Latest news with #HariSingh
News18
27-05-2025
- Politics
- News18
The Proxy Trap: How Pakistan's Deep State Undermines Peace With India
Last Updated: The Pahalgam attack fulfilled its intent: to derail the fragile prospects for harmony and collaboration between India and Pakistan A familiar and recurring pattern has once again unfolded in South Asia—every few years, as the region seems poised on the brink of enduring peace, destabilising forces with ties to Pakistan emerge to undermine such progress. Just as the Kashmir valley was settling into a climate of calm, order, and optimism for the future, terrorism resurfaced from obscurity. A firm and appropriate response was delivered. Yet, the attack fulfilled its intent: to derail the fragile prospects for harmony and collaboration between the neighbouring nations of India and Pakistan. The roots of discord between the two nations predate their very existence. Within months of gaining independence, the neighbouring states engaged in war over the coveted region of Kashmir. Pakistan, unwilling to accept the decision of the ruler of Jammu and Kashmir decided to pursue an independent course, dispatched militias to seize control of the territory. In response, Maharaja Hari Singh appealed to Jawaharlal Nehru for assistance, offering accession to the newly established Indian Union. The subsequent developments, including United Nations mediation, resulted in a provisional ceasefire line—later formalised in 1972 as the 'Line of Control' (LoC). Pakistan illegally occupied one-third of Kashmir, a position it continues to hold. A further violent conflict broke out in 1965 when Pakistan initiated an incursion across the ceasefire line. The following year, Indian Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri and Pakistani President Ayub Khan agreed to cease hostilities and pursue peaceful avenues for resolving their disputes. The 1970s began with a devastating setback for Pakistan, as its eastern region, oppressed under Islamabad's brutal governance, rose in rebellion to demand independence. India, motivated by both humanitarian concerns and strategic interests, supported the liberation movement, culminating in the creation of Bangladesh in 1971. In the aftermath, recognising its significant lack of strategic depth and conventional military parity with India, the Pakistani establishment—particularly the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI)—revised its security strategy. Pakistan's participation in equipping and training Afghan fighters during the US-led response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan provided it with the necessary framework to pursue this updated approach—proxy warfare. From the late 1980s onward, Pakistan's military and intelligence establishment fomented armed insurgency in Indian-administered Kashmir, resulting in prolonged cycles of violence and radicalisation. Throughout this period, Pakistan leveraged its strategic use of proxy militant groups to retain a veil of plausible deniability. Meanwhile, the imbalance in civil-military relations ensured that any initiative by civilian governments to advance bilateral dialogue was systematically undermined by the military, keen to safeguard its dominant position in national affairs. At a time when the world viewed India and Pakistan with concern over their newly acquired nuclear capabilities, Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee met his Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharif to sign the historic 1999 Lahore Declaration. Both nations committed to confidence-building measures, multilateral cooperation, counter-terrorism efforts, nuclear and conventional security, and diplomatic dialogue concerning Kashmir. However, just months later, infiltrators supported by the Pakistani military occupied strategic positions in Kargil, Kashmir, sparking a limited conflict that resulted in the deaths of 527 Indian soldiers. Predictably, this severely undermined the diplomatic gains and intensified Indian distrust of Pakistan. Once again, India chose to overcome the hostilities and offer the prospect of improved neighbourly relations with Pakistan. President Pervez Musharraf, presenting himself as a partner in the US-led post-9/11 'war on terror,' met with Prime Minister Vajpayee at the Agra Summit in 2001, raising hopes for renewed India-Pakistan dialogue. However, within a few months, India endured a horrific attack on its Parliament, which resulted in nine fatalities and was carried out by terrorists affiliated with the Pakistan-based group Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM). Between 2004 and 2007, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh sought to achieve comprehensive peace with Pakistan and to reduce the Line of Control (LoC) to 'just a line on a map." Utilising backchannel diplomacy, he engaged with the Pakistani President to develop what became known as the 'Manmohan-Musharraf formula.' This included initiatives such as free movement and trade across the LoC, the historic Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus service, and the significant 2006 Havana meeting where both parties agreed to establish a joint anti-terrorism institutional framework, among other measures. However, these efforts