Tag Archives: kashmir

Tom Arms

Observations of an Expat: Kashmir in a changed world

By Tom Arms | Sat 10th May 2025 - 9:54 am

Fifteen years ago there were probably three major hotspots in the world: The Korean Peninsula, the Middle East and Kashmir. All three of them involved nuclear weapons.

Ranked in terms of potential flare-ups, the Middle East was at the top followed by Korea because the United States was heavily involved in both those disputes. Kashmir was well down the list because it was mainly a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan, although China also had a foothold in the picture postcard mountain region. Kashmir, however, seemed more manageable than the other two hotspots.

This month, however, Kashmir moved up the troublesome leader board after Muslim terrorists murdered a group of Indian tourists. The links between the Pakistan government and the terrorists is uncertain. What is known is that Pakistan is controlled by the army and the army is control by General Asim Munir, an Islamic scholar who recently referred to Kashmir as “the jugular vein of Pakistan.”

The Hindu nationalist government of Narendra Modi does not need much to encourage it to go after Pakistan. It did so this week by threatening to cut Pakistan off from vital water supplies and by launching a surgical strike 70 miles inside Pakistan in the important Punjab region.

Pakistan responded by shooting down Indian war planes and by firing the opening shots in South Asia’s first drone war.

Then, both sides appear to have taken a step back to catch their breath and review the situation. Pakistan has said it will respond to the latest fighting “at a time and place of its choosing,” which is usually interpreted a step towards a ceasefire.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | 1 Comment
Tom Arms

Tom Arms’ World Review

By Tom Arms | Sun 4th May 2025 - 8:30 am

Kashmir

Donald Trump says that the Kashmir problem goes back thousands of years and is very complicated, which is his way of saying that he doesn’t want to be involved.

To be honest we can talk about the roots of Hinduism, the invasion of the Mughals, the British Empire, and etcetera. But in reality the Kashmir problem dates back to the 1947 partition of the Indian subcontinent.

At that time the semi-autonomous kingdom of Jammu and Kashmir was given the option to join India or Pakistan. But there was a snag. The monarch—Maharaja Hari Singh was a Hindu while the majority of the population was Muslim.

Initially, the Maharaja tried to solve the problem by opting for independence. However, in October 1947, tribal militias from Pakistan invaded Kashmir. This prompted the Maharaja to seek military assistance from India. In return, he signed the Instrument of Accession, formally agreeing to join India. The result was the First Indo-Pakistani War (1947–1948).

The conflict ended with a United Nations-brokered ceasefire in 1949, which established a Line of Control (LoC) dividing Kashmir between Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir and Pakistani-administered Azad Kashmir. The UN also called for a plebiscite to allow the people of Kashmir to choose between India and Pakistan. This never happened.

Kashmir has remained a flashpoint ever since. India and Pakistan have fought additional wars over the region—in 1965 and 1999—and tensions persist with frequent military skirmishes along the LoC.

In addition to the international dimension, Kashmir also faces internal unrest. From 1989 onward, a violent separatist insurgency emerged in Indian-administered Kashmir, fuelled by dissatisfaction with Indian rule, human rights abuses, and support for militants from across the border. This insurgency has resulted in tens of thousands of deaths and widespread suffering among civilians.

Then in August 2019, Narendra Modi’s Indian government, revoked Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, which had granted Jammu and Kashmir a special autonomous status. This was followed by a heavy military crackdown, internet shutdowns, and the detention of local leaders.

Just to make things more complicated, China also holds a portion of the region (Aksai Chin) and has its own disputes with India and tends to side with Pakistan.

This is all very troubling, but what makes it more so is the nuclear dimension. In 1998 both countries started building nuclear arsenals and they both have about 170 nuclear warheads each. India has a No First Use policy. Pakistan does not. This presumably means that if Pakistan is faced what it regarded as an existential threat then it would feel justified in the nuclear option.

Following the recent murder of 26 Indian tourists in Kashmir, India has threatened to scupper the 1960 Indus Water Treaty and cut Pakistan off from water which it needs to survive. This has been interpreted as an existential threat.

To complicate matters further, Israel—with its estimated 160 nuclear warheads—is paranoid about the “Islamic bomb” represented by Pakistan. The government of Benjamin Netanyahu also has close relations with India’s Narendra Modi.

Donald Trump

Donald Trump is not known for ethnical behaviour. In fact, he may be one of the most corrupt presidents in American history. And American politics have been known for their corruption throughout the country’s nearly 250-year history.

