Many Kashmiris were enraged by the restrictions placed on them, leading to more anti-India sentiments. But, the international response to this move was largely favorable to India. Many nations expressed their support and remarked that this was a situation of India dealing with its internal matters. Both India and Pakistan strongly believe that Kashmir rightfully belongs to them. Additionally, Kashmir is incredibly valuable to both nations. It is hard to imagine, that either country would willingly surrender Kashmir.
It is certain that thousands of Kashmiris and soldiers have faced and continue to face atrocities. There are also reports of human rights violations in the region. In both Pakistan and India there is increasing sympathy for the Kashmiris. However, at the current moment, there is little hope for change in this region. Of late, India has gained a lot of international support as well. Rapidly growing as an economy and as a military power, India has become a desirable ally and trade partner for many.
We can look to the amendment of Article as an example of this. We can speculate that going forward this international support will only continue.
India faces little international pressure to renegotiate the terms of Kashmir with Pakistan. Pakistan on the other hand was under scrutiny.
Multiple nations have called for Pakistan to withdraw its support of terrorist activities and funding terrorist organizations. Pakistan certainly faces the brunt of international scrutiny in this matter. India has little reason to withdraw from this conflict. Kashmir is very valuable to India. Future plans of channeling hydroelectricity and the abundance of natural resources make it so.
Additionally, with nationalist and anti -Pakistan sentiments rising in India, a majority of the people would not want to lose Kashmir. To add to this, India has not faced severe economic or political repercussions due to the Kashmiri conflict.
Hence, in the coming future, given the current events, it is extremely unlikely that India will change its stance on Kashmir. On the contrary, India seems to be moving towards completely integrating Kashmir into itself.
Similarly, Pakistan is unlikely to change its stance. Kashmir is very valuable to Pakistan. Its beneficial relationship with China depends on it.
Kashmir is the key to important rivers that fuel Pakistani agriculture. Although Pakistan has been under international scrutiny, there has not been significant pressure.
While Pakistan may be weaker in terms of military strength, it too is a nuclear power. In the case of a war, mutually assured destruction is a guarantee. Additionally, China has had straining relations with India as well and is an ally. Hence, the chances of an Indian invasion are low. Although the Pakistani economy is declining, losing Kashmir would only serve to damage the economy.
Although there is a cry for independence in Kashmir, it is unclear as to whether it is a majority. Additionally, there are fears around the world that an independent Kashmir would not last. An independent Kashmir would be surrounded by three nuclear states and plagued with multiple terrorist organizations. It would be bound to rely on one of the three powers. Analysts predict that an independent Kashmir would quickly crumble under anarchy and terrorism. There are fears that such a nation would simply become another terrorist-ruled state.
Both India and Pakistan are unlikely to let this happen. It is unlikely that we will see a referendum either [27]. It would be reasonable to believe that a fair referendum would be hard to achieve.
Additionally, the Kashmiri sentiments seemed to have changed, during the partition, a sizable portion of Kashmiri were pro- India. However, given the current events and the surge of anti-India sentiments amongst the Kashmiris, it is hard to say which side the Kashmiris are leaning towards. India has no reason to change its position on Kashmir. Hence, since their victory is not guaranteed through a referendum, they would have little reason to call for a referendum.
India has wanted no international involvement in this matter. However, the plight of the Kashmiris is heard more than ever now. In both countries, there is a rising demographic that wants to end the loss of lives and sorrow that Kashmir has become synonymous with. As the world is increasing the measures taken against terrorism, we can hope that Kashmir too can one day be free of it. The global stage is keeping a close watch on Kashmir and many organizations are going in to better the situation.
Some are calling to make the line of control the official border. While this is certainly more likely than India or Pakistan entirely giving up Kashmir, the odds still remain low. For reasons described, it is hard to see this happen especially, in the absence of a mutually hurting stalemate. Both nations are likely to drag out this issue until they no longer can. Either way, while the future looks bleak, the hope that there will be an improvement still remains.
