Latest news with #KarachiAgreement
News18
3 days ago
- Business
- News18
Gilgit-Baltistan: A New Uprising In Pakistan's ‘Last Colony' Against Oppressive Rule
Last Updated: For decades, GB has sought autonomy, political representation, and development aligned with local needs and ambitions, but has faced growing neglect and exploitation from Pakistan A fresh wave of resistance against the Pakistani state's illegal occupation of the region is being witnessed in Gilgit-Baltistan (GB). The local traders and business community of GB have launched a movement to oppose trade and travel between Pakistan and China via the Khunjerab Pass. This latest protest is the outcome of the relentlessly exploitative economic and political conditions imposed on GB by the Pakistani state. The protest by the traders has come close on the heels of a mass movement by the local residents of GB against the controversial Land Reforms Act, 2025, passed on May 21. For the last four weeks, traders have been continuing with a sit-in at the Karakoram Highway, bringing the region to a standstill. They are demanding recognition of local interests by Islamabad as well as its accountability. To understand GB's tumultuous relationship with Islamabad, it is important to look at the history of this asymmetric and oppressive power dynamic, which continues to disenfranchise, marginalise, and politically erase the identity, aspirations, and future of the people of this region. According to the US-based Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), Pakistan has treated GB more as a colony rather than as part of the federation. 'The region has long been regarded by Pakistan not as a cherished part of the federation, but as a distant and burdensome periphery. Successive governments have turned a blind eye to the fundamental needs of the humble inhabitants of Gilgit-Baltistan, relegating the region to an ad hoc governance framework administered from afar—governed not by participatory laws, but by decrees handed down from Islamabad," says a recent MEMRI report. The origins of this injustice lie in the 1949 Karachi Agreement. Under this 'agreement", the control of GB (then called Northern Areas) was transferred from Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK) to Islamabad without any representative from the region. Since then, Islamabad has directly ruled GB through the Ministry of Kashmir Affairs, using the draconian colonial-era Frontier Crimes Regulation. Its constitutional status remains in limbo as Pakistan has tried to use it to build another false narrative by linking it to the resolution of the Kashmir issue with India. But to deal with growing frustration among the local residents, it introduced limited self-governance reforms to the region, renaming it 'Gilgit and Baltistan' in 2009. However, this move was exposed as hollow; right from the beginning, the GB assembly was systematically populated by 'compliant figureheads or puppets, rather than leaders who dared to interpret their roles with independence and purpose," as emphasised in the MEMRI analysis. For decades, GB has sought autonomy, political representation, and development aligned with local needs and aspirations, but instead has faced growing neglect and exploitative policies from Pakistan. The Pakistani magazine Herald once described Gilgit-Baltistan as Pakistan's 'last colony", a phrase that aptly reflects Islamabad's governing attitude toward the region. Very recently, GB was engulfed in massive demonstrations against the forcibly passed Land Reforms Act, 2025. This legislation was opposed by the people, as it would enable land grabs by Punjabi landlords and the Pakistani military, displace the local population, and exploit natural resources. This law would also intensify military control. As GB is the only region under Pakistan's occupation that has a Shia and Ismaili majority, Islamabad has also undertaken a systematic campaign of altering the demography by opening up the region to outsiders. Now, fed up with increasing federal taxes and deliberate obstacles to local trade, GB traders—backed by a host of local political parties and religious groups—have sustained a resilient sit-in at Sost. This powerful show of solidarity and demand for justice compelled Chief Minister Haji Gulbar Khan and Governor Mehdi Shah to seek federal intervention, leading to the formation of a federal committee to make recommendations for the issue's resolution. The protestors' demands are simple: exemption from income, sales, and other federal taxes on commodities imported from China through the Khunjerab Pass—deemed illegal by traders considering GB's lack of constitutional status—and urgent customs clearance for 280 consignments stuck at Sost Dry Port under a one-time amnesty scheme. Ironically, while Gilgit-Baltistan is considered to be geographically very significant for the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, Islamabad's treatment of local traders sends a clear message that it is least bothered about the interests of the local population and is only interested in exploiting the strategic position and resources of the region. All routes connecting Pakistan to China, including the critical Karakoram Highway, pass through GB, which should ideally have brought more economic opportunities for the local population. However, in contrast, it has resulted in increased Chinese military presence. This reinforces the fact that Pakistan follows the template of exploiting the region while keeping the people underdeveloped. If the locals dare to express their aspirations, they are handled brutally by the Pakistani military and its death squads. Therefore, the traders' blockade in GB represents more than an economic conflict—it is the roar of a voice silenced for decades from a region long suffering under the thumb of Islamabad's colonial and oppressive policies. The writer is an author and 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. Click here to add News18 as your preferred news source on Google. tags : China Kashmir pakistan view comments Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: August 16, 2025, 22:02 IST News opinion Global Watch | Gilgit-Baltistan: A New Uprising In Pakistan's 'Last Colony' Against Oppressive Rule Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