In his first term, President Trump was attacked for promoting his newly-acquired International Hotel in Washington DC as THE Washington hostelry. His message was clear to foreign and domestic visitors: stay at my hotel and I will looking kindly on you. Guess where visitors stayed?

Whenever Trump upped sticks and moved to the Florida White House at Mar-a-Lago (which was quite often) he took with him a large retinue of Secret Service agents and White House staff. He charged the government for the privilege. This earned him an estimated $2 million net in his first four years. The practice continued when he was out of office and in his second term.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 3 Comments
Mo Waqas

Kashmir in Crisis: Navigating the Aftermath of the Pahalgam Attack

By Mo Waqas | Thu 24th April 2025 - 10:00 am

I write from Pakistan, where I’ve been visiting family and reconnecting with my roots. What began as a peaceful visit has been overshadowed by two tragic events that have shaken the region and pushed tensions to the brink.

On 22 April 2025, militants from a group calling itself the “Kashmir Resistance” carried out a brutal attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir. Twenty-six tourists—25 Indian nationals and one Nepalese—were killed, and 17 others injured. The group claimed the attack was in response to what they view as demographic change and “outsider” settlement in the region.

Just weeks earlier, on 11 March, the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) hijacked the Jaffar Express, which was travelling from Quetta to Peshawar. Over 400 passengers were taken hostage. The standoff resulted in the deaths of 31 people—21 civilians and four security personnel among them.

These twin tragedies are not isolated; they are part of a deeper, escalating conflict across South Asia that risks boiling over.

The powder keg of South Asia

This region is on edge. Fear is palpable. Each attack deepens distrust and fuels calls for retaliation. But this is not just another regional skirmish—it’s a dangerous game involving two nuclear-armed states. Miscalculation could be catastrophic.

Retaliation is easy. Restraint, though harder, is the only way forward.

To New Delhi: direct your fury toward diplomacy, not retribution. To Islamabad: confront and curb extremism with sincerity, not just soundbites.

Military theatrics may please TV studios, but they don’t bring back the dead. Nor do they bring peace to the farmer who works beneath the looming threat of war.

The global community, particularly the UN Security Council, must not be passive. Kashmir is not only a political flashpoint—it is a humanitarian crisis. Years of international neglect have allowed violence to fester.

Pakistan’s power in uniform

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 1 Comment
Paul Reynolds

Why Britain should worry about Kashmir

By Paul Reynolds | Wed 26th August 2020 - 1:29 pm

Embed from Getty Images

Kashmir is one of those decades-long conflicts which rarely makes it into the mainstream UK media;  until recently. In June this year 20 Indian soldiers died in fighting with Chinese soldiers, on the border between Indian-administered and Chinese-administered Kashmir.

So what is the nature of the conflict and why has it become much more dangerous this year ?

Central to the recent upsurge in violence, lies China-India relations. To understand, we must start with ‘British India’.

After Indian independence following WW2, Kashmir was divided into Pakistan administered and Indian administered territory, with two smaller areas controlled by China. Both the Pakistani and Indian administered sides are majority Muslim, except (Buddhist) Ladakh, on the Chinese border.

India and Pakistan have more than once gone to war over territory, and so have India and China.

When Indian administered Kashmir was established, the spectre of future Kashmiri independence was raised, and significant autonomy provided for in Article 370 of the Indian Constitutions, later also by Article 35A.

Among these provisions were restricted involvement of the Indian state (foreign policy, defence etc). Land ownership and receipt of public services like education and health were restricted to Kashmiris. Article 370, leading potentially to independence, was a factor in the measure of acceptance by Kashmiris of Indian administration early on.

However, in the late 1980s an insurgency by Muslim Kashmiris against Indian administration started, with various forms of support, overt and covert, from Pakistan. This rise in violence against Indian rule was largely a result of gradual erosion of autonomy and democracy;  and fading prospects of independence.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 11 Comments
Imaduddin Ahmed

How British liberals should advocate for the human rights of the citizens of Jammu and Kashmir

By Imaduddin Ahmed | Fri 30th August 2019 - 12:59 pm

This past month, the Government of India has escalated military presence in Jammu and Kashmir, already perhaps the densest in the world, enforced curfews, a media blackout, blocked all communications and arrested Kashmiri politicians without issuing warrants under a draconian law. Reports of torture of civilians are now coming through the BBC.

This comes accompanying the Government of India’s attempt to revoke Jammu and Kashmir’s special status per the conditions of it joining India after India became independent.

