By Anees Orangzaib
October 27, 1947, a day that is deeply burned into the memory of Kashmiris, was when Indian soldiers, taking the pretext of the Instrument of Accession, made a landing in the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir. For the people living in the Valley, this did not imply a union, but rather the beginning of an occupation that would ultimately determine their destiny. This particular day is referred to as “Black Day,” which has become a representative of the oppression that the Kashmiris endured in their claim to the self-determination that was recognized by international law and the UN Charter.
The turning point in Kashmir’s history came on October 27, 1947, when Indian troops entered Jammu and Kashmir under the pretext of aiding Maharaja Hari Singh against a local uprising. The Maharaja, facing growing resistance from his people, who rejected his autocratic rule and sought to join Pakistan, requested Indian military assistance. In return, India demanded the signing of the Instrument of Accession, a document whose authenticity and legality remain deeply contested. Historical records suggest that it was signed under duress and without the consent of the Kashmiri people.
India justified its invasion on this controversial agreement, but even Lord Mountbatten, then Governor-General of India, made the accession conditional on holding a plebiscite once peace was restored. The United Nations soon intervened, and Security Council Resolution 47 (1948) explicitly called for a free and impartial plebiscite to determine Kashmir’s future. However, India has consistently evaded this commitment, transforming what was claimed to be a temporary military intervention into a permanent occupation. Decades later, the promised plebiscite remains unfulfilled, and the presence of Indian troops continues to define life in the Valley, an enduring reminder of a broken pledge and an unending struggle for self-determination.
The 1990s were a decade when the Kashmiris faced the most tragic times of their history. The armed resistance and India’s brutal counterinsurgency led to a very high number of deaths and increased the number of displaced people. The tragedy is not only in the number of deaths but also in the suffering of each family. A father never returned to his family or a mother living in hope of getting justice—every family has such a story of tragedy. The years of suffering have left slaughtered generations and made the whole society a victim of perpetual militarization.
India crossed another limit on August 5, 2019, when it abrogated Articles 370 and 35A, which had provided Jammu and Kashmir with a special autonomous status and the ability to govern itself. This act was in direct violation of international law and the principles of self-determination and non-intervention. Along with the abrogation came a complete communication blackout, mass detentions of politicians and activists, and lockdowns that suffocated the region. Famous leaders such as Yasin Malik were imprisoned under repressive laws their only crime being the quest for freedom.
India’s political strategy in IIOJK not only entails oppression but also reflects what scholars in International Relations refer to as “settler colonialism.” India is changing the demographics of the region through new domicile laws, changes in property rights, and land redistribution. This demographic engineering is intended to decrease the proportion of Muslims and occupy Kashmir politically with Hindus forever such a practice is forbidden by the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits the occupying power from transferring its population into the territory it occupies. These measures are nothing but intentional actions to obliterate a nation’s identity and to weaken its claim of right to self-determination.
IIoJK, from an (IR) perspective, remains at the heart of South Asia’s main conflict and is still the world’s most dangerous nuclear flashpoint. The issue of Kashmir has drawn India and Pakistan into a security dilemma, which has implications for the stability of the whole region and the peace of the world. The Indian policy in Kashmir is a reflection of the Hindu-Nationalist ideology of the BJP government; therefore, it is a demand for the power to rule over the whole region. This revealed that power politics is more important than justice and human rights.
It is a demand for the practice of international law not only in forms of words but through actual measures taken. The demand is not for sympathy but for justice – the implementation of UN resolutions, the accountability of human rights violations, and the restoration of Kashmiris’ right to self-determination. The South Asian conflict between India and Pakistan is not amenable to solutions of force or silence; it demands the path of dialogue, recognition, and the end of occupation.
The situation of Palestine is a reminder to the whole world that peace based on injustice is always unstable. The world cannot afford to overlook Kashmir any longer. The people of IIoJK are entitled to decide how they want to live and where, to be free, to be peaceful, and to be hopeful in a land that was once called paradise.
The author is a student of International Relations at Federal Urdu University of Arts, Science & Technology Islamabad and is currently serving as an intern at the Kashmir Institute of International Relations.