were ultimately rendered futile and deceptive when terrorists from the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba carried out the 2008 Mumbai attacks, killing over 160 individuals. The sole surviving attacker, Ajmal Kasab, directly implicated the ISI in his confession, revealing that it had trained him and assisted in selecting targets. When Narendra Modi extended conciliatory gestures towards Nawaz Sharif upon assuming office as Prime Minister, there was renewed optimism. However, this hope was swiftly dashed when terrorists linked to Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) attacked the Pathankot airbase. Later that year, the same group carried out the Uri attack, resulting in the deaths of 18 soldiers and prompting India to conduct surgical strikes on terrorist camps in Balakot. In the wake of the Uri attack, the 2016 SAARC summit scheduled to be held in Islamabad was cancelled, and the forum has not convened since. The JeM was once again responsible for the horrific 2019 Pulwama attack, which involved a suicide bombing of a CRPF convoy, killing 40 personnel. The recent terrorist attack in Pahalgam, which claimed the lives of 25 Indian civilians and one Nepali citizen, follows a period of marked and sustained decline in terrorism within the Valley. In recent years, Jammu and Kashmir has experienced greater integration with India, notably following the abrogation of Article 370, alongside a surge in tourism, economic opportunities, and developmental initiatives. Consequently, Pakistan's deep state was compelled to intervene in an effort to derail this hopeful progress for both the people of Kashmir and the wider region. top videos View all Any credible peace process between India and Pakistan depends fundamentally on genuine intent and transparency in actions. Pakistan's reliance on proxy terrorist groups as strategic tools undermines not only bilateral dialogue but also broader efforts towards regional cooperation and development, exemplified by the stagnation of SAARC. Pakistan faces a long and challenging journey if it is to change the practices that have caused extensive violence in the region. This journey must begin with a profound transformation of its civil-military relations and a significant reduction of its disproportionately influential and controversial military establishment that supports terrorism. The writer is an author and a columnist. His X handle is @ArunAnandLive. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18's views. tags : india Pakistan Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: May 27, 2025, 18:51 IST News opinion Right Word | The Proxy Trap: How Pakistan's Deep State Undermines Peace With India
Yahoo
18-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
How did Kashmir end up largely under Indian control?
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. Nestling at the point where the borders of India and Pakistan meet in the Himalayas, Jammu and Kashmir is the only Muslim-majority state or territory in Hindu-majority India (excepting the tiny Lakshadweep archipelago). It has been a flashpoint between India and Pakistan since Partition in 1947, partly because of its geo-strategic importance. The glacial waters flowing through Kashmir provide water and electricity to tens of millions of people in India; Pakistan's biggest river, the Indus, also passes through it. But to both sides it is also a symbol of pride, a land famed for its beauty. "If there is a heaven on Earth," the Mughal emperor Jahangir once remarked, "it's here, it's here, it's here." Its mountainous landscape appears often in Bollywood films and on restaurant walls across the subcontinent. There are also significant Muslim and Hindu shrines in Kashmir. In the mid-19th century, Kashmir's Sikh rulers ceded the Valley of Kashmir to the British, who in turn sold it to the Hindu rajah of neighbouring Jammu. Srinagar, Kashmir's summer capital, became a holiday resort for the British. Upon independence a century later, the princely states in theory had the right to choose whether to join India or Pakistan, but the decision was largely determined by religious demographics and geographical location. Kashmir's playboy maharaja, Hari Singh, could not decide, as his state adjoined both nations; he pondered turning it into an independent "Switzerland of Asia". But his hand was forced when, after Partition, Muslims in northwest Kashmir, backed by a Pakistani tribal army, rose up against the Hindu population and massacred them. Independent India's new PM, Jawaharlal Nehru, a Kashmiri Hindu by descent, sent in troops to quash the revolt – in return, Singh ceded Kashmir to India, in October 1947. Pakistan has (like India) always claimed the whole of Kashmir, and its regular forces entered the conflict soon after. The resulting First Indo-Pakistani War ended in 1949, with a UN-brokered ceasefire. Most of the region was left under Indian control, except the northwestern third, including Gilgit-Baltistan and Azad ("Free") Kashmir, which is controlled by Pakistan. In 1948, the UN called for both sides to withdraw troops and let the people of Kashmir vote on their future status. This referendum never took place, essentially because Nehru realised that it would not be decided