31-07-2025
- Politics
- First Post
Authoritarian drift in Dhaka: India's role in upholding minority rights and democracy
As Bangladesh flounders under authoritarian drift and Pakistan tramples over historic commitments, India must not be a silent bystander read more As South Asia grapples with rising authoritarianism and political instability, India's role as a democratic stabiliser is being increasingly tested. Nowhere is this more evident than in Bangladesh, where a deepening governance crisis under the interim government has sparked global concern. Systematic repression of minorities, curtailed press freedoms, erosion of democratic checks and balances, and judicial partisanship have combined to undermine the foundational pluralism of Bangladesh. At the same time, Pakistan's blatant violation of the Karachi Agreement with India exposes Islamabad's continued disregard for historical commitments and regional peace. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD In this volatile environment, India bears both a strategic imperative and a moral obligation to uphold minority rights, regional pluralism, and democratic accountability. Anchored by its civilisational ties, shared borders, and principled commitment to inclusive governance, New Delhi must position itself as a proactive guardian of regional stability and human rights. Deepening Governance Crisis Under the current interim administration, Bangladesh has witnessed a disturbing rollback of civil liberties. With the general elections clouded by allegations of voter suppression, institutional bias, and selective disqualification of opposition voices, democracy in Dhaka is under severe strain. More alarmingly, minority communities—especially Hindus, Christians, and Buddhists—have borne the brunt of this democratic decline. There has been a spike in communal violence, often orchestrated under the guise of maintaining 'public order.' Properties and temples of minority citizens have been vandalised with impunity, with state protection often either absent or complicit. Hindu communities, concentrated in regions like Khulna, Sylhet, and Chittagong, face socio-political marginalisation that threatens their very identity. Judicial impartiality, too, has eroded significantly. Courts are increasingly seen as instruments of political control rather than protectors of constitutional rights. Journalists exposing human rights violations are harassed, detained, or silenced, shrinking the space for civil discourse. Standing Up for Pluralism India is not a passive observer in Bangladesh's trajectory. It shares a 4,096-kilometre border with Bangladesh—South Asia's longest land border—and has deep historical and cultural linkages, especially with the people of Bangladesh. India's pivotal role in the 1971 Liberation War and its enduring political, economic, and security cooperation with Dhaka further bolster its standing. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Given this context, India has both a strategic and moral responsibility to act. Strategic Imperative: A destabilised Bangladesh can easily spill over into India's sensitive northeastern states, aggravating illegal migration, cross-border trafficking, and insurgent or terror activity. Regional instability also weakens collective efforts against terrorism and disrupts Bay of Bengal maritime security. Moral Obligation: As the region's most vibrant democracy, India must champion pluralism and minority rights, especially when these rights are under threat in neighbouring nations. India's silence could be construed as tacit approval of oppression, weakening its democratic credentials and moral stature. Through diplomatic engagement, multilateral forums, and backchannel diplomacy, India must press Dhaka for concrete guarantees of minority protection, judicial independence, and press freedom. Quiet diplomacy must be balanced with public posturing that sends a strong message about India's unwavering commitment to democratic norms. Towards a Rights-Based Regional Doctrine India's regional doctrine needs an explicit rights-based dimension. Instead of reactive diplomacy, India should adopt a proactive stance that integrates democratic values, human rights, and pluralism into its neighbourhood engagement strategy. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD This could include establishing a South Asia Minority Rights Watch under Indian auspices; regular parliamentary resolutions condemning violations of democratic norms in the neighbourhood; leveraging trade, aid, and connectivity projects to incentivise democratic reforms in Bangladesh; and strengthening regional alliances with democratic partners to build diplomatic consensus around human rights. India Must Lead with Courage and Conviction As Bangladesh flounders under authoritarian drift and Pakistan tramples over historic commitments, India must not be a silent bystander. Its leadership in South Asia is not merely geographical; it is moral and civilisational. Protecting minority rights, upholding democratic accountability, and challenging regional duplicity are not just strategic options—they are moral imperatives. In defending pluralism abroad, India affirms its own democratic soul at home and stakes its rightful claim as the conscience-keeper of South Asia. The writer is the Director General of the Centre for Land Warfare Studies. Lt Gen Dushyant Singh (Retd) is Director General, CLAWS. Views expressed are personal and do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Memri
