the (Pakistan) army…People in Kashmir are fighting against (India). We just need to incite them," Musharraf told a TV channel.^[135][136]

In 2015 Pakistan’s outgoing National Security Advisor Sartaj Aziz said that Pakistan wished to have third party mediation on Kashmir, but it was unlikely to happen unless by international pressure.^[137] “Under Shimla Accord it was decided that India and Pakistan would resolve their disputes bilaterally,” Aziz said. “Such bilateral talks have not yielded any results for the last 40 years. So then what is the solution?”^[137]

A survey carried out across both Jammu and Kashmir and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir by London-based thinktank Chatham House, its author claims 'is the first ever of its kind', shows that only 2% of the respondents on the Indian side favour joining Pakistan.^[138]

Chinese view

China states that Aksai Chin is an integral part of China and does not recognise the inclusion of Aksai Chin as part of the Kashmir region.

• China did not accept the boundaries of the princely state of Kashmir and Jammu, north of Aksai Chin and the Karakoram as proposed by the British.^[139]
• China settled its border disputes with Pakistan under the 1963 Trans Karakoram Tract with the provision that the settlement was subject to the final solution of the Kashmir dispute.^[140]

Cross-border troubles

The border and the Line of Control separating Indian and Pakistani Kashmir passes through some exceptionally difficult terrain. The world's highest battleground, the Siachen Glacier, is a part of this difficult-to-man boundary. Even with 200,000 military personnel,^[141] India maintains that it is infeasible to place enough men to guard all sections of the border throughout the various seasons of the year. Pakistan has indirectly acquiesced its role in failing to prevent "cross-border terrorism" when it agreed to curb such activities^[142] after intense pressure from the Bush administration in mid-2002.

The Government of Pakistan has repeatedly claimed that by constructing a fence along the line of control, India is violating the Shimla Accord. India claims the construction of the fence has helped decrease armed infiltration into Indian-administered Kashmir.

In 2002, Pakistani President and Army Chief General Pervez Musharraf promised to check infiltration into Jammu and Kashmir.

Water dispute

Another reason for the dispute over Kashmir is water. Kashmir is the source of many rivers and tributaries in the Indus River basin. This basin is divided between Pakistan, which has about 60 percent of the catchment area, India with about 20 percent, Afghanistan with 5 percent and around 15 percent in China (Tibet autonomous region). The river tributaries are the Jhelum and Chenab rivers, which primarily flow into Pakistan, while other branches—the Ravi, Beas, and the Sutlej—irrigate northern India.

The Indus is a river system that sustains communities in India and Pakistan. Both have extensively dammed the Indus River for irrigation of their crops and hydro-electricity systems. In arbitrating the conflict in 1947, Sir Cyril Radcliffe, decided to demarcate the territories as he was unable to give to one or the other the control over the river as it was a main economic resource for both areas. The Line of Control (LoC) was recognised as an international border establishing that India would have control over the upper riparian and Pakistan over the lower riparian of the Indus and its tributaries. Despite appearing to be separate issues, the Kashmir dispute and the dispute over the water control are in reality related and the fight over the water remains one of the main problems in establishing good relations between the two countries.

In 1948, Eugene Black, then president of the World Bank, offered his services to solve the tension over water control. In the early days of independence, the fact that India was able to shut off the Central Bari Doab Canals at the time of the sowing season, causing significant damage to Pakistan's crops. Nevertheless, military and political clashes over Kashmir in the early years of independence appear to have been more about ideology and sovereignty rather than over the sharing of water resources. However, the minister of Pakistan has stated the opposite.^[143]

The Indus Waters Treaty was signed by both countries in September 1960, giving exclusive rights over the three western rivers of the Indus river system (Jhelum, Chenab and Indus) to Pakistan, and over the three eastern rivers (Sutlej, Ravi and Beas) to India, as long as this does not reduce or delay the supply to Pakistan. India therefore maintains that they are not willing to break the established regulations and they see no more problems with this issue.

Pakistan's relation with militants

India has furnished documentary evidence to the United Nations that Pakistan supports Kashmiri militants, leading to a ban on some terrorist organisations, which Pakistan has yet to enforce. Former President of Pakistan and the ex-chief of the Pakistan military Pervez Musharraf, stated in an interview in London, that the Pakistani government indeed helped to form underground militant groups and "turned a blind eye" towards their existence.^[144]

According to former Indian Prime-minister Manmohan Singh, one of the main reasons behind the conflict was Pakistan's "terror-induced coercion". He further stated at a Joint Press Conference with United States President Barack Obama in New Delhi that India is not afraid of resolving all the issues with Pakistan including that of Kashmir "but it is our request that you cannot simultaneously be talking and at the same time the terror machine is as active as ever before. Once Pakistan moves away from this terror-induced coercion, we will be very happy to engage productively with Pakistan to resolve all outstanding issues."^[145]

In 2009, the President of Pakistan Asif Zardari asserted at a conference in Islamabad that Pakistan had indeed created Islamic militant groups as a strategic tool for use in its geostrategic agenda and "to attack Indian forces in Jammu and Kashmir".^[146] Former President of Pakistan and the ex-chief of the Pakistan military Pervez Musharraf also stated in an interview that Pakistani government helped to form underground militant groups to fight against Indian troops in Jammu and Kashmir and "turned a blind eye" towards their existence because it wanted to force India to enter negotiations.^[144] The British Government have formally accepted that there is a clear connection between Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and three major militant outfits operating in Jammu and Kashmir, Lashkar-e-Tayiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed and Harkat-ul-Mujahideen.^[147][148] The militants are provided with "weapons, training, advice and planning assistance" in Punjab and Kashmir by the ISI which is "coordinating the shipment of arms from the Pakistani side of Kashmir to the Indian side, where Muslim insurgents are waging a protracted war".^[149][150]

Throughout the 1990s, the ISI maintained its relationship with extremist networks and militants that it had established during the Afghan war to utilise in its campaign against Indian forces in Kashmir.^[151] Joint Intelligence/North (JIN) has been accused of conducting operations in Jammu and Kashmir and also Afghanistan.^[152] The Joint Signal Intelligence Bureau (JSIB) provide communications support to groups in Kashmir.^[152] According to Daniel Benjamin and Steven Simon, both former members of the National Security Council, the ISI acted as a "kind of terrorist conveyor belt" radicalising young men in the Madrassas of Pakistan and delivering them to training camps affiliated with or run by Al-Qaeda and from there moving them into Jammu and Kashmir to launch attacks.^[153]

Reportedly, about Rs. 24 million are paid out per month by the ISI to fund its activities in Jammu and Kashmir.^[154] Pro-Pakistani groups were reportedly favoured over other militant groups.^[154] Creation of six militant groups in Kashmir, which included Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), was aided by the ISI.^[155][156] According to American Intelligence officials, ISI is still providing protection and help to LeT.^[156] The Pakistan Army and ISI also LeT volunteers to surreptitiously penetrate from Pakistan Administrated Kashmir to Jammu and Kashmir.^[157]

In the past, Indian authorities have alleged several times that Pakistan has been involved in training and arming underground militant groups to fight Indian forces in Kashmir.^[158]

Human rights abuse

Indian administered Kashmir

Claims of human rights abuses have been made against the Indian Armed Forces and armed insurgents operating in Jammu and Kashmir. Since 1989, over 50,000 people are claimed to have died during the conflict.^[159] Data released in 2011 by Jammu and Kashmir government stated that, in the last 21 years, 43,460 people have been killed in the Kashmir insurgency. Of these, 21,323 are militants, 13,226 civilians killed by militants, 3,642 civilians killed by security forces, and 5,369 policemen killed by militants.^[160] Human rights watch also blamed both Indian security foreces and Kashmiri separatist militants for human rights abuses.^[159]

In its report of September 2006, Human Rights Watch stated that,

Indian security forces claim they are fighting to protect Kashmiris from militants and Islamic extremists, while militants claim they are fighting for Kashmiri independence and to defend Muslim Kashmiris from an abusive Indian army. In reality, both sides have committed widespread and numerous human rights abuses and violations of international humanitarian law (or the laws of war).^[159]

Human Rights Watch also blamed Pakistan for supporting militants in Kashmir, in same 2006 report it says, "There is considerable evidence that over many years Pakistan has provided Kashmiri militants with training, weapons, funding and sanctuary. Pakistan remains accountable for abuses committed by militants that it has armed and trained."^{[159][161][162]}