in India's favour. Instead, the countries went to war over Kashmir again, first in 1965 and then in 1971. The ceasefire line agreed in the Simla Agreement in 1972 became the de facto border, known as the "Line of Control". From the 1950s on, popular movements emerged in Kashmir demanding either independence or a merger with Pakistan. India responded with repression, while Pakistan provided support for militant groups. In the late 1980s, growing opposition to Indian rule was fuelled by a rigged election and the killing of peaceful protesters. The Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front, a pro-independence group backed by Pakistan, launched an insurgency against the Indian authorities. India responded with a massive counterinsurgency operation, flooding the region with troops, and making Kashmir one of the most highly militarised areas in the world. About 41,000 people were killed over the following 27 years. Extrajudicial military killings were rife; at least 8,000 Kashmiris "disappeared". Nearly all the Hindus in the Valley of Kashmir, known as the Pandits – about 100,000 – left following a series of terrorist killings. The insurgency was largely brought under control by the early 2000s, but there have been regular eruptions of violence since. Pakistan's military intelligence service, the ISI, has encouraged the growth of radical Islamist groups that focus on the Kashmir issue, though their members are often not Kashmiris. The usual pattern is that an atrocity takes place (the killing of 40 paramilitary police by a car bomb in 2019, for example); India then holds Pakistan responsible, and attacks alleged terrorist camps in Pakistan, which denies responsibility and counter-attacks. But the latest atrocity was different, since it hit tourists, not a military target. All Indian governments since 1947 have taken a hard line on Kashmir, but Modi's Hindu nationalist BJP has been particularly unyielding. In 2019, it revoked Article 370 of India's Constitution, dating from 1949, which had guaranteed Kashmir a degree of autonomy, and restricted property rights to "permanent residents". Instead, Jammu and Kashmir is now ruled directly from Delhi. His government had also claimed that militancy in the region was in check, and encouraged the resumption of tourism. This is hotly contested, and there is no simple answer. An authoritative poll, conducted by Chatham House and Mori in 2010, found that in India-administered Jammu and Kashmir, 43% said they would vote for independence, while 28% would vote to stay with India, and only 2% to join Pakistan. However, this varied strongly by region: of some 13 million people in the state, eight million live in the Kashmir Valley, which is now over 95% Muslim; upwards of 74% there supported independence. But in Jammu, where five million people live, 68% of them Hindu, support for independence was only 1%. In Azad (Pakistani) Kashmir, 50% thought Kashmir as a whole should be part of Pakistan, and 45% thought it should be independent. Robert Bradnock, who ran the poll, concluded that the referendum envisaged by the UN would now fail to resolve the conflict.
Irish Examiner
13-05-2025
- Politics
- Irish Examiner
Why are India and Pakistan on the brink of war and how dangerous is the situation? An expert explains
India has launched military strikes against a number of sites in Pakistan and Pakistan's side of the disputed region of Kashmir, reportedly killing at least 31 people and injuring dozens more. India claimed the attacks were on terrorist infrastructure, but Pakistan denied this, and said these were civilians. India says another 10 people on the Indian side of the Kashmir region have been killed by shelling from Pakistan in the same period. The exchange comes two weeks after a terrorist attack in Kashmir killed 26 people. The group Resistance Front (TRF), which India argues is a proxy for the Pakistani-based terrorist group Lashkar-e-Taiba, claimed responsibility for the attack. India claimed that Pakistan had indirectly supported the terrorist attack, but Pakistan vehemently denies this. The escalating conflict between two of the world's major military powers has the potential to de-stablise Asia and beyond. Already, many countries around the world, including the UK, France and Russia, have made public their concerns about what happens next. How do India and Pakistan's militaries compare? India is ranked as one of the world's top five military nations by Military Watch magazine and Pakistan is ranked ninth. Both countries have nuclear weapons. Overall, India is considered to have the military edge with a bigger and more modern military force, while Pakistan has a smaller and more agile force that has been primarily focused on defensive and covert activities. While neither country has used nuclear weapons in a conflict, there are always concerns that this norm may be broken. Both countries are nuclear powers with India holding 180 nuclear warheads, and Pakistan possessing about 170. Though India has a 'no first use' policy, which it claims means the country would never use nuclear weapons first, there have been signs it is reconsidering this policy since 2019. Pakistan has never declared a no first use policy and argues that tactical nuclear weapons are