In the quiet, forested valleys of Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK), where life once followed the rhythm of seasons and prayer calls, an unrelenting silence now hangs heavy. Since the revocation of Article 370 by the Indian government in 2019, the region has been effectively transformed into a security garrison, with curfews, surveillance, communication blackouts, and arrests marking everyday life. For the Kashmiri population, cut off from the outside world, their political voice suppressed, and their identity threatened, this lockdown has not been merely an administrative decision. It has become a lived trauma.
Follow CPF WhatsApp Channel for Daily Exam Updates
Led by Sir Syed Kazim Ali, Cssprepforum helps 70,000+ aspirants monthly with top-tier CSS/PMS content. Follow our WhatsApp Channel for solved past papers, expert articles, and free study resources shared by qualifiers and high scorers.
Pakistan, long a self-declared advocate for the Kashmiri cause, now finds itself in a complex diplomatic conundrum. The question no longer remains whether Pakistan should act; rather, it is how to act in a way that is principled, effective, and realistic in the current global and regional order. With tensions already strained between Islamabad and New Delhi, Pakistan’s policy choices must reflect both moral urgency and strategic prudence.
The situation on the ground remains grim. Indian forces, numbering over 900,000, have entrenched themselves across IIOJK, ensuring the suppression of public dissent and stifling even peaceful civil expressions of political will. Journalists are harassed, local leaders imprisoned, and the demography of the region appears to be undergoing forced alteration through legal and bureaucratic maneuvers. These developments have alarmed human rights observers around the world, yet responses from global powers have remained largely symbolic or muted.
In this context, Pakistan’s first and most immediate policy option lies in international law and diplomacy. The United Nations Security Council, under Article 39 of Chapter VII, holds a mandate to address threats to international peace. While the UNSC’s record on Kashmir is far from assertive, Pakistan can continue to frame India’s actions, particularly the unilateral abrogation of Article 370, as a violation of both the Shimla Agreement and longstanding UN resolutions. It is important that Pakistan persists in bringing the issue before the Council, not only to highlight the human rights abuses but also to stress the larger risks of conflict escalation between two nuclear-armed neighbors.
Additionally, Pakistan should leverage its membership in international human rights institutions, most notably the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC). By using the council's platform to present documented cases of illegal detentions, enforced disappearances, and suppression of political freedoms in IIOJK, Pakistan can work toward building a coalition of conscience. The UNHRC has, in the past, published reports critical of Indian conduct in Kashmir. These can be used as the foundation for more sustained diplomatic engagement, with calls for independent investigations, observer missions, and consistent monitoring.
Parallel to these legal and diplomatic routes, political unity within Pakistan remains crucial. A fragmented national discourse weakens Pakistan’s credibility on the international stage. Therefore, uniting all major political parties under a national front for Kashmir would lend weight to Pakistan’s claims and help coordinate foreign policy efforts more efficiently. A reinvigorated Kashmir Committee, composed of diverse political voices, could serve as a permanent body to liaise with international stakeholders, diaspora communities, and advocacy networks. Moreover, appointing a special envoy dedicated solely to the Kashmir issue, with a clear mandate and resources, would signal Islamabad’s commitment and keep global attention from drifting away.
Beyond these forums, Pakistan also has the option of presenting the case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), particularly focusing on human rights violations and India's breach of international humanitarian laws. Although India has generally refused third-party mediation, and legal outcomes at the ICJ are often slow and non-binding without mutual consent, such a move would reinforce Pakistan’s commitment to lawful and non-violent solutions. It would also further internationalize the dispute in legal discourse, bringing in scholars, rights groups, and media coverage.
Nevertheless, not all policy tools lie in the corridors of diplomacy. Pakistan can, and should, make more strategic use of soft power to support the Kashmiri cause. Media campaigns, public diplomacy, and international lobbying can play an essential role in shaping global public opinion. Pakistan's media outlets and state broadcasters should allocate more consistent airtime to Kashmir, not through emotional rhetoric, but with facts, voices from the ground, and insights from credible journalists. Similarly, embassies and consulates must regularly host discussions, publish policy briefs, and engage with think tanks to ensure that Kashmir remains visible on the global policy radar.
Moreover, people-to-people solidarity campaigns can add an important dimension. Pakistan's civil society, universities, and artists can initiate cultural and educational exchanges that highlight the heritage of Kashmir while underscoring the consequences of its militarization. The goal must be to humanize the Kashmiri experience beyond numbers and slogans.
Pakistan can also advocate for structured peace talks, either bilaterally or through third-party mediation. While New Delhi has consistently rejected outside intervention, changing geopolitical alignments and domestic pressures may make dialogue a more palatable option over time. Engaging influential states such as China, Turkey, and even members of the European Union to mediate or observe discussions could be explored. Furthermore, Pakistan should make use of platforms like the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and the European Parliament to push for fact-finding missions and policy discussions on Kashmir.
However, the conversation around hard power cannot be entirely ignored, especially as the situation in IIOJK deteriorates. The first form of hard power is material support. While military aid is neither advisable nor internationally tenable, providing humanitarian assistance through non-governmental channels, such as medicines, food supplies, and digital connectivity tools, can help Kashmiris cope with the lockdown’s material hardships. Similarly, intelligence sharing and technological support aimed at documenting abuses, such as satellite imagery or secure communication networks, can empower civil resistance within Kashmir.
The second form, direct military engagement, must be treated with utmost caution. Although some quarters argue that a limited conflict might force international intervention, the reality is more dangerous. Both Pakistan and India possess nuclear arsenals, and any military escalation, whether over the Line of Control or in adjacent territories, carries the risk of spiraling beyond control. Military action must remain the last and least desirable resort. Instead, Pakistan's strategic posture should focus on deterrence, readiness, and moral high ground, rather than confrontation.
In evaluating its options, Pakistan must also remain aware of its own internal challenges. Economic instability, political polarization, and governance issues can weaken its position abroad. If the international community is to take Pakistan’s advocacy seriously, it must demonstrate domestic coherence, legal transparency, and moral consistency. Addressing issues of minority rights, press freedom, and judicial independence at home will only strengthen Islamabad’s hand when it demands the same of India in Kashmir.
Join 3-Day Free Orientation for CSS/PMS English Essay & Precis Course
Learn to Qualify for CSS 2026/27 & PMS with Sir Syed Kazim Ali’s free 3-day online orientation. Learn essay & precis writing. Limited seats available; register via WhatsApp by June 29!
In essence, Pakistan’s policy choices require a careful balance of assertiveness and restraint. The urgency of the Kashmiri plight demands sustained diplomatic pressure, unified national resolve, and creative non-military solutions. The international environment may not always appear favorable, but history has shown that persistent, principled diplomacy, rooted in law and human rights, can shift even the most entrenched narratives.
At the heart of this issue are not just treaties and resolutions, but people. Families torn apart, futures darkened, and voices silenced. The struggle of Kashmiris is not a distant issue confined to territorial maps or constitutional clauses. It is a living reality that calls for dignity, freedom, and justice. While Pakistan’s capacity to influence outcomes is constrained, its responsibility to try remains undiminished. The path forward lies not in impulsive escalation, but in unwavering commitment to principle, peace, and the promise of self-determination.