Civilian casualties over the past 12 months were already at a decade high, according to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights as of April 2019 who found in his 2018 report the Indian state to be guilty of ‘excessive force that led to unlawful killings and a very high number of injuries’, and to be guilty of denying access to justice to Kashmiris. The report recommended measures to eliminate the impunity with which security forces were able to act and improve accountability for human rights violations of the state, as well as for the self-determination of Kashmiris in both Pakistan and Indian administered Kashmir. Instead of adopting its recommendations, the Government of India’s recent actions will worsen the situation.

Being committed to fair, free and open societies, British liberals will be itching to intervene. However, British involvement in the bilateral (but asymmetric) issue between Jammu and Kashmir and India could reek of colonialism.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 5 Comments
Tom Arms

Observations of an ex pat: Kashmiri powder keg

By Tom Arms | Fri 9th August 2019 - 8:55 am

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi should consider the age-old truism “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”

Actually, to say that Kashmir isn’t broke would be putting an optimistic gloss on the Asian sub continent’s number one flashpoint. Since independence and partition in 1947, the mountainous region has been the cause of three wars and numerous border clashes which have threatened to escalate into full-blown conflicts.

Kashmir is a simmering political cauldron whose lid has largely been kept in place by two clauses in the Indian constitution which give the Muslim-dominated, but Indian-controlled region autonomy in all matters except foreign affairs, defence and communications.  Kashmir has its own flag and has passed laws favouring the property rights of the Muslim majority. Modi has revoked the constitutional clauses—articles 370 and 35A—and dropped big hints that he wants to develop Indian-administered Kashmir with imported Hindu settlers.

The result has been riots, demonstrations and the recall of the Pakistani ambassador to India. But that could only be the start. Both states are armed with about 150 nuclear weapons each and blinkered by a dangerous religious zeal. The conflict also has the potential to drag in China and possibly the US. China’s interest is its claim to a desolate and sparely-populated section of Kashmir.  The Chinese have also $46 billion investment in Pakistan to protect.

America’s position is more ambivalent. It needs Pakistani support the fight in Afghanistan, but is angry at what President Trump has called Pakistan’s  “lies and deceit” in combating the Taliban. At the same time, Trump and Modi enjoy close personal relations through a shared right-wing populist approach to political issues.

The problems started with partition. Kashmir has three religious populations: Hindu, Muslim and Buddhist. The overwhelming majority of the inhabitants are Muslim. But at the time of partition it was ruled by a Hindu Rajah. As the sub-continent edged inexorably towards partition, Irregular troops from Pakistan moved into Kashmir to claim the entire country. The Hindu Rajah, Hari Singh, appealed for help to the Congress Party in India who dispatched troops to the region.

The result was a stand-off; A UN-mediated ceasefire and the division of Kashmir which left Pakistan in control of the under-developed provinces of Gilgit-Baltistan and Azad Kashmir which are 100 percent Muslim and India in control of the more prosperous Jammu, Ladakh and Kashmir  provinces which are 66 percent Muslim with the balance made of up Hindus and Buddhists.

The UN ceasefire agreement included a clause for a referendum over the decision of who governs the whole of Kashmir. The Indians failed tocomply with this part of the agreement as their part of Kashmir was 66 percenty Muslm.  Instead they came up with the compromise of autonomy in the form of constitutional clauses 370 and 35A. The Muslims in Indian-administered  Kashmir were generally satisfied  with this. They were not as zealous as their co-religionists in Pakistan and were happy to remain part of India as long as they were allowed control of domestic affairs.

Continue reading »
Posted in News | Also tagged , and | 7 Comments
Advert

Recent Comments

  • David Le Grice
    I think this article massively understates the malaise and cowardice that has taken over the party. On the supreme court judgement we still haven't proposed to...
  • Geoffrey Payne
    @Simon McGrath - in answer to your question, I would be fine with a BBC presenter having those views if he was presenting Match of the Day because his personal ...
  • Simon McGrath
    I guess the best way of thinking about the Gary Lineker issue is to think about what one’s position would be if he held rather different views to most readers...
  • Geoffrey Payne
    Delighted to see Carl Cashman mentioned here. He is clearly someone who is carrying the flame of Liberal radicalism, which is very much part of a Liverpool trad...
  • Geoffrey Payne
    @David Le Grice, we are covering economic policy more spefically at our other conference in St Albans on the 19th July (see https://www.socialliberal.net/events...