Some human rights organisations have alleged that Indian Security forces have killed hundreds of Kashmiris through the indiscriminate use of force and torture, firing on demonstrations, custodial killings, encounters and detensions.^{[163][164][165][166]} The government of India denied that torture was widespread^[164] and stated that some custodial crimes may have taken place but that "these are few and far between".^[164] According to one human rights report in Kashmir there have been more than three hundred cases of "disappearances" since 1990.^{[167][168][169]} State Human Rights Commission (SHRC) has found 2,730 bodies buried into unmarked graves scattered all over Kashmir believed to contain the remains of victims of unlawful killings and enforced disappearances by Indian security forces.^{[170][171][172]} SHRC stated that about 574 of these bodies have already been identified as those of disappeared locals.^[173] SHRC also accused Indian army of forced labour.^[174] According to cables leaked by the WikiLeaks website, US diplomats in 2005 were informed by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) about the use of torture and sexual humiliation against hundreds of Kashmiri detainees by the security forces.^[175] The cable said Indian security forces relied on torture for confessions and that the human right abuses are believed to be condoned by the Indian government.^[176] In 2012, the Jammu and Kashmir State government stripped its State Information Commission (SIC) department of most powers after the commission asked the government to disclose information about the unmarked graves. This state action was reportedly denounced by the former National Chief Information Commissioner.^[177] A state government inquiry into the 22 October 1993 Bijbehara killings, in which the Indian military fired on a procession and killed 40 people and injured 150, found out that the firing by the forces was 'unprovoked' and the claim of the military that it was in retaliation was 'concocted and baseless'. However, the accused are still to be punished.^[178]

According to a report by Human Rights Watch,

Indian security forces have assaulted civilians during search operations, tortured and summarily executed detainees in custody and murdered civilians in reprisal attacks. Rape most often occurs during crackdowns, cordon-and-search operations during which men are held for identification in parks or schoolyards while security forces search their homes. In these situations, the security forces frequently engage in collective punishment against the civilian population, most frequently by beating or otherwise assaulting residents, and burning their homes. Rape is used as a means of targetting women whom the security forces accuse of being militant sympathizers; in raping them, the security forces are attempting to punish and humiliate the entire community.^[179]

The allegation of mass rape incidents as well as forced disappearances are reflected in a Kashmiri short documentary film by an Independent Kashmiri film-maker, the Ocean of Tears produced by a non-governmental non-profit organisation called the Public Service Broadcasting Trust of India and approved by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (India). The film also depicts mass rape incidents in Kunan Poshpora and Shopian as facts and alleging that Indian Security Forces were responsible.^[180][181] A report from the Indian Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) claimed that the seven people killed in 2000 by the Indian military, were innocent civilians.^{[182][183][184]} The Indian Army has decided to try the accused in the General Court Martial.^[185] It was also reported that the killings that were allegedly committed in "cold-blood" by the Army, were actually in retaliation for the murder of 36 civilians [Sikhs] by militants at Chattisingpora in 2000.^[185] The official stance of the Indian Army was that, according to its own investigation, 97% of the reports about human rights abuses have been found to be "fake or motivated".^[186] However, there have been at least one case where civilians have been killed in 'fake encounters' by Indian army personnel for cash rewards.^[187]

Our people were killed. I saw a girl tortured with cigarette butts. Another man had his eyes pulled out and his body hung on a tree. The armed separatists used a chainsaw to cut our bodies into pieces. It wasn't just the killing but the way they tortured and killed.

— A crying old Kashmiri Hindu in refugee camps of Jammu told BBC news reporter^[188]

The violence was condemned and labelled as ethnic cleansing in a 2006 resolution passed by the United States Congress.^[189] It stated that the Islamic terrorists infiltrated the region in 1989 and began an ethnic cleansing campaign to convert Kashmir into a Muslim state. According to the same resolution, since then nearly 400,000 Pandits were either murdered or forced to leave their ancestral homes.^[190]

According to a Hindu American Foundation report, the rights and religious freedom of Kashmiri Hindus have been severely curtailed since 1989, when there was an organised and systematic campaign by Islamist militants to cleanse Hindus from Kashmir. Less than 4,000 Kashmiri Hindus remain in the valley, reportedly living with daily threats of violence and terrorism.^[191]

According to an op-ed published in a BBC journal, the emphasis of the movement after 1989, ″soon shifted from nationalism to Islam.″ It also claimed that the minority community of Kashmiri Pandits, who have lived in Kashmir for centuries, were forced to leave their homeland.^[188]

The displaced Pandits, many of who continue to live in temporary refugee camps in Jammu and Delhi, are still unable to safely return to their homeland.^[191] The lead in this act of ethnic cleansing was initially taken by the Jammu & Kashmir Liberation Front and the Hizbul Mujahideen. According to Indian media, all this happened at the instigation of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) by a group of Kashmiri terrorist elements who were trained, armed and motivated by the ISI. Reportedly, organisations trained and armed by the ISI continued this ethnic cleansing until practically all the Kashmiri Pandits were driven out after having been subjected to numerous indignities and brutalities such as rape of their women, torture, forcible seizure of property etc.^[192] The separatists in Kashmir deny these allegations. The Indian government is also trying to reinstate the displaced Pandits in Kashmir. Tahir, the district commander of a separatist Islamic group in Kashmir, stated: "We want the Kashmiri Pandits to come back. They are our brothers. We will try to protect them." But the majority of the Pandits, who have been living in pitiable conditions in Jammu, believe that, until insurgency ceases to exist, return is not possible.^[188]

Mustafa Kamal, brother of Union Minister Farooq Abdullah, blamed security forces, former Jammu and Kashmir governor Jagmohan and PDP leader Mufti Sayeed for forcing the migration of Kashmiri Pandits from the Valley.^[193] Jagmohan denies these allegations.^[188]

Reports by the Indian government state 219 Kashmiri pandits were killed and around 140,000 migrated due to millitancy while over 3000 remained in the valley.^[194][195] The local organisation of pandits in Kashmir, Kashmir Pandit Sangharsh Samiti claimed that 399 Kashmiri Pandits were killed by insurgents.^[196][197]

The CIA has reported that at least 506,000 people from Indian Administered Kashmir are internally displaced, about half of who are Hindu Pandits.^[198][199] The United Nations Commission on Human Rights (UNCR) reports that there are roughly 1.5 million refugees from Indian-administered Kashmir, the bulk of who arrived in Pakistan-administered Kashmir and in Pakistan after the situation on the Indian side worsened in 1989 insurgency.^[200]

Médecins Sans Frontières conducted a research survey in 2005 that found 11.6% of the interviewees who took part had been victims of sexual abuse since 1989.^[201][202] Some surveys have found that in the Kashmir region itself (where the bulk of separatist and Indian military activity is concentrated), popular perception holds that the Indian Armed Forces are more to blame for human rights violations than the separatist groups. Amnesty International has called on India to "unequivocally condemn enforced disappearances" and to ensure that impartial investigations are conducted into mass graves in its Kashmir region. The Indian state police confirms as many as 331 deaths while in custody and 111 enforced disappearances since 1989.^{[203][204][205][206]} Amnesty International criticised the Indian Military regarding an incident on 22 April 1996, when several armed forces personnel forcibly entered the house of a 32-year-old woman in the village of Wawoosa in the Rangreth district of Jammu and Kashmir. They reportedly molested her 12-year-old daughter and raped her other three daughters, aged 14, 16, and 18. When another woman attempted to prevent the soldiers from attacking her two daughters, she was beaten. Soldiers reportedly told her 17-year-old daughter to remove her clothes so that they could check whether she was hiding a gun. They molested her before leaving the house.^[206]

Several international agencies and the UN have reported human rights violations in Indian-administered Kashmir. In a recent press release the OHCHR spokesmen stated "The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights is concerned about the recent violent protests in Indian-administered Kashmir that have reportedly led to civilian casualties as well as restrictions to the right to freedom of assembly and expression."^[68] A 1996 Human Rights Watch report accuses the Indian military and Indian-government backed paramilitaries of "committ[ing] serious and widespread human rights violations in Kashmir."^[207] One such alleged massacre occurred on 6 January 1993 in the town of Sopore. TIME Magazine described the incident as such: "In retaliation for the killing of one soldier, paramilitary forces rampaged through Sopore's market, setting buildings ablaze and shooting bystanders. The Indian government pronounced the event 'unfortunate' and claimed that an ammunition dump had been hit by gunfire, setting off fires that killed most of the victims."^[208] There have been claims of disappearances by the police or the army in Kashmir by several human rights organisations.^[209][210] Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978:^[211][212] Human rights organisations have asked Indian government to repeal^[213] the Public Safety Act, since "a detainee may be held in administrative detention for a maximum of two years without a court order."^[204]

