Why integrating J&K with Pakistan is a mirage
New Delhi: For over seventy years, Pakistan has harboured aspirations of incorporating Jammu and Kashmir, including Pakistan-Occupied Jammu & Kashmir (PoJK), into its territory.
This ambition has been a foundational element of its national narrative, driven by religious, strategic, and ideological motivations. However, despite the political rhetoric, emotional appeals, and the manipulation of religious sentiments, the notion of integrating Jammu and Kashmir into Pakistan remains impractical.
It is, in reality, an illusion—one that disregards the region’s intricate history, its political realities, and the significant economic and social challenges that Pakistan currently faces.
This article examines why the aspiration to integrate Jammu and Kashmir, including PoJK, into Pakistan is not only unrealistic but also a farcical pursuit that should be set aside in favour of more attainable and constructive objectives.
Pakistan’s claim to Jammu and Kashmir is rooted in the two-nation theory, which argues that Muslims and Hindus constituted separate nations requiring distinct homelands.
Based on this logic, Pakistan believes that Kashmir, with its Muslim-majority population, should have acceded to it in 1947. However, this oversimplified narrative overlooks the actual historical and political complexities of the region. Jammu and Kashmir was not a typical province of British India; it was a princely state ruled by Maharaja Hari Singh, a Hindu, while its population was predominantly Muslim.
At the time of Partition in 1947, the princely states were given the option to join either India or Pakistan. Contrary to Pakistan’s narrative, Maharaja Hari Singh chose to accede to India after Pakistan’s armed tribal forces invaded the region.
This accession was legally valid under the terms of the Indian Independence Act, of 1947, and was later ratified by the Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir.
Pakistan’s continued emphasis on the two-nation theory also disregards the pluralistic nature of Kashmir’s society, which has historically been home to diverse communities, including Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, and Buddhists. The notion that Kashmir’s Muslim majority automatically implies a desire to join Pakistan is an oversimplification of the region’s political and cultural landscape.
Pakistan’s aggression and the creation of PoJK
The term Pakistan-Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK) stems from Pakistan’s initial military incursion into the area. Rather than representing a “liberation” of the Kashmiri populace, Pakistan’s invasion in 1947 resulted in extensive violence, displacement, and instability.
The ensuing Indo-Pak war led to the creation of the Line of Control (LoC), which effectively partitioned the region. PoJK has remained under Pakistani administration ever since, despite the fact that no international organisation, including the United Nations, acknowledges it as part of Pakistan.
Furthermore, the assertion that Pakistan acted in defence of Kashmiri self-determination is undermined by its own conduct. Pakistan failed to meet the precondition established by the United Nations for the withdrawal of its forces from the region, which was necessary before any plebiscite could occur.
Therefore, Pakistan’s control over PoJK is not only illegal but also constitutes a historical betrayal of the very people it claims to champion.
Despite its claims of liberating Kashmir, Pakistan has done little to enhance the lives of the people residing in Pakistan-Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK). Legally, PoJK is governed under a separate framework, the “Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, 1974.”
This act provides limited autonomy but places the region under the control of Pakistan’s Ministry of Kashmir Affairs. The inhabitants of PoJK do not enjoy the same rights and political representation as citizens in Pakistan’s other provinces.
In reality, PoJK is treated as a colony rather than as an integral part of Pakistan. Its political leadership is often handpicked by Islamabad, and the region’s political autonomy is a mere formality. The notion that Pakistan can successfully integrate the rest of Jammu and Kashmir into its fold is farcical when it cannot even grant full rights and autonomy to PoJK, which has been under its control for more than seven decades.
PoJK as a hotbed of militancy and instability
In addition to political marginalization, Pakistan-Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK) has been afflicted by militancy. The region has become a breeding ground for various militant groups, many of which have received implicit support from Pakistan’s intelligence agencies. These groups have not only targeted India but have also turned against the local population, resulting in widespread violence and instability.
The turmoil in PoJK serves as a stark reminder of the repercussions of Pakistan’s policies in Kashmir. If Pakistan is unable to guarantee peace, stability, or development in this small area it controls, how can it expect to manage the entire region if Jammu and Kashmir were to somehow become part of its territory? The current state of affairs in PoJK offers a grim preview of what the rest of Jammu and Kashmir would resemble under Pakistani control: underdeveloped, unstable, and ravaged by violence.
Pakistan’s economy is ill-equipped to absorb Jammu and Kashmir, a region with over 12 million inhabitants (as per the 2011 Indian Census). The country is grappling with high inflation, escalating debt, chronic unemployment, and a significant shortage of foreign reserves. Its economy heavily relies on loans from international institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and it has struggled to provide basic services to its own populace.
Even Pakistan-Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK), which has been under Pakistani control for decades, remains underdeveloped and impoverished. Essential infrastructure such as roads, schools, hospitals, and electricity is either insufficient or in a state of disrepair.