25-07-2025
- Politics
- Memri
Pakistan Considers Gilgit-Baltistan A Burdensome Part Of Its Periphery – The Enduring Fallout Of The Karachi Agreement
For the people of Gilgit-Baltistan (GB), existence has unfolded as a relentless chronicle of adversity and marginalization. Officially labeled the "Northern Areas," the region has long been regarded by Pakistan not as a cherished part of the federation, but as a distant and burdensome periphery. Successive governments have turned a blind eye to the fundamental needs of the humble inhabitants of Gilgit-Baltistan, relegating the region to an ad hoc governance framework administered from afar governed not by participatory laws, but by decrees handed down from Islamabad. (Source: X) Pakistani Magazine "Herald" Described Gilgit-Baltistan As "The Last Colony" GB has been governed through decrees and presidential orders, denied representation in the National Assembly, and excluded from the constitutional framework that defines the rest of the country. This legal ambiguity stems from the Karachi Agreement of 1949,[1] a document signed in secrecy between Pakistan and Azad Kashmir, which transferred control of Gilgit-Baltistan to Islamabad without a single representative from the region present. In just one line, the fate of an entire people was sealed: "All affairs of the Gilgit and Ladakh areas under the control of the Political Agent at Gilgit." That line, devoid of consultation or consent, plunged Gilgit-Baltistan into decades of administrative neglect and political invisibility. GB was subjected to the colonial-era Frontier Crimes Regulation, a draconian legal framework that denied basic civil liberties. The Pakistani state, viewing Gilgit-Baltistan as a strategic asset rather than a community of citizens, tethered it to the Kashmir dispute for geopolitical leverage. As expert Nosheen Ali argues in the book "Delusional States: Feeling Rule and Development in Pakistan's Northern Frontier,"[2] this linkage was a calculated move to bolster Pakistan's position in a potential UN plebiscite, not a reflection of the region's identity or aspirations. The governance model imposed by Islamabad has consistently reflected a colonial mindset, prioritizing central control over participatory development. This sentiment was poignantly captured by the Pakistani magazine "Herald," which once described Gilgit-Baltistan as "the last colony," a haunting label that continues to echo in the collective memory of its people.[3] Even as early as August 14, 1964, the publication "Karachi Outlook" observed with striking clarity that the Ministry of Kashmir Affairs had entrenched itself with vested interests, treating Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan not as partners in governance but as subordinates in a dominion.[4] The ministry's preference, as the article noted, was for compliant figureheads, "puppets" rather than leaders who dared to interpret their roles with independence or purpose. Such revelations underscore a longstanding pattern of administrative manipulation and exclusion that has defined Gilgit-Baltistan's fraught relationship with the Pakistani state and perpetuated its constitutional obscurity. This disconnect has fostered a deeply flawed administrative framework, characterized by fragmentation and inefficiency. Today, Gilgit-Baltistan suffers from chronic underdevelopment, inadequate infrastructure, and a lack of basic services. Pakistan's mainstream political parties, continue to sideline the pressing needs of Gilgit-Baltistan's local communities. The proliferation of ten miniature districts for a population scarcely exceeding two million has stunted the evolution of robust local governance, diluting institutional capacity and cohesion. Alarmingly, the federal government now contemplates adding more revenue districts, an extension of this unsustainable administrative experimentation. In their effort to uphold this bureaucratic distortion, authorities risk resorting to taxation bereft of any representative mandate, thereby deepening public disenfranchisement and fueling resentment across the region. Gilgit-Baltistan Remains Under The Thumb Of Islamabad's Self-Governance Orders In Skardu, the largest city, residents endure up to 22 hours of load shedding in winter, relying on underperforming hydroelectric projects like the Satpara Dam, which was meant to power 40,000 homes but delivers only a fraction of its promise. The region remains disconnected from the national grid, a stark symbol of its isolation. Protests erupt regularly, with citizens braving freezing temperatures to demand land rights, oppose unjust taxation, and resist the encroachment of federal projects like CPEC that seize local land without compensation. The GB Revenue Authority Bill, which imposes taxes without offering representation, has become a flashpoint for public outrage. The people of Gilgit-Baltistan cannot vote in national elections, nor do they have a voice in shaping the policies that govern their lives. Gilgit-Baltistan remains under the thumb of Islamabad's self-governance orders, that consolidate power in the federal government and leave local institutions toothless. This has fueled a growing demand for constitutional rights, political recognition, and genuine autonomy. Activists like