Many human rights organisations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch (HRW) have condemned human rights abuses in Kashmir by Indians such as "extra-judicial executions", "disappearances", and torture.^[205] The "Armed Forces Special Powers Act" grants the military, wide powers of arrest, the right to shoot to kill, and to occupy or destroy property in counterinsurgency operations. Indian officials claim that troops need such powers because the army is only deployed when national security is at serious risk from armed combatants. Such circumstances, they say, call for extraordinary measures. Human rights organisations have also asked the Indian government to repeal^[213] the Public Safety Act, since "a detainee may be held in administrative detention for a maximum of two years without a court order."^[204] A 2008 report by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees determined that Indian Administered Kashmir was only 'partly free'.^[203] A recent report by Amnesty International stated that up to 20,000 people have been detained under a law called AFSPA in Indian-administered Kashmir.^{[204][205][206][214]}

Pakistan administered Kashmir

Azad Kashmir

Claims of religious discrimination and restrictions on religious freedom in Azad Kashmir have been made against Pakistan.^[215] The country is also accused of systemic suppression of free speech and demonstrations against the government.^[215] UNHCR reported that a number of Islamist militant groups, including al-Qaeda, operate from bases in Pakistani-administered Kashmir with the tacit permission of ISI^[200][215] There have also been several allegations of human rights abuse.^[200]

In 2006, Human Rights Watch accused ISI and the military of systemic torture with the purpose of "punishing" errant politicians, political activists and journalists in Azad Kashmir.^[216] A report titled "Kashmir: Present Situation and Future Prospects", submitted to the European Parliament by Emma Nicholson, was critical of the lack of human rights, justice, democracy, and Kashmiri representation in the Pakistan National Assembly.^[217] According to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, Pakistan's ISI operates in Pakistan-administered Kashmir and is accused of involvement in extensive surveillance, arbitrary arrests, torture, and murder.^[215] The 2008 report by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees determined that Pakistan-administered Kashmir was 'not free'.^[215] According to Shaukat Ali, chairman of the International Kashmir Alliance, "On one hand Pakistan claims to be the champion of the right of self-determination of the Kashmiri people, but she has denied the same rights under its controlled parts of Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan".^[218]

After the 2011 elections, Azad Kashmir Prime Minister Sardar Attique Ahmad Khan stated that there were mistakes in the voters list which have raised questions about the credibility of the elections.^[219]

In December 1993, the blasphemy laws of Pakistan were extended to Pakistan Administered Kashmir. The area is ruled directly through a chief executive Lt. Gen. Mohammed Shafiq, appointed by Islamabad with a 26-member Northern Areas Council.^[220]

UNCR reports that the status of women in Pakistani-administered Kashmir is similar to that of women in Pakistan. They are not granted equal rights under the law, and their educational opportunities and choice of marriage partner remain "circumscribed". Domestic violence, forced marriage, and other forms of abuse continue to be issues of concern. In May 2007, the United Nations and other aid agencies temporarily suspended their work after suspected Islamists mounted an arson attack on the home of two aid workers after the organisations had received warnings against hiring women. However, honour killings and rape occur less frequently than in other areas of Pakistan.^[200]

Gilgit-Baltistan

The main demand of the people of Gilgit-Baltistan is constitutional status for the region as a fifth province of Pakistan.^[221][222] However, Pakistan claims that Gilgit-Baltistan cannot be given constitutional status due to Pakistan's commitment to the 1948 UN resolution.^[222][223] In 2007, the International Crisis Group stated that "Almost six decades after Pakistan's independence, the constitutional status of the Federally Administered Northern Areas (Gilgit and Baltistan), once part of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir and now under Pakistani control, remains undetermined, with political autonomy a distant dream. The region's inhabitants are embittered by Islamabad's unwillingness to devolve powers in real terms to its elected representatives, and a nationalist movement, which seeks independence, is gaining ground. The rise of sectarian extremism is an alarming consequence of this denial of basic political rights".^[224] A two-day conference on Gilgit-Baltistan was held on 8–9 April 2008 at the European Parliament in Brussels under the auspices of the International Kashmir Alliance.^[225] Several members of the European Parliament expressed concern over human rights violations in Gilgit-Baltistan and urged the government of Pakistan to establish democratic institutions and the rule of law in the area.^[225][226]

In 2009, the Pakistani government implemented an autonomy package for Gilgit-Baltistan, which entails rights similar to those of Pakistan’s other provinces.^[221] Gilgit-Baltistan thus gains province-like status without actually being conferred such status constitutionally.^[221][223] Direct rule by Islamabad has been replaced by an elected legislative assembly under a chief minister.^[221][223]

There has been criticism and opposition to this move in Pakistan, India, and Pakistan administrated Kashmir.^[227] The move has been dubbed a cover-up to hide the real mechanics of power, which allegedly are under the direct control of the Pakistani federal government.^[228] The package was opposed by Pakistani Kashmiri politicians who claimed that the integration of Gilgit-Baltistan into Pakistan would undermine their case for the independence of Kashmir from India.^[229] 300 activists from Kashmiri groups protested during the first Gilgit-Baltistan legislative assembly elections, with some carrying banners reading "Pakistan's expansionist designs in Gilgit-Baltistan are unacceptable"^[222]

In December 2009, activists from nationalist Kashmiri groups staged a protest in Muzaffarabad to condemn the alleged rigging of elections and the killing of an 18-year-old student.^[230]

Map issues

As with other disputed territories, each government issues maps depicting their claims in Kashmir territory, regardless of actual control. Due to India's Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1961, it is illegal in India to exclude all or part of Kashmir from a map (or to publish any map that differs from those of the Survey of India).^[231] It is illegal in Pakistan not to include the state of Jammu and Kashmir as disputed territory, as permitted by the United Nations. Non-participants often use the Line of Control and the Line of Actual Control as the depicted boundaries, as is done in the CIA World Factbook, while the region is often marked out in hashmarks. When Microsoft released a map in Windows 95 and MapPoint 2002, a controversy arose because it did not show all of Kashmir as part of India as per the Indian claim. All neutral and Pakistani companies claim to follow the UN's map and over 90% of all maps containing the territory of Kashmir show it as disputed territory.^[232]

In 2010, Jammu and Kashmir was removed from the United Nations list of unresolved disputes, in a setback to Pakistan which has been asking the world body to intervene on the issue.^[233][234]

Recent developments

India continues to assert its sovereignty or rights over the entire region of Kashmir, while Pakistan maintains that it is a disputed territory. Pakistan argues that the status quo cannot be considered as a solution and further insists on a UN-sponsored plebiscite. Unofficially, the Pakistani leadership has indicated that they would be willing to accept alternatives such as a demilitarised Kashmir, if sovereignty of Azad Kashmir was to be extended over the Kashmir valley, or the "Chenab" formula, by which India would retain parts of Kashmir on its side of the Chenab river, and Pakistan the other side—effectively re-partitioning Kashmir on communal lines. The problem with the proposal is that the population of the Pakistan-administered portion of Kashmir is for the most part ethnically, linguistically, and culturally different from the Valley of Kashmir, a part of Indian-administered Kashmir. Partition based on the Chenab formula is opposed by some Kashmiri politicians, although others, including Sajjad Lone, have suggested that the non-Muslim part of Jammu and Kashmir be separated from Kashmir and handed to India. Some political analysts say that the Pakistan state policy shift and mellowing of its aggressive stance may have to do with its total failure in the Kargil War and the subsequent 9/11 attacks. These events put pressure on Pakistan to alter its position on terrorism.^[235] Many neutral parties to the dispute have noted that the UN resolution on Kashmir is no longer relevant.^[236] The European Union holds the view that the plebiscite is not in Kashmiris' interest.^[237] The report notes that the UN conditions for such a plebiscite have not been, and can no longer be, met by Pakistan.^[238] The Hurriyat Conference observed in 2003 that a "plebiscite [is] no longer an option".^[239] Besides the popular factions that support one or other of the parties, there is a third faction which supports independence and withdrawal of both India and Pakistan. These have been the respective stands of the parties for a long while, and there have been no significant changes over the years. As a result, all efforts to solve the conflict have so far proved futile.