Pakistan has demonstrated little willingness or capacity to invest in the region, prioritising its military and geopolitical ambitions instead. The integration of the rest of Jammu and Kashmir, with its intricate economic and developmental demands, would impose a colossal burden on an already fragile economy.
Developmental disparities between PoJK and Pakistan
The stark economic disparity between Pakistan-Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK) and Pakistan’s other provinces further underscores the impracticality of integrating Jammu and Kashmir.
PoJK has long been one of the least developed areas under Pakistani control, with a per capita income significantly lower than that of the rest of Pakistan. Unemployment is widespread, healthcare services are inadequate, and educational facilities are limited.
If Pakistan has struggled to develop a region that has been under its control for over seventy years, how can it realistically expect to address the economic and social challenges of Jammu and Kashmir, which are even more complex? The economic burden of integration would be insurmountable for Pakistan, which is already grappling with the needs of its existing population.
One of the most significant obstacles to Pakistan’s aspiration of integrating Jammu and Kashmir is the region’s demographic diversity. Jammu and Kashmir is not a homogeneous entity. While the Kashmir Valley is predominantly Muslim, the Jammu region has a substantial Hindu population, and the Ladakh region is home to a large Buddhist community.
Even within the Muslim population of the Kashmir Valley, there exist diverse political and cultural identities, with some factions advocating for independence rather than accession to Pakistan. Pakistan’s simplistic belief that the Muslim-majority Kashmir naturally belongs to it overlooks these ethnic and religious complexities.
Moreover, Pakistan’s own record with ethnic minorities is dismal. The people of Balochistan, Sindh, and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa have long voiced grievances about marginalization, lack of development, and human rights violations. The forced integration of Jammu and Kashmir, with its varied population, would likely incite further unrest and alienation among the region’s diverse communities.
Sectarian tensions and Shia population
Pakistan’s inability to manage sectarian tensions within its own borders poses another obstacle to the integration of Jammu and Kashmir. Pakistan-Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK), particularly the Gilgit-Baltistan region, has a significant Shia population that has faced systematic discrimination and sectarian violence under Pakistani rule. Incorporating Jammu and Kashmir, which also has a notable Shia population, would only intensify these tensions.
The sectarian divide between Sunni and Shia Muslims in Pakistan is a deeply rooted issue that has resulted in widespread violence and instability. Pakistan’s failure to address these problems within its own borders underscores its inability to manage the sectarian complexities of Jammu and Kashmir, should it ever be integrated into Pakistan.
Any unilateral attempt by Pakistan to integrate Jammu and Kashmir would result in severe diplomatic repercussions. The international community, including the United Nations, has consistently upheld the disputed status of the region.
While Pakistan has sought to internationalise the Kashmir issue, most nations regard it as a bilateral dispute that should be resolved through dialogue between India and Pakistan.
Furthermore, Pakistan’s ongoing involvement in promoting terrorism in the region has alienated many of its former allies, including the United States and key members of the European Union.
Even China, Pakistan’s closest ally, has shown little inclination to support any unilateral actions by Pakistan to annex Jammu and Kashmir, preferring instead to maintain the status quo due to its own strategic interests in the region.
Indian response: A strong deterrent
India’s stance on Jammu and Kashmir is clear and unwavering: the region is an integral part of its sovereign territory, and any attempt by Pakistan to alter this status quo would face military and diplomatic resistance.
Following the abrogation of Article 370 in August 2019, which revoked Jammu and Kashmir’s special status, India has asserted its commitment to fully integrating the region into its federal framework.
Any Pakistani effort to incorporate Jammu and Kashmir would almost certainly provoke conflict, with devastating consequences for both nations and the broader region. Given India’s increasing diplomatic influence on the global stage and its robust military presence in the area, Pakistan’s ambition to annex Jammu and Kashmir appears as distant as ever.
The notion of integrating Jammu and Kashmir, including Pakistan-Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK), into Pakistan is not only impractical but also a perilous illusion. Historically, legally, politically, economically, and socially, such an integration would spell disaster for Pakistan. The country’s internal challenges—ranging from economic instability to political unrest and sectarian violence—are already overwhelming.
Adding the complexities of Jammu and Kashmir to this mix would only exacerbate these issues. Instead of pursuing an unattainable objective, Pakistan should concentrate on addressing its domestic problems, particularly in neglected regions like PoJK and Balochistan.
Enhancing governance, investing in infrastructure, and fostering social harmony within its existing borders would benefit Pakistan’s future far more than chasing the dream of integrating Jammu and Kashmir. The time has come for Pakistan to move beyond its fixation on Kashmir and focus on building a more prosperous and stable future for its citizens. The integration of Jammu and Kashmir into Pakistan is not a solution; it is a distraction from the real challenges confronting the country.