Once the flashpoint of global concern and international diplomacy, the Kashmir dispute has gradually faded from the mainstream geopolitical radar. What was once considered the “nuclear tinderbox” of South Asia now appears to be locked in a cycle of diplomatic apathy, political suppression, and humanitarian neglect. With international actors increasingly silent, India tightening its administrative grip, and Pakistan struggling to maintain momentum, the issue seems to teeter between being a frozen conflict and a forgotten cause. Against this backdrop, this editorial aims to unpack the evolution of the Kashmir dispute, examine the shifting international response, highlight the strategic silence of global powers, and assess whether the people of Kashmir have become victims not only of military aggression but of collective amnesia.
To understand the current impasse, it is essential to revisit the conflict’s roots. The Kashmir dispute began with the partition of British India in 1947. The princely state of Jammu and Kashmir, under Maharaja Hari Singh, initially chose to remain independent. However, following an invasion by tribal militias from Pakistan, the Maharaja acceded to India under duress, prompting the first Indo-Pak war. The United Nations intervened and called for a plebiscite to determine the wishes of the Kashmiri people, a promise that remains unfulfilled. This unresolved status has since triggered three wars, multiple insurgencies, and continuous cross-border tensions.
While Pakistan views Kashmir as its “jugular vein,” India regards it as an integral part of its union. In this geopolitical struggle, the people of Kashmir have suffered the most, through militarization, enforced disappearances, and political alienation. Matters worsened on August 5, 2019, when India revoked Article 370 of its constitution, stripping Jammu and Kashmir of its special status. This was followed by a communication blackout, mass detentions, and increased military deployment. Although international reactions initially ranged from concern to condemnation, global attention quickly faded. In an age of shifting headlines and transient concerns, Kashmir is increasingly treated as a ‘settled’ or ‘internal’ matter. But is the conflict truly frozen, or just conveniently forgotten?
The Eroding Global Conscience on the Kashmir Dispute
India’s Strategic Normalization and Narrative Management
In recent years, India has worked to normalize the post-2019 status quo. By revoking Article 370 and bifurcating the region into union territories, New Delhi asserted administrative control and sought to redefine the public narrative. The government now promotes investment, infrastructure, and elections as proof of progress. However, this “normalcy” is often enforced through repression. Laws like the Public Safety Act (PSA) and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) are used to silence opposition and journalists. India has also shaped global perceptions by framing criticism as interference or support for terrorism. This tactic discourages Western democracies from raising objections. Media access to Kashmir remains restricted, and local journalists face censorship and harassment. As a result, critical narratives have been muted, and the international spotlight has dimmed.
Pakistan’s Diminishing Diplomatic Clout
Pakistan, once an active advocate for Kashmir, has seen its diplomatic effectiveness decline. In response to the 2019 move, Islamabad downgraded ties with India and raised the issue at the UN and OIC. However, that momentum was short-lived. Domestic political instability, economic struggles, and shifting civil-military dynamics have pushed Kashmir lower on Pakistan’s foreign policy agenda. Pakistan’s focus on IMF negotiations, FATF compliance, and relations with Gulf States and the U.S. has sidelined its Kashmir advocacy. For example, during Pakistan’s 2022-23 financial crisis, much of its diplomatic energy was absorbed by urgent efforts to secure a $3 billion IMF bailout, as reported by The Economist and Reuters, overshadowing international human rights advocacy. Moreover, Islamabad's continued invocation of UN Security Council resolutions, while legally sound, is increasingly met with diplomatic fatigue. The absence of a well-organized global media strategy and effective lobbying further undermines Pakistan’s credibility. Consequently, its narrative on Kashmir struggles to gain international traction.