Revelations made on 24 September 2013 by the former Indian army chief General V. K. Singh claim that the state politicians of Jammu and Kashmir are funded by the army secret service to keep the general public calm and that this activity has been going on since Partition. He also stated that the secret service paid a bribe to a politician to topple the state government, which was pushing for AFSPA repeal in 2010.^[240][241]

In a 2001 report entitled "Pakistan's Role in the Kashmir Insurgency" from the American RAND Corporation, the think tank noted that "the nature of the Kashmir conflict has been transformed from what was originally a secular, locally based struggle (conducted via the Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front – JKLF) to one that is now largely carried out by foreign militants and rationalized in pan-Islamic religious terms." The majority of militant organisations are composed of foreign mercenaries, mostly from the Pakistani Punjab.^[242] In 2010, with the support of its intelligence agencies, Pakistan again 'boosted' Kashmir militants, and recruitment of mujahideen in the Pakistani state of Punjab has increased.^[243][244] In 2011, the FBI revealed that Pakistan's spy agency ISI paid millions of dollars into a United States-based non-governmental organisation to influence politicians and opinion-makers on the Kashmir issue and arrested Syed Ghulam Nabi Fai.^[245]

The Freedom in the World 2006 report categorised Indian-administered Kashmir as "partly free", and Pakistan-administered Kashmir, as well as the country of Pakistan, as "not free".^[246] India claims that contrary to popular belief, a large proportion of the Jammu and Kashmir populace wishes to remain with India. A MORI survey found that within Indian-administered Kashmir, 61% of respondents said they felt they would be better off as Indian citizens, with 33% saying that they did not know, and the remaining 6% favouring Pakistani citizenship. However, this support for India was mainly in the Ladakh and Jammu regions, not the Kashmir Valley, where only 9% of the respondents said that they would be better off with India.^[247] According to a 2007 poll conducted by the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies in New Delhi, 87% of respondents in the Kashmir Valley prefer independence over union with India or Pakistan.^[248] However, a survey by Chatham House in both Indian and Pakistani administered Kashmir found that support for independence stood at 43% and 44% respectively.^[249]

The 2005 Kashmir earthquake, which killed over 80,000 people, led to India and Pakistan finalising negotiations for the opening of a road for disaster relief through Kashmir.

Efforts to end the crisis

The 9/11 attacks on the United States resulted in the US government wanting to restrain militancy in the world, including Pakistan. They urged Islamabad to cease infiltrations, which continue to this day, by Islamist militants into Indian-administered Kashmir. In December 2001, a terrorist attack on the Indian Parliament linked to Pakistan resulted in war threats, massive troop deployments, and international fears of a nuclear war in the subcontinent.

After intensive diplomatic efforts by other countries, India and Pakistan began to withdraw troops from the international border on 10 June 2002, and negotiations restarted. From 26 November 2003, India and Pakistan agreed to maintain a ceasefire along the undisputed international border, the disputed Line of Control, and Actual Ground Position Line near the Siachen glacier. This was the first such "total ceasefire" declared by both powers in nearly 15 years. In February 2004, Pakistan increased pressure on Pakistanis fighting in Indian-administered Kashmir to adhere to the ceasefire. Their neighbours launched several other mutual confidence-building measures. Restarting the bus service between the Indian- and Pakistani- administered Kashmir has helped defuse tensions between the countries while both India and Pakistan have decided to co-operate on economic fronts.

In 2005, General Musharraf as well as other Pakistani leaders sought to resolve the Kashmir issue through the Chenab Formula road map. Based on the 'Dixon Plan', the Chenab Formula assigns Ladakh to India, Gilgit-Baltistan (G-B) to Pakistan, proposes a plebiscite in the Kashmir Valley and splits Jammu into two-halves.^[250] On 5 December 2006, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf told an Indian TV channel that Pakistan would give up its claim on Kashmir if India accepted some of his peace proposals, including a phased withdrawal of troops, self-governance for locals, no changes in the borders of Kashmir, and a joint supervision mechanism involving India, Pakistan, and Kashmir.^[251] Musharraf stated that he was ready to give up the United Nations' resolutions regarding Kashmir.^[252]

2008 militant attacks

In the week of 10 March 2008, 17 people were wounded when a blast hit the region's only highway overpass located near the civil secretariat—the seat of government of Indian-controlled Kashmir—and the region's high court. A gun battle between security forces and militants fighting against Indian rule left five people dead and two others injured on 23 March 2008. The battle began when security forces raided a house on the outskirts of the capital city of Srinagar housing militants. The Indian Army has been carrying out cordon-and-search operations against militants in Indian-administered Kashmir since the violence broke out in 1989. While the authorities say 43,000 people have been killed in the violence, various human rights groups and non-governmental organisations have put the figure at twice that number.^[253]

According to the Government of India Home Ministry, 2008 was the year with the lowest civilian casualties in 20 years, with 89 deaths, compared to a high of 1,413 in 1996.^[254] In 2008, 85 security personnel died compared to 613 in 2001, while 102 militants were killed. The human rights situation improved, with only one custodial death, and no custodial disappearances. Many analysts say Pakistan's preoccupation with jihadis within its own borders explains the relative calm.^[255]

2008 Kashmir protests

Massive demonstrations occurred after plans by the Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir state government to transfer 100 acres (0.40 km²) of land to a trust which runs the Hindu Amarnath shrine in the Muslim-majority Kashmir valley.^[256] This land was to be used to build a shelter to house Hindu pilgrims temporarily during their annual pilgrimage to the Amarnath temple. Such demonstrations have been aloof of the fact that the India government very regularly undertakes activities for upliftment of Muslim community (as a secular government)and very regularly donates lands and other properties to the systemized Waqf Boards.^[257][258]

Indian security forces and the Indian army responded quickly to keep order. More than 40 unarmed protesters were killed^[259][260] and at least 300 were detained.^[261] The largest protests saw more than a half million people waving Pakistani flags and crying for freedom at a rally on 18 August, according to Time magazine.^[262] Pro-independence Kashmiri leader Mirwaiz Umar Farooq warned that the peaceful uprising could lead to an upsurge in violence if India's heavy-handed crackdown on protests was not restrained.^[263] The United Nations expressed concern at India's response to peaceful protests and urged investigations be launched against Indian security personnel who had taken part in the crackdown.^[68]

Separatists and political party workers were believed to be behind stone-throwing incidents, which have led to retaliatory fire from the police.^[264][265] An autorickshaw laden with stones meant for distribution was seized by the police in March 2009. Following the unrest in 2008, secessionist movements got a boost.^[266][267]

2008 Kashmir elections

State elections were held in Indian administered Kashmir in seven phases, starting on 17 November and finishing on 24 December 2008. In spite of calls by separatists for a boycott, an unusually high turnout of more than 60% was recorded.^[268][269] The National Conference party, which was founded by Sheikh Abdullah and is regarded as pro-India, emerged with a majority of the seats.^[270] On 30 December, the Congress Party and the National Conference agreed to form a coalition government, with Omar Abdullah as Chief Minister.^[271] On 5 January 2009, Abdullah was sworn in as the eleventh Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir.^[272]

In March 2009, Abdullah stated that only 800 militants were active in the state and out of these only 30% were Kashmiris.^[273]

2009 Kashmir protests

In 2009, protests started over the alleged rape and murder of two young women in Shopian in South Kashmir. Suspicion pointed towards the police as the perpetrators. A judicial enquiry by a retired High Court official confirmed the suspicion, but a CBI enquiry reversed their conclusion. This gave fresh impetus to popular agitation against India. Significantly, the unity between the separatist parties was lacking this time.^[274]

2010 Kashmir Unrest

The 2010 Kashmir unrest was series of protests in the Muslim majority Kashmir Valley in Jammu and Kashmir which started in June 2010. These protests involved the 'Quit Jammu Kashmir Movement' launched by the Hurriyat Conference led by Syed Ali Shah Geelani and Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, who had called for the complete demilitarisation of Jammu and Kashmir. The All Parties Hurriyat Conference made this call to protest, citing human rights abuses by Indian troops.^[275] Chief Minister Omar Abdullah attributed the 2010 unrest to the fake encounter staged by the military in Machil. Protesters shouted pro-independence slogans, defied curfews, attacked security forces with stones and burnt police vehicles and government buildings.^[276][277] The Jammu and Kashmir Police and Indian para-military forces fired live ammunition on the protesters, resulting in 112 deaths, including many teenagers. The protests subsided after the Indian government announced a package of measures aimed at defusing the tensions in September 2010.^[278]