Al Jazeera. Chandra, S. Addressing Kashmir. Strategic Analysis,35 2 , Dhall, Pinky. Hajni, Mehraj. Korbel, Josef. Zee News. Mukherjee, Kunal. Munshi, Miraj-U-Din. JSTOR , www. Accessed 20 June Patricia Bauer. Encyclopedia Britannica website.
Waldman, Amy. Honolulu: Global Environment and Energy in the 21st century. Wolpert, Stanley. Kavic University of California Press. Times of India. Archived from the original on 1 June Retrieved 14 August Archived from the original on 13 April Retrieved 2 February Retrieved 9 April Annals of the Association of American Geographers.
Before you download your free e-book, please consider donating to support open access publishing. E-IR is an independent non-profit publisher run by an all volunteer team.
Your donations allow us to invest in new open access titles and pay our bandwidth bills to ensure we keep our existing titles free to view. Any amount, in any currency, is appreciated. Many thanks! Donations are voluntary and not required to download the e-book - your link to download is below.
This content was originally written for an undergraduate or Master's program. The government also introduced a bill to strip the region of statehood and divide it into two parts, both under direct control of the central government.
But Mr. Modi, a Hindu nationalist, had campaigned for re-election in part by stoking patriotic fervor against Muslim-led Pakistan. He promised the full integration of Kashmir, a cause which his party has championed for decades, and now he is delivering on that pledge. In , the sudden separation of the area into Pakistan and India prompted millions of people to migrate between the two countries and led to religious violence that killed hundreds of thousands.
Left undecided was the status of Jammu and Kashmir, a Muslim-majority state in the Himalayas that had been ruled by a local prince.
Fighting quickly broke out, and both countries eventually sent in troops, with Pakistan occupying about one-third of the state and India two-thirds. The prince signed an agreement for the territory to become part of India.
Regional autonomy, which was formalized through Article , was a key inducement. Despite efforts by the United Nations to mediate the Kashmir dispute, India and Pakistan continue to administer their portions of the former princely territory while hoping to get full control of it. Muslim militants have frequently resorted to violence to expel the Indian troops from the territory.
Pakistan has backed many of those militants, as well as terrorists who have struck deep inside India — most brutally in a four-day killing spree in Mumbai in , which left more than people dead.
Article was added to the Indian constitution shortly after the partition of British India to give autonomy to the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir until a decision was made about its rule. It limited the power of India's central government over the territory. A related provision gave state lawmakers the power to decide who could buy land and be a permanent resident -- a provision that irked many non-Kashmiris.
Although it was intended to be temporary, Article says that it can only be abrogated with the consent of the legislative body that drafted the state constitution. That body dissolved itself in , and India's Supreme Court ruled last year that Article is therefore a permanent part of the constitution.
The Modi government disagrees and says the president of India, who is beholden to the ruling party, has the power to revoke the article. Since the late s the terrorist groups have conducted targeted strikes and attacks on Indian government and military facilities , leading the Indian military to retaliate in Pakistani territory. Pakistan then alleges that India has breached the borderline , defying international treaties like the Simla Agreement to conduct its anti-terror attacks.
In many cases, treaties and international court decisions cannot be enforced. There is no international police force to help implement international law.
If a country ignores an International Court of Justice ruling, the other party in that court case may have recourse to the Security Council, which can pressure or even sanction a nation to comply with international law. But that rarely happens, as such resolution processes are highly political and any permanent Security Council member can veto them.
And when conflicting parties are more inclined to view a conflict through the lens of domestic law — as India views Kashmir and Israel views the Palestinian territories — they can argue that international law simply does not apply. Sign up today. For decades, both the U. International law has grown and strengthened since its creation in the s, but there are still many problems it cannot solve.
Portsmouth Climate Festival — Portsmouth, Portsmouth. Edition: Available editions United Kingdom. Become an author Sign up as a reader Sign in.
The scene in Srinagar, in Indian-administered Kashmir, after an Aug. Kashmir has experienced sporadic violence for more than seven decades, including three wars.
0コメント