AT the time of partition of the sub-continent in 1947, all princely states were to be integrated into neighbouring provinces based on geographic proximity and religious majority.
However, Kashmir’s case was unique.
Despite having a 95% Muslim population, it had been sold by the British to Maharaja Gulab Singh and his heirs under the 1846 Treaty of Amritsar for 7.5 million rupees, a striking example of colonial manipulation, exploitation and indirect rule.
Local Kashmiris however, never reconciled to the domination of Sikhs and Dogras.
Their uprising in 1947 turned into a general revolt and eventually liberated a small region, now called ‘Azad Jammu & Kashmir (AJK)’.
Their rapid military advances led to a swiftly negotiated ceasefire under United Nations auspices, with an explicit commitment to a free and impartial plebiscite to determine Kashmir’s future.
Despite longstanding international assurances of the Kashmiri people’s right to self-determination, the unresolved impasse continues to endure, with devastating consequences for Kashmiris, particularly women and children, in Indian administered Kashmir.
As India’s global standing rises with strong backing from the West, its hardened stance on Kashmir is deepening divisions and adding to ongoing tensions in the region.
India used US support to extend its reach on Pakistan’s western borders and built its intelligence bases in Afghanistan and Iran, laid a barricade of consulates at Pak- Afghan and Pak-Iran borders, helping it carry out operations against Pakistan, especially in Balochistan and FATA.
Keeping Pakistan’s western borders active, India seeks to maintain tension along the Line of Control (LOC) in Kashmir to influence both its internal and external policies, while keeping Pakistan under pressure.
As a Kashmiri myself and a combat veteran who actively participated in operations in Kashmir and Afghanistan, I take it as a national duty to share my thoughts on some key facts and context behind the recent Pahalgam terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir, as well as its possible consequences.
The attack on tourists in Pahalgam has strengthened tensions between India and Pakistan amid fears of military escalation that could have global consequences.
India accuses Pakistan of supporting militants who cross the border to carry out attacks, while Pakistan denies the allegation and maintains that it only supports the Kashmiri people’s right to self-determination.
The Resistance Front (TRF), believed to be a proxy for Lashkar-e-Taiba and blamed for these attacks has also retracted its claim of responsibility for the Pahalgam terror attack.
It alleges Indian cyber-intelligence operatives, claiming their initial statement was planted.
It’s often useful to revisit some past events masked as grand narratives to better understand current realities.
Just before the 1989 Indian general elections, Indian forces planned an operation in the Bagh Valley to seize key strategic heights, an effort aimed at shaping public opinion in favour of the ruling political party.
At the time, I was the Brigade Major (BM), an operational staff officer in the sector and privy to our countermeasures, which effectively thwarted their plan.
The operation never advanced beyond artillery and mortar shelling from across the Line of Control.
The Kargil conflict of May 1999, often mischaracterized as a war, led to a tense stand-off seen by many as a potential nuclear flashpoint.
What is frequently overlooked, is its connection to the earlier Siachen operation, where Indian forces, taking advantage of harsh weather, occupied vacated positions on the Siachen glacier.
At the time, I was overseeing security and counterintelligence in Pakistan Army’s premier intelligence agency.
The Kargil operation was essentially a repeat of India’s Siachen strategy.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi began his tenure in 2014 with a gesture of peace and friendship.
However, relations soured after a 2016 attack in Uri sector, seen by some as politically timed.
In 2019, following the Pulwama terror attack, India launched airstrikes in Pakistan, a run-up to revoking Jammu and Kashmir’s special status.
As history shows, in each of the incidents mentioned above, there was a motive behind for which the Indians sought a premise to act upon.
While projecting a focus on global ambitions, New Delhi has largely maintained calm along the LOC since 2021, showing strategic restraint toward Pakistan.
However, India’s stance has recently hardened, possibly capitalizing on Pakistan’s internal unrest and border tensions with Afghanistan and Iran.
This terror attack came as Pakistan’s military face mounting pressure from a wave of militant violence, compounded by political turmoil and ill-timed governance setbacks, constrictive to an effective response.
The attack’s timing with Vice President JD Vance’s visit to India appears strategic, signalling caution to the US as it navigates ties with Pakistan.
Modi’s Washington visit reaffirmed India’s importance but also revealed its limitations in countering China.
As the US seeks a reliable partner in the region, this incident may be aimed at influencing diplomatic dynamics and testing the depth of the evolving US-India and US-Pak relationships.
Given the historical context of Indian tactics in Kashmir, it is evident that this terror attack was also a calculated false flag operation, serving a multipurpose agenda.
Pakistan has responded cautiously.
In past crises, the US helped ease tensions, but President Trump’s recent comments do not suggest a similar role under the present environments.
Despite a shady background, this incident may result into a breakdown of the ceasefire along the LOC or a broader tit-for-tat military escalation after a stalemate of couple of years.
Limited skirmishes have already been reported.
The emerging scenario will adversary impact both the countries.
The incident further complicates South Asia’s already shifting strategic landscape, marked by evolving security dynamics and emerging alliances.
Without strong international pressure to de-escalate, the main deterrents remain fears of nuclear escalation and economic fallout.
Having spent decades countering meticulously crafted conspiracies by our Indian counterparts, I can state with confidence that it is strategically imperative for both sides to base all hypotheses in reality, rather than in manufactured crises or manipulated narratives, particularly those exploiting religious beliefs to mislead or deceive.
—The writer is Security Professional, entrepreneur and author, based in Dubai, UAE.