Shabir Choudhry continue to raise the alarm, warning that the region is teetering on the edge of chaos. With each passing year, the protests grow louder, the grievances deeper, and the urgency more palpable. Gilgit-Baltistan is not merely a disputed territory, it is a community yearning for justice, dignity, and the right to determine its own future. When Pakistan entered into a border agreement with China 1963, it ceded a portion of territory south of the Mintaka Pass, land historically belonging to Hunza to Beijing. This realignment of the boundary between China's Xinjiang province and Pakistan-administered territory was executed without any consultation with the people of Gilgit-Baltistan. The absence of local representation in such a consequential decision underscores the region's disenfranchisement and the extent to which its fate has been shaped by external interests. The construction of the Karakoram Highway (KKH). linking Pakistan with China through Gilgit-Baltistan, further entrenched this dynamic. The highway has facilitated the unchecked influx of weapons, narcotics, and religious militias into the region. These developments have not only destabilized the social fabric but have also precipitated a dramatic shift in the region's demographic. Historically, Shias and Ismailis comprised approximately 85 percent of the population. Today, that figure has dwindled to nearly half, a transformation driven in part by the systematic settlement of outsiders, an act widely perceived as an attempt to dilute the indigenous identity and alter the sectarian balance. Gilgit-Baltistan Stands Not Only As A Disputed Territory But As A Testament To The Enduring Consequences Of Governance Divorced From Representation And Accountability Successive governments have consistently failed to demonstrate genuine commitment to addressing the economic and political aspirations of Gilgit-Baltistan's people. Instead, the region has been subjected to chronic neglect, its strategic value prioritized over the welfare of its inhabitants. The demographic engineering and administrative marginalization reflect a broader pattern of exploitation, where the voices of the local population are silenced in favor of geopolitical maneuvering. In this context, Gilgit-Baltistan stands not only as a disputed territory but as a testament to the enduring consequences of governance divorced from representation and accountability. Over the years, the Karachi Agreement has emerged as a crucible of contention and reflection, reverberating through the intellectual corridors of constitutional debate and the impassioned narratives of Gilgit-Baltistan's political conscience. Legal minds, regional leaders, and activist voices alike have cast a critical eye upon the circumstances under which the agreement came into being, lamenting the stark absence of representation from those whose futures it reshaped so profoundly. Its signing, executed without consultation or consent, has stirred enduring questions about the legitimacy of governance imposed in silence. Can a pact that determines the course of a people's destiny be just if they were denied a seat at the table? Will it be treated at par with the other provinces, and if not, does Pakistan accept that it remains a disputed province?
Time of India
11-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Thaw in hostilities on India's terms, says BJP, dismisses claims of US pressure
NEW DELHI: on Saturday dismissed claims that the pause in hostilities between India and Pakistan was driven by US pressure , emphasising that the agreement was firmly on New Delhi's terms. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Contrasting the current understanding with past instances where India lost strategic advantages, the party credited the govt for rewriting the narrative. Citing India's new ' war doctrine ' that any act of terror will be treated as an 'act of war' against India, a BJP neta said only the US and Israel had comparable doctrines, marking India's assertive global stance. The functionary also highlighted India's leverage over the , which remains unaffected by the current India-Pakistan border understanding. Notably, World Bank, once a guarantor, has distanced itself from the treaty, strengthening India's position. "India is a rising economic power , while Pakistan is a struggling state. Our focus is the welfare of 140 crore Indians, not wasting time on a delinquent jihadi state," the BJP neta said. BJP contrasted the current pause in hostilities with historical agreements where India ceded advantages. The 1949 ceasefire, based on the Karachi Agreement, followed US-brokered talks and UN monitoring. The 1965 war ended with the Tashkent Declaration, mediated by the Soviet Union and the US, forcing India to return hard-won territories. The 1971 war, despite Pakistan's surrender, led to the Simla Agreement under Moscow's and Washington's influence. India released 99,000 prisoners without securing strategic gains, such as Pakistan vacating POK or formalising borders. The Indian Peacekeeping Force (IPKF) operation in Sri Lanka (1987-1990) drained resources and ended in withdrawal, costing the life of former PM Rajiv Gandhi. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Similarly, the 1999 Kargil war ceasefire, facilitated by the Clinton administration, saw India halt its offensive just as victory was in sight, missing a tactical opportunity. BJP said the current pause in hostilities reflected New Delhi's terms, prioritising national security and economic progress while maintaining strategic leverage. This approach, the party argued, ensured India's rise as a global power, unburdened by past concessions or external pressures.
