Despite the passage of seven years since India illegally revoked the statehood of Indian Illegally Oc-cupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK) and ended its special status, New Delhi has not been able to control the security situation in any part of the occupied territory.
Rather, the security situation and unrest among the masses across IIOJK have further deteriorated. The people of IIOJK have rejected every step the Indian Government has taken since August 5, 2019, when it acted unilaterally and illegally, revoking the special status of IIOJK granted through Article 370 of the Indian Constitution and later supplemented by Article 35A in 1954. That act was illegal, immoral and a blatant violation of international law, UN resolutions and the Constitution of IIOJK itself.
The special status of IIOJK under Article 370 was a temporary, transitional and provisional arrange-ment, asserting that Kashmir was not a part of India. This position was to remain effective until the people of Kashmir determined their future through a free and fair plebiscite as per UN resolutions. In the last seventy-eight years, a plebiscite could not be held only because of India’s perpetual reluctance, sustained through a deliberate strategy of prolonging the dispute and buying time to alter its nature. Article 370 was to remain valid until the conduct of that plebiscite. Undoing it required the Constituent Assembly, or at a minimum, the Legislative Assembly of IIOJK—neither of which was convened. Instead, India imposed President’s Rule to implement its illegal annexation through unconstitutional means.
Subsequent to August 5, 2019, New Delhi introduced yet another illegal measure—the “Adaptation of State Laws Order-2020”—designed to grant Kashmiri citizenship to non-Kashmiris and engineer massive demographic changes. This constitutes a direct violation of international law, UNCIP resolutions, UNSC Resolutions 91 and 122 and the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949. Article 49(6) of that Convention explicitly prohibits an occupying power from transferring its own civilian population into occupied territory. India, as a signatory state, is legally bound to observe these provisions. Its actions in IIOJK amount to a willful and deliberate breach of this foundational obligation. Official data presented to the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly confirmed that the demo-graphic re-engineering is well underway, with domicile certificates being systematically issued to non-Kashmiri residents. Critics have drawn parallels between India’s settler-colonial approach in IIOJK and Israel’s expansion of settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory—a comparison that reflects the gravity of what is unfolding on the ground.
The events of April 2025 brought the consequences of India’s failed occupation strategy into sharp relief. The Pahalgam massacre of April 22, 2025, in which 26 tourists were killed, shattered India’s carefully constructed narrative that the revocation of Article 370 had brought normalcy to Kashmir. Instead of conducting a transparent investigation, India launched a sweeping security crackdown involving mass detentions, raids and the demolition of civilian homes. Communities were placed under intense surveillance and daily life was disrupted across the occupied territory. On May 7, 2025, India launched Operation Sindoor, targeting alleged militant infrastructure inside Pakistan and Azad Jammu and Kashmir, triggering a four-day military conflict between two nuclear-armed states. A ceasefire was eventually reached on May 10, 2025, but the underlying dispute remained entirely unresolved.
The pattern of collective punishment has only intensified since then. As recently as July 2026, Indian forces conducted sweeping cordon-and-search operations across IIOJK, arresting at least 3,000 Kashmiri youth from multiple districts, including Srinagar, Shopian, Pulwama, Baramulla and Kupwara. Human rights observers have noted that such crackdowns frequently coincide with periods of political pressure within India itself, with mass detentions serving to divert domestic attention rather than address genuine security concerns. India is simultaneously building a four-layer security grid across IIOJK on a war footing, with new police posts, upgraded surveillance systems and counter-drone infrastructure, turning the territory into what observers have described as a giant open-air prison.The international community has not remained entirely silent. The 51st session of the OIC Council of Foreign Ministers, held in Istanbul in June 2025, adopted a comprehensive resolution firmly rejecting India’s illegal and unilateral actions to change the demographic structure of IIOJK, in contravention of the UN Charter, relevant Security Council resolutions and the Fourth Geneva Convention. Yet the UN Security Council and its permanent members have remained conspicuously passive. The Responsibility to Protect, invoked freely elsewhere, has not been applied to Kashmir—a selective silence that damages the credibility of the international legal order.
The Government of Pakistan must continue to approach the UN Human Rights Council, the ICJ, the ICC and all available international forums regarding the massive human rights violations and demographic changes being imposed in IIOJK. The UN and the international community must press India to restore the special status of IIOJK and take concrete steps toward the permanent resolution of this dispute in accordance with the wishes of its people. A governance model built on detention, demolition and demographic engineering does not resolve disputes—it deepens them. Seven years of repression have proven that beyond all reasonable doubt.
— The writer is Professor of Politics and IR at International Islamic University, Islamabad.
