Pakistan using Kashmir as smokescreen to divert attention from internal crises

Pakistan is facing a severe economic downturn, political repression, and growing public anger against its high-handed policy in the country’s hinterland.

Pakistan is a nation of distractions. Its landscape of distractions has been meticulously constructed by its military-dominated establishment, steering focus away from pressing domestic issues of everyday concerns. This carefully crafted playbook is aimed at ensuring that Pakistanis are distracted towards archaic issues of trivial significance in their daily lives and aspirations, thereby shielding the powers-that-be from public scrutiny on critical issues. Pakistan is facing a severe economic downturn, political repression, and growing public anger against its high-handed policy in the country’s hinterland such as Balochistan and tribal districts. To fade these issues into the background, the Pak establishment orchestrates familiar diversionary tactics, exemplified by the designation of January 5 as Kashmir’s Right to Self-Determination Day in recent years.

However, this serves more as a smokescreen than genuine concern for the region where it has engaged in proxy war since decades wherein thousands have perished in its efforts to destabilise India. This distraction provides the Pakistani establishment with the necessary bandwidth to craft and control the national narrative by camouflaging internal strife and evading accountability. As such, January 5 joins a roster of distraction dates, including February 5 (Kashmir Solidarity Day) and October 27 (Kashmir Black Day), which have lost significance due to evolving realities in Jammu and Kashmir.

Political Scene in J&K

The altered political landscape of Jammu and Kashmir, reshaped within the Indian union, constitutionally approved and judicially stamped re-arrangement, has rendered these designated days increasingly symbolic. Consequently, its miniscule political constituency stands obliterated in the region and exposed to the local people for their nefarious role in keeping the region embroiled in ever continuing cycle of violence.

Moreover, United Nations’ resolutions, like the UNCIP’s resolutions of 1948 and subsequent agreements, remain unfulfilled due to Pakistan’s dismissal of conditions laid therein. It may be recalled that the UN Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP) adopted a supplementary resolution on January 5, 1949, to its earlier resolution of August 13, 1948, laying down principles for the plebiscite in J&K, subject to the fulfilment subject to certain conditions by India and Pakistan. Interestingly, the foremost condition laid down by UNCIP Resolution (Part II (A)(1)(2)) of August 13, 1948, included the withdrawal of the “tribesmen and Pakistan nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purpose of fighting” from J&K, including Gilgit-Baltistan, as their presence constituted “a material change in the situation”. It is a historical fact that the Pakistani establishment rejected these conditions forthwith and never took any practical steps towards fulfilling any of the parameters laid down in the resolution.

Agreements And Resolutions

Further, it subsequently agreed to resolve any pending issues with India via a bilateral mechanism through Shimla Agreement of 1972. In its Section 1(ii), the two countries resolved “to settle their differences by peaceful means by bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them. Pending the final settlement of any of the problems between the two countries, neither side shall unilaterally alter the situation and both shall prevent the organisation, assistance or encouragement of any acts detrimental to the maintenance of peace and harmonious relations.”

Despite initial agreements, such as the Shimla Agreement of 1972, calling for peaceful bilateral resolutions, Pakistan’s persistent public agitation over UNCIP Resolutions concerning Kashmir lacks logical grounding. It contrasts sharply with its lack of practical adherence to their stipulations and demonstrates a disconnect between its rhetoric and actions. While Pakistan champions these resolutions on the international stage, its domestic instability becomes a catalyst for diverting attention from the nation’s actual challenges. Therefore, its emphasis on outdated UN Resolutions on Kashmiri is nothing but a tool for the military-dominated establishment to sidestep accountability, directing public attention away from internal instability and grievances.

Crisis in PoJK

Moreover, Pakistan’s administration of the portion of Jammu and Kashmir which it has occupied since 1947 reveals its true intentions toward the region's people. Pakistan has created of façade of self-governance in POJK since its occupation of the region, which is at best nominal in character, with all the affairs of the region managed by the military. Pakistan Occupied Jammu & Kashmir (POJK), along with Gilgit-Baltistan, operates under the practical control of a three-star General from the Pakistan Army’s Rawalpindi-based X Corps. As Human Rights Watch notes in one of its reports, “The Pakistani government represses democratic freedoms, muzzles the press and practices routine torture.” It further noted locals desiring of public offices prerequisite providing a written pledge of loyalty to Islamabad. “There is a façade of an elected local government, but the federal government in Islamabad, the army and the intelligence agencies control all aspects of political life in Azad Kashmir…The military shows no tolerance for dissent and practically runs the region as a fiefdom,” the report states.

As such, Pakistan’s handling of the PoJK from a purely military perspective, including Gilgit-Baltistan, have left these regions at the margins of the development with high inflation, scant socio-economic infrastructure and higher levels of unemployment. These regions not only lag behind Jammu and Kashmir in terms of development but also rank lowest in every developmental indicator within Pakistan. For example, POJK experiences a poverty rate of 29%, while Gilgit-Baltistan's poverty rate soared to 35%, surpassing Pakistan's national average of 28%. In contrast, Jammu and Kashmir has a poverty rate of around 10% according to government data.

Glaring Disparities between PoJK and J&K

The economic disparities have become starkly evident over the years. In terms of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), POJK recorded a GDP of $6.5 billion in the 2020-21 fiscal year compared to Jammu and Kashmir’s $22 billion in the same period. Likewise, there are glaring infrastructure gaps between these regions, particularly in road networks, railways, and airport facilities. POK’s meagre 276 KM length of national highways contrasts starkly with Jammu and Kashmir’s expansive 2423 KM network. While Jammu and Kashmir anticipates linking a 357 KM railway line to India’s national railway network in the near future, POK remains devoid of any such connectivity. Similarly, the region lacks adequate airport infrastructure, with only small airfields in Gilgit and Skardu, whereas Jammu and Kashmir boasts an international airport in Srinagar with pan-India connectivity.

The health infrastructure further highlights the disparities, with POJK having 589 health facilities, including 23 major hospitals, 11 tehsil level hospitals, 50 Rural Health Centres and 225 Basic Health Centres. In comparison, Jammu and Kashmir has an extensive network of 3834 health facilities, including 22 district hospitals, 84 Community Health Centres, 398 Primary Health Centres, and multiple medical colleges.

These stark gaps in socio-economic indicators between PoJK and J&K underscore Pakistan’s systematic neglect of these regions, depriving them of essential developmental opportunities and basic infrastructure, even as the military dominated establishment in Islamabad continues to smokescreen Kashmir for its domestic agenda. Therefore, as Pakistan ricochets its rabble rousing of UN resolutions on Kashmir in days ahead, it needs to be seen in the context of its repressive domestic political environment, internal dissidence and an unending economic crisis.

Arun Anand is an author and columnist who has written several books. His X handle is @ArunAnandLive. Views are personal and do not represent the stand of this publication.