Mint
04-05-2025
- Politics
- Mint
Pakistan violates ceasefire agreement with India for 10th day: Why does it continue to fire across the Line of Control?
Pakistani troops continued their pattern of unprovoked small arms firing across multiple sectors along the Line of Control (LoC) in Jammu and Kashmir, drawing a strong and effective response from the Indian Army, officials said on Sunday. This marks the 10th consecutive night of cross-border firing, occurring amid escalating tensions following the April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam, which killed 26 people, most of them tourists. According to officials, ceasefire violations were reported from eight locations across five districts of the Union Territory during the intervening night of Saturday and Sunday. Fortunately, no casualties have been reported so far. 'During the night of May 3 and 4, Pakistan Army posts resorted to unprovoked small arms fire across the LoC in areas opposite Kupwara, Baramulla, Poonch, Rajouri, Mendhar, Naushera, Sunderbani, and Akhnoor in J&K. Indian Army responded promptly and proportionately,' a defence spokesperson said. The ceasefire violations along the LoC and International Border (IB) have been very rare since India and Pakistan renewed the ceasefire agreement on February 25, 2021. India shares a total of 3,323 km of border with Pakistan, divided into three parts: the International Border (IB), approximately 2,400 km from Gujarat to the northern banks of the Chenab River in Akhnoor, Jammu; the Line of Control (LoC), 740 km long, running from parts of Jammu to parts of Leh; and the Actual Ground Position Line (AGPL), 110 km long, dividing the Siachen region from NJ 9842 to Indira Col in the north. The LoC, serving as the de facto border, stretches for approximately 740 kilometres, from Sangam in Kashmir to Point NJ-9842 near the Siachen Glacier. In Jammu, the LoC transitions into what India considers the International Border (IB), as India has no territorial claims on Pakistani Punjab. The Ceasefire Line between India and Pakistan was initially established under the Karachi Agreement of 1949, following the 1948–49 war. It was later renamed the Line of Control (LoC) after the Simla Agreement in 1972. Though not recognised as an international boundary, the LoC functions as a military control line between the two countries. However, cross-border firing and the infiltration of Pakistan-backed terrorists, particularly since the onset of the Kashmir insurgency in 1989, along with attacks by Pakistani Border Action Teams (BATs), have rendered the ceasefire 'agreement' effectively meaningless. Periods like the 1990s and the span between 2016 and 2021 saw over a thousand violations annually, with the 1990s often described by Indian Army veterans as a 'free for all' along the Line of Control. In 2021, both militaries found mutual incentive to curb hostilities and reaffirmed the 2003 ceasefire understanding, originally established ahead of the India-Pakistan Composite Dialogue. Despite the broader breakdown in diplomatic and economic ties since 2019, the military channel remains the only active line of bilateral communication, giving both nations a reason to maintain the current ceasefire arrangement. According to (Retd) IFS officer Anil Trigunayat, former Ambassador to Jordan, Libya and Malta, ceasefire violations are mostly cover fires to enable the entry of terrorists, and to provoke India to retaliate. 'Mostly it does to facilitate the entry of terrorists across the border by providing fire cover. Secondly it wishes to provoke India to retaliate and use grey zone warfare to accuse India of violation to garner international sympathy and domestic support as it goes through tremendous financial and socio-economic stress," the former Ambassador told Livemint. Over the past four years, Pakistan's economy has steadily declined, while the military's dominant hold over the country is increasingly being challenged by insurgent groups such as the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA), and Balochistan Liberation Front (BLF). Following the Taliban's return to power in Afghanistan, the TTP significantly escalated its operations, leading to a 73% surge in terror attacks across Pakistan in the first 21 months of Taliban rule, according to a report by ORF. The province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has been hit hardest, witnessing an alarming 279.8% rise in incidents, jumping from 572 in 2021 to 2,173 in 2024. Meanwhile, the BLA and BLF have also stepped up their offensives, particularly targeting Pakistani military installations, further destabilizing internal security from multiple fronts, according to the report. First Published: 4 May 2025, 08:14 PM IST