The Deafening Silence of the Global Community
Perhaps the most telling aspect of the Kashmir crisis today is the conspicuous silence of the international community. Western democracies, long considered champions of human rights and self-determination, now appear unwilling to challenge India. Strategic interests have clearly taken precedence over moral imperatives. For instance, the United States under the Biden administration views India as a vital counterweight to China in the Indo-Pacific. In June 2023, during Prime Minister Modi’s state visit to Washington, President Biden praised India’s democratic credentials while sidestepping questions on Kashmir and minority rights—highlighting the selective nature of U.S. engagement. The European Union, too, has been hesitant to alienate India—one of the world’s largest markets. While human rights organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch continue to document abuses, their advocacy is increasingly isolated from policy decisions. Even the United Nations, despite its own resolutions, has limited its response to sporadic reports and statements—none of which have led to meaningful action. Hence, this deliberate indifference sends a dangerous message: that Kashmir can be erased from the global conscience simply because it no longer aligns with prevailing geopolitical interests.
Human Rights Crisis and Civil Liberties in Kashmir
Beyond the political maneuvering lies a deeply unsettling humanitarian picture. Reports by credible organizations, including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the UN OHCHR, paint a grim reality of a region under siege. Arbitrary arrests, prolonged detentions without trial, the use of pellet guns against civilians, and chronic internet shutdowns have become distressingly common. After August 2019, in particular, thousands—including political leaders, activists, and even minors, were detained under preventive laws. According to a 2022 report by Amnesty International, over 5,000 people were taken into custody in the immediate aftermath of the abrogation of Article 370. Also, educational institutions and businesses suffered due to the communication blackouts that lasted for months, causing long-term economic and psychological harm. Journalists and activists who dare to dissent face relentless persecution under vague anti-terror provisions. Alarmingly, the psychological toll on the population, especially the youth, is severe. A generation is growing up in a climate of fear, surveillance, and hopelessness. The erosion of civil liberties in Kashmir should have triggered robust international action. Instead, it has been met with muted responses from global capitals, reinforcing the perception that Kashmiris have been forsaken.
A Conflict Ripe for Exploitation by Extremist Elements
The vacuum created by international apathy has broader security implications. Historically, prolonged political repression and the absence of democratic avenues often pave the way for extremist narratives. The longer the Kashmir issue remains unresolved, the more susceptible it becomes to exploitation by radical elements. While Pakistan officially denies providing support to insurgents, the possibility of radicalization cannot be ignored—especially among disenfranchised youth. A 2021 report by the Observer Research Foundation noted a sharp rise in local recruitment into militant outfits, with over 180 young Kashmiris reportedly joining insurgent groups that year alone. In such a climate, extremist groups may find sympathy or even recruits, escalating regional instability. This is not merely a domestic issue for India or Pakistan. In a nuclearized South Asia, the consequences of renewed insurgency or cross-border conflict could be catastrophic. Global disengagement, under the pretense of neutrality, risks enabling a slow-burning conflict to erupt once more.
Despite their claims of ownership and concern, both India and Pakistan have often instrumentalized Kashmir for strategic ends. While India highlights development as a counter to dissent, such progress cannot justify the denial of basic civil rights. Conversely, Pakistan's repeated emphasis on self-determination loses credibility when juxtaposed with the governance gaps and autonomy constraints in Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan. Moreover, international organizations must confront their own failures—especially the inability to maintain consistent moral pressure over time. Rather than treating the conflict as merely a territorial dispute or bilateral deadlock, the global community must recognize the deeper human dimension of the crisis. Kashmir is, first and foremost, a human tragedy before it is a geopolitical challenge. Therefore, any resolution that marginalizes Kashmiri voices is not just incomplete but fundamentally illegitimate.
In conclusion, the Kashmir dispute, once central to South Asian diplomacy and international engagement, now drifts between stasis and oblivion. What persists is not peace but a fragile, enforced calm, maintained through political silencing, strategic realignments, and a global community increasingly complicit in its silence. If this trend continues, and the issue is allowed to fade from global conscience, the cost will not be abstract—it will be deeply human, borne by millions living under prolonged lockdown, surveillance, and fear. Therefore, it is imperative that the international community re-engage with the Kashmir question—not for geopolitical advantage, but out of a long-overdue moral responsibility. Ultimately, as long as the voices of the Kashmiri people remain unheard and unrepresented, the conflict cannot be considered frozen—it can only be called forgotten.