important to countering India's larger conventional forces. The concern is that even if a small nuclear exchange were to take place between the two countries, it could kill up to 20 million people in a matter of days. Why are the countries fighting over Kashmir? Kashmir has been a source of tension and conflict even before India and Pakistan gained independence from the British empire in 1947. Originally the Muslim-majority Kashmir was free to accede to either India or Pakistan. While the local ruler (maharaja), Hari Singh, originally wanted Kashmir to be independent, he eventually sided with India, leading to a conflict in 1947. This resulted in a UN-mediated ceasefire in 1949 and agreement that Kashmir would be controlled partly by Pakistan and partly by India, split along what's known as the Line of Surveillance (or Line of Control). As Kashmir is rich in minerals such as borax, sapphire, graphite, marble, gypsum and lithium, the region is strategically important. It is also culturally and historically important to both Pakistan and India. Due to the region's significance and disagreement over sovereignty, multiple conflicts have taken place over Kashmir, with wars erupting in 1965 and 1999. Tensions were renewed in 2016, after 19 Indian soldiers were killed in Uri, on the Indian side of Kashmir. India responded by launching 'surgical strikes' across the Line of Control, targeting alleged militant bases. Then in 2019, a bombing in Pulwama (again part of the Indian-administered Kashmir) that killed more than 40 Indian paramilitary personnel led to Indian airstrikes in Balakot which borders Kashmir. This was the first action inside Pakistan since the Indian-Pakistani conflict in 1971 and again led to retaliatory raids from Pakistan and a brief aerial conflict. A Kashmiri villager examines the damage caused to his house by Indian shelling in Neelum Valley, a district of Pakistan-administered Kashmir on Saturday. Photo: AP/M.D. Mughal These past conflicts never intensified further in part because India applied a massive diplomatic pressure campaign on the US, the UK and Pakistan, warning against escalation, while Pakistan showed a willingness to back down. Both sides as nuclear powers (India gained nuclear weapons in 1974 and Pakistan in 1998) had an understanding that escalating to full-scale war would be incredibly risky. What will happen next? The question is whether or not cooler heads will prevail this time. The strikes by India, part of Operation Sindoor, were met with mass approval across many political lines in India, with both the ruling Bharatiya Janata party (BJP) and the opposition Congress party voicing their support for the operation. This helps Modi gain more backing, at a time when his popularity has been falling. Modi and the BJP suffered a shocking result in the 2024 election, losing 63 seats out of 543 seats and falling short of a majority in the Lok Sabha (lower house of parliament). Under Modi, India has been rapidly becoming more autocratic, another source of concern as such countries are more likely to take risks when it comes to conflict. As power becomes increasingly personalised and dissent is repressed, would-be autocrats may be more likely to take on bold moves to garner more public and elite support. An Indian paramilitary soldier stands guard on the banks of Dal Lake after loud explosions were heard in Srinagar on Saturday. Photo: AP/Mukhtar Khan Pakistan may also have reason to respond with more force to India's recent attack than in the past. Pakistan's powerful military has often stoked fears of a conflict with India to justify its enormous military budget. Regardless of the outcome, it needs a success to sell to its domestic audience. Pakistan has been de facto led by its military for decades, which also makes it more likely to engage in conflict. In spite of intervals of civilian rule, the military has always held a lot of power, and in contrast to India (where there is a wider role for a civilian minister of defence), the Pakistani military has more influence over nuclear and security policy. Both military regimes and multi-party autocracies may see conflict as a way of gaining legitimacy, particularly if both regimes think their political support is unravelling. This most recent escalation is also significant because it is the first time in the Kashmir conflict that India has struck at Punjab, considered the heart of Pakistan. Pakistan will face internal pressure to respond, settle the score and restore deterrence. Both sides have been resolute in not losing an inch of territory. The question is how quickly diplomatic pressure can work. Neither India nor Pakistan are engaged in security dialogue, and there is no bilateral crisis management mechanisms in place. Further complicating matters is that the US's role as a crisis manager in south Asia has diminished. Under Donald Trump, Washington cannot be counted on. This all makes deescalating this conflict much more difficult. Natasha Lindstaedt is a Professor in the Department of Government, University of Essex. (c) The Conversation Read More Calm reported along Indian and Pakistani border after days of fighting
News18
12-05-2025
- Politics
- News18
At 4 Days, What This The Shortest Conflict Between India And Pakistan?