2014 Jammu and Kashmir Elections

The Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly election, 2014 was held in Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir in five phases from November 25 to December 20, 2014. Despite repeated boycott calls by separarist Hurriyat leaders,^[279] elections recorded highest voters turnout in last 25 years, that is more than 65% which is more than usual voting percentage in other states of India.^[21][22][23]

Phase wise voting percentage is as follow:

J & K 2014 elections voters turnout

	Date	Seats	Turnout
	Tuesday 25 November	15	71.28%
	Tuesday 2 December	18	71%
	Tuesday 9 December	16	58.89%
	Sunday 14 December	18	49%
	Saturday 20 December	20	76%
	Total	87	65.23%
Source:[280][281][282][283][284]

The European Parliament, on the behalf of European Union, welcomed the smooth conduct of the State Legislative Elections in the Jammu and Kashmir.^[285] The EU in its message said that, "The high voter turnout figure proves that democracy is firmly rooted in India. The EU would like to congratulate India and its democratic system for conduct of fair elections, unmarred by violence, in the state of Jammu and Kashmir".^{[285][286][287]} The European Parliament also takes cognizance of the fact that a large number of Kashmiri voters turned out despite calls for the boycott of elections by certain separatist forces.^[286]

October 2014

In October 2014, Indian and Pakistani troops traded gunfire over their border in the divided Himalayan region of Kashmir, killing at least four civilians and worsening tensions between the longtime rivals, officials on both sides have said. The small-arms and mortar exchanges – which Indian officials called the worst violation of a 2003 ceasefire – left 18 civilians wounded in India and another three in Pakistan. Tens of thousands of people fled their homes on both sides after the violence erupted on 5 October. Official reports state that nine civilians in Pakistan and seven in India were killed in three nights of fighting.^[288]

The US Presidents on Conflict

• In an interview with Joe Klein of Time magazine in October 2008, Barack Obama expressed his intention to try to work with India and Pakistan to resolve the crisis.^[289] He said he had talked to Bill Clinton about it, as Clinton has experience as a mediator. In an editorial in The Washington Times, Selig S Harrison,^[290] director of the Asia Programme at the Center for International Policy and a senior scholar of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars called it Obama's first foreign policy mistake.^[291] In an editorial, The Australian called Obama's idea to appoint a presidential negotiator "a very stupid and dangerous move indeed".^[292] In an editorial in Forbes, Reihan Salam, associate editor for The Atlantic, noted "The smartest thing President Obama could do on Kashmir is probably nothing. We have to hope that India and Pakistan can work out their differences on Kashmir on their own".^[293] The Boston Globe called the idea of appointing Bill Clinton as an envoy to Kashmir "a mistake".^[294] President Obama subsequently appointed Richard Holbrooke as special envoy to Pakistan and Afghanistan.^[295] President Asif Ali Zardari hoped that Holbrooke would help mediate to resolve the Kashmir issue.^[296] Kashmir was later removed from Holbrooke's mandate.^[297] "Eliminating ... Kashmir from his job description ... is seen as a significant diplomatic concession to India that reflects increasingly warm ties between the country and the United States," The Washington Post noted in a report.^[298] Brajesh Mishra, India's former national security adviser, was quoted in the same report as saying that "No matter what government is in place, India is not going to relinquish control of Jammu and Kashmir". "That is written in stone and cannot be changed."^[299] According to The Financial Times, India has warned Obama that he risks "barking up the wrong tree" if he seeks to broker a settlement between Pakistan and India over Kashmir.^[300]

In July 2009, US Assistant Secretary of State Robert O. Blake, Jr. stated that the United States had no plans to appoint any special envoy to settle the dispute, calling it an issue which needed to be sorted out bilaterally by India and Pakistan.^[301] According to Dawn this will be interpreted in Pakistan as an endorsement of India's position on Kashmir that no outside power has any role in this dispute.^[302]

• In 2002, former US President, Bill Clinton described Kashmir as "the most dangerous place in the world."^[303] He averted a nuclear war between India and Pakistan over the issue of Kashmir according to former US Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott. Talbott reveals in his book Engaging India: Diplomacy, Democracy and the Bomb that India and Pakistan came very close to a nuclear war in 1999.^[304] According to Talbott, before Clinton met with Prime Minister of Pakistan, Nawaz Sharif in 1999 to discuss the issue, US national security adviser Sandy Berger told Clinton that he could be heading into "the single most important meeting with a foreign leader of his entire presidency".^[305]

India and Pakistan conducted nuclear tests in 1998 and the two countries each hold significant numbers of nuclear warheads.^[306] India and Pakistan fought two wars over the issue of Kashmir in 1947 and 1965. These two neighbours came dangerously close to a third war during the Kargil conflict in 1999.^[307]

Problems Before Plebiscite

UN Resolution

• The United Nations Security Council Resolution 47 was passed by United Nations Security Council under chapter VI of UN Charter.^[308] Resolutions passed under Chapter VI of UN charter are considered non binding and have no mandatory enforceability as opposed to the resolutions passed under Chapter VII.^{[309][310][311][312]}
• On January 24, 1957 the UN Security Council reaffirmed the 1948 resolution.The Security Council, reaffirming its previous resolution to the effect, "that the final disposition of the state of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance with the will of the people expressed through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite conducted under the auspices of United Nations," further declared that any action taken by the Constituent Assembly formed in Kashmir " would not constitute disposition of the state in accordance with the above principles."^[313]
• In March 2001, the then Secretary-General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan during his visit to India and Pakistan,remarked that Kashmir resolutions are only advisory recommendations and comparing with those on East Timor and Iraq was like comparing apples and oranges, since those resolutions were passed under chapter VII, which make it enforceable by UNSC.^{[314][315][316][317][318][319]} In 2003,then Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf announced that Pakistan was willing to back off from demand for UN resolutions for Kashmir.^{[320][321][322]}
• Moreover, India alleges that Pakistan failed to fulfill the pre-conditions by withdrawing its troops from the Kashmir region as was required under the same U.N. resolution of 13 August 1948 which discussed the plebiscite.^{[323][324][325]}
• Jammu and Kashmir is out of UN dispute list: In Nov 2010 the United Nations has removed Jammu and Kashmir from its list of disputed territories.^{[326][327][328][329]}
• It was major setback to Pakistan’s efforts to internationalise the Kashmir issue, the United Nations has excluded Jammu & Kashmir (J&K) from its list of unresolved international disputes under the observation of the UN Security Council (UNSC). Pakistan's acting envoy in the UN, Amjad Hussain Sial, has lodged a strong protest, while Indian authorities welcomed the decision.^{[326][327][329]}
• In 2010, United States Ambassador to India, Timothy J. Roemer said that Kashmir is an 'internal' issue of India and not to be discussed on international level rather it should be solved by bilateral talks between India and Pakistan.^{[330][331][332][333]} He said, "The (US) President ( Barack Obama), I think was very articulate on this issue of Kashmir. This is an internal issue for India."^[330][331]
• Separatist Hurriyat leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani said that, "First of all when they say Kashmir is an internal issue, it is against the reality. The issue of Jammu and Kashmir is an international issue and it should be solved. As long as promises made to us are not fulfilled, this issue will remain unsolved."^[334][335]
• The UN later affirmed that the Jammu and Kashmir dispute remains on the United Nation Security Council’s agenda and denied claims that the UN had removed Kashmir from the list of unresolved issues.^[336]

Instrument of Accession

• The Instrument of Accession of the State of Jammu and Kashmir to the Union of India was signed by Maharaja Hari Singh, erstwhile ruler, on 25 October 1947 and executed on 27 October 1947 between the ruler of Kashmir and the Governor-General of India. This was a legal act and completely valid in terms of the Government of India Act 1935, Indian Independence Act 1947 and under international law. Hence the accession of the Jammu and Kashmir state was total and irrevocable.^[337]
• The Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir had unanimously ratified the Instrument of Accession to India duly adopting a constitution for the state endorsing perpetual merger of Jammu and Kashmir with the Union of India. The Constituent assembly lawfully represented wish of Kashmiri people at that time.^[337]
• Moreover, Instrument of Accession is accepted by each elected legislative assembly of Jammu and Kashmir. Despite boycott calls by separatist leaders, recent 2014 assembly elections recorded more than 65% voting percentage in Kashmir which is more than usual voting percentage in other states of India.^[23] Indian authorities claim that more than 65% voters of Kashmir have voted in favour of "Instrument of Accession" and Indian Democracy in 2014 elections.^[338]

