G20 in Kashmir: India’s goals & summit outcome
THE decision to hold a Group of 20 (G20) tourism meeting in Indian Illegally Indian Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK), the first diplomatic event in the disputed region since New Delhi revoked Kashmir’s special status in 2019, has drawn significant attention and sparked controversy.
Under the banner of creating a “New Kashmir” or “Naya Kashmir,” the Indian government has taken measures to silence the voices of the territory’s people and restrict the freedom of its press. This approach is part of India’s attempt to project a sense of normalization in its occupation of Kashmir. India’s decision of hosting the G20 summit not only reveals its aspirations to exert a greater influence on the global stage but also signifies its intent to shape the narrative on crucial matters. Through this meeting, India wanted to utilize its position to advance its developmental objectives, attract foreign investment and bolster its diplomatic stature. India aimed to exhibit its economic growth, technological advancements and dedication to international collaboration. However, the recent release of the UN special report highlighting severe human rights violations by India poses a significant hurdle in the realization of its ambitions.
Despite the Indian government’s efforts to project a sense of normalcy and peace in the region, the choice to host the G20 Tourism Summit in Kashmir has raised eyebrows and intensified the debate surrounding the situation. Security measures have been significantly heightened for the event with roads leading to the venue meticulously prepared and a heavy presence of security forces. While Indian officials argue that these measures are necessary to prevent any potential terrorist attacks, critics view them as further evidence of the ongoing militarization and securitization of the region. Instead of showcasing a peaceful and prosperous Kashmir, the event brought to the forefront the ongoing dispute and the need for a resolution that respects the rights and aspirations of the people of Kashmir.
UN Special Rapporteur on Minority Issues, Fernand de Varennes, has strongly criticized India’s decision to host the summit in Kashmir, citing the serious human rights violations and the revocation of Kashmir’s special status in 2019. He said, “The government of India is seeking to normalize what some have described as a military occupation by instrumentalizing a G20 meeting and portraying an international seal of approval.”
The refusal of key players, such as China, Turkiye and Saudi Arabia, to participate has highlighted the international community’s concerns regarding the region’s disputed status. Egypt, invited as a guest despite not being a G20 member, has also refrained from attending the event. As the G20 presidency is cyclic, the decision for India to hold a session in a disputed region will forever be remembered as a contentious move in history.
This collective action serves as a powerful show of solidarity with the oppressed people of occupied Kashmir and undermines India’s efforts to present a sanitized image while concealing ongoing human rights violations. It also demonstrates the hesitation of G20 countries in endorsing India’s normalization agenda and undermines her efforts to present a sanitized image while concealing ongoing human rights violations.
It is unfortunate that G20’s Western members, who have been vocal critics of Russia’s occupation of Ukraine, have given their stamp of approval to India’s occupation of Kashmir. The international community must critically analyze the implications of holding such a high-profile event in a region where deep-rooted conflicts persist. The spotlight on Kashmir brings into focus the urgent need for a peaceful resolution to the dispute between India and Pakistan, according to United Nations resolutions, and one that takes into account the aspirations and rights of the people of Kashmir.
—The writer is Assistant Director, NUST Institute of Policy Studies (NIPS)