Last Updated: Since 1947, India and Pakistan have fought four wars, but this latest conflict was notably brief Was this the shortest 'war' between India and Pakistan till date? The intense cross-border firing and drone activity between the nuclear-armed neigbours continued for four days, but there were no incidents along the heavily militarized Line of Control on the night of May 11 to 12. On Saturday, both nations agreed to cease all military operations on land, in the air and at sea to avoid further escalation. Since 1947, India and Pakistan have fought four wars, but this latest conflict was notably brief. First War Lasted 15 Months The history of India-Pakistan wars includes four major conflicts and several significant military operations. The first war, known as the Kashmir War, occurred between 1947 and 1948, spanning 15 months. This conflict began in October 1947 and lasted until January 1949, involving Pakistan-backed tribal attackers aiming to seize Kashmir. Maharaja Hari Singh of Kashmir subsequently merged with India, saving half of Kashmir while Pakistan occupied the other half, termed Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). A United Nations-mediated ceasefire ended this war. Second War Lasted 22 Days The second war in 1965 lasted for 22 days from August 5 to September 23. Triggered by Pakistan's Operation Gibraltar, it saw India gain a significant advantage before a ceasefire was declared. The Tashkent Agreement in January 1966 restored the pre-war status quo. Third War Lasted 13 Days In 1971, the third India-Pakistan war, also known as the Bangladesh Liberation War, lasted 13 days from December 3 to December 16, and resulted in the creation of Bangladesh. This conflict led to a historic defeat for Pakistan, with 93,000 soldiers surrendering. The subsequent Simla Agreement established the Line of Control (LoC), with India returning captured territory to Pakistan. The Kargil War of 1999 was a prolonged conflict, lasting around 2 months and 20 days. It began in May and ended on July 26, involving the infiltration of Pakistani forces into the Kargil region. India emerged victorious, reclaiming its territory and causing international disgrace for Pakistan, leading to a military coup by General Pervez Musharraf. Other Major Military Conflicts And Operations Rann of Kutch Conflict (1965): Border clashes took place in the Kutch region of Gujarat in April 1965, lasting about one to two weeks. Operation Parakram (2001–2002): Following the Parliament attack on December 13, 2001, Indian and Pakistani forces remained in a tense standoff along the border for 10 months. Though a full-scale war was avoided, it marked one of the longest military deployments between the two nations. Uri Surgical Strike (2016): In response to the Uri terror attack on September 18, 2016, the Indian Army carried out surgical strikes across the LoC on the night of September 29–30. The operation lasted only a few hours. Balakot Air Strike (2019): After the Pulwama terror attack on February 14, 2019, the Indian Air Force launched an airstrike on February 26, 2019, hitting terror camps in Balakot. The strike lasted only a few minutes. The recent four-day conflict was triggered by an attack by Pakistan-backed terrorists on Indian tourists in J&'s Pahalgam on April 22, killing 26 people. Two weeks later, India launched Operation Sindoor and bombed terror bases in Pakistan and PoK. Pakistan responded by unsuccessfully targeting Indian military installation in Jammu and Punjab, followed by missile and drone strikes on civilian areas. India successfully intercepted and fended off the attacks, retaliating by inflicting heavy losses on Pakistan military establishments. Intense shelling on the LoC continued until the ceasefire at 5 pm on May 10. First Published: May 12, 2025, 12:25 IST
New Indian Express
11-05-2025
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Why Kashmir must be Unified and Whole
A border is a line drawn by politics and held in place by rote. Few are as blood-soaked and brittle as the one that runs down the spine of Kashmir, cleaving a valley into two, and history into a wound. Pakistan-occupied Kashmir is not just territory. It is the unfinished sentence of 1947, the jagged consequence of deceit, delay, and the tragic timidity of post-colonial diplomacy. Pakistan has no moral or historical claim to PoK. It is stolen land, seized in the fog of Partition through the deployment of tribal militias backed by Pakistan, in direct violation of the Instrument of Accession signed by Maharaja Hari Singh in October 1947: an instrument recognised by India, the British Crown, and even the United Nations. In that moment, Kashmir legally became a part of India. We must step into the past, into the chaotic cartography of Mountbatten's Radcliffe Line, which split not just the subcontinent but its conscience. The two-nation theory, the flawed seed from which the Partition bloomed, demanded division by religious majority. Kashmir was never just a demographic puzzle. It was, and remains, a civilisational keystone, historically connected more to the plains of Punjab and the bygone empires of Delhi than to the tribal badlands of Pakistan's northwest.