Article 370

• Article 370 of the Indian constitution is a provision that grants special autonomous status to Jammu and Kashmir. The article is drafted in Part XXI of the Constitution, which relates to Temporary, Transitional and Special Provisions.^[339]
• Article 370 is the only link that connects Jammu and Kashmir to India.^[340]
• To implement a plebiscite in Jammu and Kashmir one has to amend or abolish the article 370, which is very complex procedure. The leaders of Kashmir oppose any such measure.^[341][342] Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir Mufti Muhammad Sayeed said, "Even Indian Parliament does not have power to scrap Article 370, which grants special status to Jammu and Kashmir under Indian constitution."^[343]
• The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir has ruled that the Article 370 cannot be "abrogated, repealed or even amended." It explained that the clause (3) of the Article conferred power to the State's Constituent Assembly to recommend to the President on the matter of the repeal of the Article. Since the Constituent Assembly did not make such a recommendation before its dissolution in 1957, the Article 370 has taken on the features of a "permanent provision" despite being titled a temporary provision in the Constitution.^[344][345]
• Article 370 has emerged as the biggest obstacle in front of plebiscite because of its complex procedure of amendment and opposition from the leaders of Jammu and Kashmir.^[340][346]

"Nehru's Promise"

• After accession of Kashmir to India in October 1947 then Prime Minister of India Jawaharlal Nehru made some statements in media and in various telegrams regarding plebiscite in Kashmir.

In telegram No.413 dated 28 October 1947 addressed to Prime Minister of Pakistan, Nehru wrote,^[347]

"That Government of India and Pakistan should make a joint request to U.N.O. to undertake a plebiscite in Kashmir at the earliest possible date."

Nehru's statement in the Indian Parliament, 26 June 1952,^[347]

"I want to stress that it is only the people of Kashmir who can decide the future of Kashmir. It is not that we have merely said that to the United Nations and to the people of Kashmir; it is our conviction and one that is borne out by the policy that we have pursued, not only in Kashmir but every where.

"I started with the presumption that it is for the people of Kashmir to decide their own future. We will not compel them. In that sense, the people of Kashmir are sovereign."

In his statement in the Lok Sabha on 31 March 1955 as published in Hindustan Times New Delhi on Ist April, 1955, Pandit Nehru said, "Kashmir is perhaps the most difficult of all these problems between India and Pakistan. We should also remember that Kashmir is not a thing to be bandied between India and Pakistan but it has a soul of its own and an individuality of its own. Nothing can be done without the goodwill and consent of the people of Kashmir."^[348] There was also a White Paper on Kashmir published by Indian government regarding plebiscite in Jammu and Kashmir in 1948.

• There are many such instances where Nehru made such remarks regarding plebiscite in Jammu and Kashmir.^[348] Pakistan and separatist Hurriyat leaders repeatedly demand that Indian Government should fulfill "Nehru's Promise".^{[347][349][350]}
• Position of the Indian authorities on "Nehru's Promise": the Indian government takes the position that Nehru himself backed off from his promise in the late 1950s. Although he was Prime Minister for 17 years, he made no serious attempt for a plebiscite. His promises have been taken as a 'good political move'.^[351]
• The reason for not holding plebiscite was given by India's Defense Minister, Kirshnan Menon, who said: "Kashmir would vote to join Pakistan and no Indian Government responsible for agreeing to plebiscite would survive.''^[127]
• Indian authorities say that Nehru's telegrams and speeches have no legal importance, nor it is compulsory to apply them as they were never passed by the Parliament of India. The white paper on Kashmir also does not have any legal importance as it was published in 1948 while the Constitution of India came into force into 1950 and defined Kashmir as an integral part of India as well as protecting the 'unity and integrity' of India. Constitution of India doesn't has any provision for plebiscite and 1948 white paper was against Constitution of India so it was automatically got abolished.
• Indian authorities also says that, Nehru is not current Prime Minister of India, because policies are made on the basis of views of current Prime Minister and his cabinet which must get nod by both houses of Parliament of India.^[352]
• Any Prime Minister of India can't make decision of plebiscite unilaterally, bill of plebiscite must be passed in both houses of Parliament of India with massive 2/3rd majority then it requires assent by President of India, and if that decision is against Basic structure of Indian Constitution then Supreme Court of India can outlaw or abolish that decision.^[352][353] Preamble and article 3 of part 2 of Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir says 'Jammu and Kashmir is and shall be an integral part of the Union of India'. This constitution has been adopted by elected Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly in 1956 when Nehru was Prime Minister of India.^[354]
• Daughter of Nehru, Indira Gandhi and his grandson Rajiv Gandhi were Prime Ministers of India but they themself never did any attempt to implement their forefather's 'Promise'. Instead Indira Gandhi done 1974 Indira–Sheikh accord with Shaikh Abdullah which vanished all possibilities of plebiscite.^[355]

Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir

• Preamble of Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir is as written in box.

• Article 3 of part 2 of Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir also says that 'Jammu and Kashmir is and shall be an integral part of the Union of India'.^[356]
• Ram Jethmalani, prominent lawyer, former union minister and chairman of Kashmir Committee said in Nov 2014 that, "The constitution of this state(J & K) was not formulated by the constituent assembly of India, but by its constituent assembly of Jammu and Kashmir. That was a plebiscite. It is the constituent assembly of J&K which incorporated some provisions of the Indian Constitution. The plebiscite has therefore taken place. You(Kashmiris) are not living under the constitution of India but under the constitution which was framed by the constituent assembly(of Jammu and Kashmir) which has willingly accepted a part of the Indian constitution."^[357]
• Indian authorities also claims that people of Kashmir have voted in large percentage in recent elections in favour of this constitution and each elected legislative assembly of J & K has accepted this constitution.^[358]

Outlook Survey

• In 1995 the first ever opinion poll was conducted in the Kashmir Valley by MODE which had been commissioned by Outlook.^[359]
• 72% of respondents favoured independence, 19% favoured Pakistan and only 7% favoured a solution within Indian sovereignty.^[359]
• 80% of respondents said that a free and fair election would definitely not help solve the Kashmir problem while only 4% said that a free and fair election could help resolve the Kashmir conflict.^[359]

Private Survey

• London based leading think tank Royal Institute of International Affairs also known as Chatham House, conducted a survey both in Pakistan administered Kashmir and Indian administered Kashimir and released it in its report Kashmir:Paths to Peace on May 2010.^{[360][361][362][363]}
• It found that 50% of people in Pakistan's side of Kashmir favoured the accession of the entire state to Pakistan, 44% of people favoured independence, 1% wanted the accession of the entire state to accede to India while 1% favoured the status quo.^[364]
• In the Indian side of Kashmir, 28% of people expressed a desire for the entire state to accede to India, 19% favoured the status quo, 43% wanted independence while 2% said they wanted the entire state to join Pakistan.^[365]
• The survey showed that only 2% of the respondents on the Indian side favoured joining Pakistan and most such views were confined to Srinagar and Budgam districts. In six of the districts surveyed late last year by researchers, not a single person favoured annexation with Pakistan, a notion that remains the bedrock for the hardline separatist campaign in Kashmir.^{[360][363][366]}
• The survey also showed that only 1% of the respondents on the Pakistani side favoured joining India. In four of the seven surveyed districts of Pakistani Kashmir, the option of merging with India found no support while this option had a support rate of only 1-3% in the remaining three districts.^[367]
• However views are highly poralised in each region. The main area of unrest has always been the predominantly Muslim majority Kashmir Valley, where the support level for Independence varies between 74% to 95% as found by the survey while support for accession with India varies between 2% to 22%.^[368] However, Hindu majority Jammu and Buddhist majority Ladakh express high levels of satisfaction with Indian rule.
• This 2010 survey too demonstrated that trend, with more than half the respondents on Indian side saying the elections had improved chances for peace(later in 2014, Jammu and Kashmir elections recorded highest percentage of voters turnout).^[360][363]
• Survey said that, "These results support the already widespread view that the plebiscite options are likely to offer no solution to the dispute."^[360][366]
• "The results aren't surprising at all. I feel they re-emphasize the need to look beyond traditional positions and evaluate the contours of a solution grounded in today's realities," said Sajjad Lone on this survey, a former ally of the Hurriyat who unsuccessfully contested the 2009 Indian general elections but won in 2014 Jammu and Kashmir assembly elections.^[360][363]

See also

• History of Jammu and Kashmir
• United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan
• Indian Armed Forces and the Jammu and Kashmir Floods, 2014
• All Parties Hurriyat Conference
• Insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir
• Pakistan and state sponsored terrorism
• India–Pakistan relations
• Indo-Pakistani Wars
• Animated PNG of disputed regions

Notes

References

Sources

• Ankit, Rakesh (2013), "Britain and Kashmir, 1948: “The Arena of the UN”", Diplomacy & Statecraft 24 (2): 273–290, doi:10.1080/09592296.2013.789771, (subscription required (help)) 
• Bose, Sumantra (2003). Kashmir: Roots of Conflict, Paths to Peace. Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-01173-2. 
• Korbel, Josef (1953), "The Kashmir dispute after six years", International Organization (Cambridge University Press) 7 (4): 498–510, JSTOR 2704850, (subscription required (help)) 
• Noorani, A. G. (2014) [first published in 2013 by Tulika Books], The Kashmir Dispute, 1947-2012, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-19-940018-8 
• Panigrahi, D. N. (2009), Jammu and Kashmir, the Cold War and the West, Routledge, ISBN 978-1-136-51751-8 
• Rai, Mridu (2004). Hindu Rulers, Muslim Subjects: Islam, Rights, and the History of Kashmir. C. Hurst & Co. ISBN 1850656614. 
• Schofield, Victoria (2003) [First published in 2000], Kashmir in Conflict, London and New York: I. B. Taurus & Co, ISBN 1860648983 
• Snedden, Christopher (2013) [first published as The Untold Story of the People of Azad Kashmir, 2012], Kashmir: The Unwritten History, HarperCollins India, ISBN 9350298988 
• Subbiah, Sumathi (2004), "Security Council Mediation and the Kashmir Dispute: Reflections on Its Failures and Possibilities for Renewal", Boston College International and Comparative Law Review 27 (1): 173–185 
• Varshney, Ashutosh (1992). "Three Compromised Nationalisms: Why Kashmir has been a Problem" (PDF). In Raju G. C. Thomas. Perspectives on Kashmir: the roots of conflict in South Asia. Westview Press. pp. 191–234. ISBN 978-0-8133-8343-9. 

Further reading

Pre-independence history

• Drew, Federic. 1877. The Northern Barrier of India: a popular account of the Jammoo and Kashmir Territories with Illustrations.&;#8221; 1st edition: Edward Stanford, London. Reprint: Light & Life Publishers, Jammu. 1971.

Partition and Post-independence

• Dr. Ijaz Hussain, 1998, Kashmir Dispute: An International Law Perspective, National Institute of Pakistan Studies
• Alastair Lamb, Kashmir: A Disputed Legacy 1846–1990 (Hertingfordbury, Herts: Roxford Books, 1991)
• Kashmir Study Group, 1947–1997, the Kashmir dispute at fifty : charting paths to peace (New York, 1997)
• Jaspreet Singh, Seventeen Tomatoes– an unprecedented look inside the world of an army camp in Kashmir (Vehicle Press; Montreal, Canada, 2004)
• Navnita Behera, Demystifying Kashmir (Washington, D.C.: Brooking Institute Press, 2006).
• Navnita Behera, State, identity and violence : Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh (New Delhi: Manohar, 2000)
• Sumit Ganguly, The Crisis in Kashmir (Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson Center Press; Cambridge : Cambridge U.P., 1997)
• Sumantra Bose, The challenge in Kashmir : democracy, self-determination and a just peace (New Delhi: Sage, 1997)
• Robert Johnson, A Region in Turmoil (London and New York, Reaktion, 2005)
• Hans Köchler, The Kashmir Problem between Law and Realpolitik. Reflections on a Negotiated Settlement. Keynote speech delivered at the "Global Discourse on Kashmir 2008." European Parliament, Brussels, 1 April 2008.
• Prem Shankar Jha, Kashmir, 1947: rival versions of history (New Delhi : Oxford University Press, 1996)
• Manoj Joshi, The Lost Rebellion (New Delhi: Penguin India, 1999)
• Alexander Evans, "Why Peace Won't Come to Kashmir", Current History (Vol 100, No 645) April 2001 p170-175.
• Surinder Mohan, "Transforming the Line of Control: Bringing the 'Homeland' Back In", Asian Politics & Policy (Vol 5, No 1) January 2013 p51-75.
• Younghusband, Francis and Molyneux, E. 1917. Kashmir. A. & C. Black, London.
• Victoria Schofield, Kashmir in the Crossfire, I.B. Tauris, London.
• Andrew Whitehead, A Mission in Kashmir, Penguin India, 2007
• Muhammad Ayub, An Army; Its Role & Rule (A History of the Pakistan Army from Independence to Kargil 1947–1999). Rosedog Books, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA. 2005. ISBN 0-8059-9594-3

Web sources

• Kashmir Conflict, Homepage Washington Post.
• The UN Security Council Resolution on Kashmir Capt Samarth Singh.

External links

• The Future of Kashmir, Matthew A. Rosenstein et al., ACDIS Swords and Ploughshares 16:1 (winter 2007-8), Program in Arms Control, Disarmament, and International Security (ACDIS) at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
• Centre for Contemporary Conflict on Kargil War
• BBC articles on Kashmir
• Recent Kashmir developments
• The Political Economy of the Kashmir Conflict US Institute of Peace Report, June 2004
• The Kashmir dispute-cause or symptom?
• LoC-Line of Control situation in Kashmir
• An outline of the history of Kashmir
• News Coverage of Kashmir
• Accession Document
• Conflict in Kashmir: Selected Internet Resources by the Library, University of California, Berkeley, USA; University of California at Berkeley Library Bibliographies and Web-Bibliographies list
• Timeline since April 2003
• Kashmir resolution of the European Parliament, 24 May 2007
• "Election in Kashmir Begins Amid Boycott Calls"
• Disputed territories of India

Ongoing armed conflicts Africa ADF insurgency Burundian unrest Central African Republic Civil War Communal conflicts in Nigeria Conflict in the Niger Delta Insurgency in Egypt Insurgency in the Maghreb Boko Haram insurgency Ituri conflict Katanga insurgency Kivu conflict Libyan Crisis Second Civil War Lord's Resistance Army insurgency Northern Mali conflict Ogaden insurgency Second Afar Insurgency Sinai insurgency Somali Civil War War in Somalia Ethnic violence in South Sudan South Sudanese Civil War Sudanese conflict in South Kordofan and Blue Nile Sudanese nomadic conflicts War in Darfur Americas Colombian conflict Mexican Drug War Peruvian internal conflict East and South Asia Balochistan conflict Insurgency in Northeast India Assam Meghalaya Manipur Nagaland Internal conflict in Bangladesh Internal conflict in Myanmar Kachin Rohingya Kashmir conflict Naxalite–Maoist insurgency Papua conflict Civil conflict in the Philippines CPP-NPA-NDF Moro Sectarianism in Pakistan South Thailand insurgency War in Afghanistan 2015–present War in North-West Pakistan Xinjiang conflict Europe War in Donbass Insurgency in the North Caucasus War in Ingushetia West Asia Arab separatism in Khuzestan Iraqi Civil War (2014–present) Israeli–Palestinian conflict Kurdish separatism in Iran Iran–PJAK conflict Nagorno-Karabakh conflict Lebanese conflict Syrian Civil War Turkey–PKK conflict Yemeni Crisis civil war

Kashmir Valley Passes Banihal Pass Zojila Burzil Pass Valleys Sind Valley Lidder Valley Lolab Valley Betaab Valley Cities Srinagar Anantnag Baramulla Towns Pulwama Budgam Ganderbal Shopian Bandipore Kulgam Downtown Nowshera Gurais Pattan Kangan Hazratbal Awantipora Tral Qazigund Kokernag Shangus Bijbehara Doru Pahalgam Pattan Uri Kreeri Boniyar Tangmarg Sopore Rafaiabad Karnah Kupwara Lolab Handwara Langate Charari Sharief Beerwah Chadoora Sumbal Sonawari Quimoh Pahloo D.H.Pora Devsar Soura Buchpora Rivers Jehlum Sind Lidder Neelum Veshaw Rambi Ara Glaciers Kolhoi Glacier Machoi Glacier Lakes Anchar Lake Dal Lake Nigeen Lake Manasbal Lake Wular Lake Vishansar Lake Krishansar Lake Gangabal Lake Gadsar Lake Sheshnag Lake Tarsar Lake Nundkol Lake Satsar Lake Kausar Nag Brari Nambal Khushal Sar Gil Sar Mountains Harmukh Kolhoi Peak Machoi Peak Amarnath Peak Sirbal Peak Tatakooti Peak Sunset Peak Mahadev Hill stations and Mughal gardens Pahalgam Sonamarg Yusmarg Gulmarg Aharbal Nishat Bagh Shalimar Bagh Chashme Shahi Verinag Kokernag See also History of Kashmir Kashmir Conflict The Valley Of Kashmir (Book) Line of Control Kashmir Railway Kashmiri language

Kashmir conflict Wars Indo-Pakistani War of 1947 Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 Kargil War Operations Operation Gibraltar Operation Grand Slam Operation Tupac Operation Bison Operation Eraze

Kashmir separatist movement Political parties All Parties Hurriyat Conference All Jammu and Kashmir Muslim Conference Jammu and Kashmir Democratic Freedom Party Jammu Kashmir Democratic Liberation Party United Kashmir People's National Party Separatist organisations Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front (Yasin Malik) Tehreek-e-Hurriyat Hizbul Mujahideen Lashkar-e-Taiba People Mohammad Abbas Ansari Sheikh Abdul Aziz Mirwaiz Umar Farooq Syed Ali Shah Geelani Amanullah Khan (JKLF) Asiya Andrabi Masarat Alam Ashiq Hussain Faktoo Hashim Qureshi Ayub Thakur Afzal Guru Yasin Malik Muhammad Ahsan Dar Sayeed Salahudeen Maqbool Bhat Hafiz Saeed History Kashmir conflict Nationalism Kashmiriyat Elections Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly election, 2008 Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly election, 2014

Indian separatist movements Movements Assam separatist movements Kashmir conflict Khalistan movement Naxalite–Maoist insurgency Separatist organisations All Tripura Tiger Force Babbar Khalsa Bhindranwala Tigers Force of Khalistan Bodo Liberation Tigers Force Dal Khalsa Dashmesh Regiment International Sikh Youth Federation Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front (Yasin Malik) Kamtapur Liberation Organization Kanglei Yawol Kanna Lup Khalistan Liberation Army Karbi Longri N.C. Hills Liberation Front Khalistan Zindabad Force Mizo National Front Muslim United Liberation Tigers of Assam National Democratic Front of Bodoland People's Liberation Army of Manipur People's Revolutionary Party of Kangleipak Tehreek-e-Hurriyat Tripura National Volunteers United Liberation Front of Asom United National Liberation Front United People's Democratic Solidarity Political parties All-India Muslim League Bodoland People's Front All Parties Hurriyat Conference All Jammu and Kashmir Muslim Conference Jammu and Kashmir Democratic Freedom Party Jammu Kashmir Democratic Liberation Party United Kashmir People's National Party People Abhizeet Asom Amanullah Khan Angami Zapu Phizo Anup Chetia Arabinda Rajkhowa Ayub Thakur Biswamohan Debbarma Fateh Singh Hashim Qureshi Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale Lakhbir Singh Brar Rode Mirwaiz Umar Farooq Mohammad Abbas Ansari Muppala Lakshmana Rao Paresh Baruah Ranjit Debbarma Sheikh Abdul Aziz Syed Ali Shah Geelani Sukhdev Singh Babbar Talwinder Singh Parmar Nationalism Assamese nationalism Bodo nationalism Kashmiriyat Naga nationalism Sikh nationalism Tripuri nationalism Controversies Human rights abuses in Assam Human rights abuses in Jammu and Kashmir Human rights abuses in Manipur Human rights issues in Northeast India Human rights abuses in Punjab Persecution of Chinese Indians

India–Pakistan relations Treaties and summits Karachi Agreement Liaquat-Nehru Treaty Indus Waters Treaty Tashkent Declaration Simla Agreement Delhi Agreement Islamabad Agreement Lahore summit Agra summit Jinnah–Mountbatten Talks Events and conflicts Partition of India Kashmir conflict Integration of Junagadh 1947 War Sir Creek Operation Gibraltar 1965 War 1971 War Pokhran–I Kirana–I Nuclear race Line of Control Maritime trespassing Siachen conflict Operation Brasstacks Pokhran-II / Chagai-I / Chagai-II Anti-Muslim violence in India Human rights abuses in Jammu and Kashmir Human rights abuses in Azad Kashmir Insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir Balochistan conflict Kargil War Atlantique incident Iran–Pakistan–India gas pipeline 2001 Indian Parliament attack 2001–2002 military standoff 2007 Samjhauta Express bombings 2008 Mumbai attacks 2008 military standoff 2011 India–Pakistan border skirmish 2013 India–Pakistan border skirmishes Sarabjit/Sanaullah murder incidents 2013 Pakistan Embassy attack 2014–15 India–Pakistan border skirmishes Initiatives Aman ki Asha Hotline Transport Samjhauta Express Delhi–Lahore Bus Srinagar–Muzaffarabad Bus Thar Express Indo-Pak Confederation Indo-Pak Joint Judicial Committee SAARC Satellite Hindi in Pakistan People Jawaharlal Nehru Lal Bahadur Shastri Liaquat Ali Khan Ayub Khan Indira Gandhi Zulfikar Ali Bhutto Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq Benazir Bhutto Atal Bihari Vajpayee Nawaz Sharif Pervez Musharraf Shaukat Aziz Asif Ali Zardari Manmohan Singh Yousaf Raza Gillani Raja Pervaiz Ashraf Narendra Modi Sports India–Pakistan cricket rivalry India–Pakistan field hockey rivalry Media Media of India Media of Pakistan Science and technology Science and technology in India WMDs Space IT Supercomputing Science and technology in Pakistan WMDs Space IT Supercomputing Art and entertainment Zindagi Sur Kshetra Indian soap operas in Pakistan Pakistani dramas in India Foodistan Pakistani artists in India Indian artists in Pakistan Related templates Foreign relations of India Foreign relations of Pakistan Indo-Pakistani wars and conflicts

Post-Cold War conflicts in Asia South Asia Nepalese conflicts Civil War (1996–2006) Royal massacre (2001) Sri Lankan Civil War (1983–2009) Kashmir conflict [1947–present] Kargil War [1999] Jammu and Kashmir insurgency (1989–present) Insurgency in Northeast India (1964–present) Naxalite–Maoist insurgency (1967–present) Afghan Wars 1989–92 1992–96 1996–2001 2001–14 2015–present War in North-West Pakistan (2004–present) Balochistan conflict (2004–present) East Asia Taiwan Strait Crisis (1996) Korean dispute Maritime border incidents (1967–present) 2013 crisis Xinjiang conflict (1960s–present) Southeast Asia East Timorese conflicts Indonesian occupation (1975–99) 1999 crisis 2006 crisis Cambodian–Thai border dispute (2008–11) Other Indonesian conflicts Papua conflict (1969–present) Aceh insurgency (1976–2005) Burmese internal conflict (1947–present) Kachin (2011–present) Civil conflict in the Philippines CPP-NPA-NDF Moro South Thailand insurgency (2004–present) Central Asia Tajikistani Civil War (1992–97) Kyrgyz Revolution (2010) Tajikistan Insurgency (2010–12) Western Asia (excluding South Caucasus) Iraqi conflicts Iraqi–Kurdish [1918–2003] Civil War [1994–97] War [2003–11] Post-War insurgency [2011–13] Civil War [2014–present] Israeli conflicts Israeli–Palestinian [1948–present] Intifada [2000–05] Gaza–Israel [2006–present] Israeli–Lebanese [1948–present] South Lebanon [1985–2000] Lebanon War [2006] Sinai insurgency (2011–present) Kurdish separatism in Iran KDPI insurgency (1989–96) Iran–PJAK conflict (2004–present) Yemeni Civil War (1994) Other insurgencies in Yemen al-Qaeda [1998–2015] Houthi [2004–2015] South Yemen [2009–15] Yemeni Crisis [2011–present] Coup d'état [2014–15] Civil War [2015] Bahraini uprising (2011) Syrian Civil War (2011–present) Regional spillover Civil conflict in Turkey [1976-80] Maoist insurgency DHKP/C insurgency PKK conflict Turkey–ISIL conflict Related topics War on Terror (2001–present) Arab Spring [2010–11] Arab Winter Colour revolutions European conflicts African conflicts Middle East conflicts Conflicts in the Americas