New Delhi, Sep 26 : Each time Islamabad attempts to internationalise the Kashmir dispute, an inconvenient question arises: If Pakistan claims to be the champion of Kashmiris, why has it failed to provide political rights, economic equality, or meaningful self‑governance to the people living in the parts of Jammu and Kashmir under its own control? New Delhi, Sep 26 (IANS) Each time Islamabad attempts to internationalise the Kashmir dispute, an inconvenient question arises: If Pakistan claims to be the champion of Kashmiris, why has it failed to provide political rights, economic equality, or meaningful self‑governance to the people living in the parts of Jammu and Kashmir under its own control?
Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, by raising the issue once again at the United Nations General Assembly, has rewritten a familiar script, again failing to address his country's own record in the region it already occupies.
The greatest irony in Pakistan's Kashmir policy remains that while it demands self‑determination for Kashmiris in India, it has ignored the rights of the people under its own administration.
Even before the ruler of the then princely state could accede, tribal militias from Pakistan's North‑West Frontier, backed and assisted by Islamabad, invaded the state in October 1947.
The attack was marked by violence and looting; facing the invasion, Maharaja Hari Singh signed the Instrument of Accession to India, after which Indian troops were airlifted into Srinagar. The first India‑Pakistan war followed, ending in a ceasefire that left Pakistan in control of roughly one‑third of the former princely state.
With much fanfare, Pakistan calls these territories "Azad Jammu and Kashmir", reflecting a contradiction. This "free" region has since remained under tight political, constitutional, and administrative control of Pakistan's civilian and military authorities. In contrast, the people here remain oppressed and bereft of development and basic needs.
For decades, residents have complained of limited political representation and of not benefiting from local resources. The issue overall concerns identity, representation, and ownership of natural resources.
Political groups advocating real independence of Pakistan‑occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK) have frequently found themselves suppressed under the gun, as the region's governance structure effectively places key powers in the hands of Islamabad and the Pakistani army.
Despite its enormous tourism potential, hydropower resources, and strategic significance, PoJK has not witnessed development. Infrastructure deficits, employment challenges, inadequate health facilities, and administrative indifference continue to marginalise residents.
Meanwhile, natural resources are being extracted with the benefits flowing to Islamabad.
Local participation in decision‑making has remained inadequate, with Pakistan's mainstream political parties holding sway in PoJK. Incidentally, Najeeb Naqi of the ruling Pakistan Muslim League‑Nawaz (PML‑N) was Thursday elected as the "President" of PoJK, amplifying Islamabad's control over the region.
Meanwhile, the Legislative Assembly currently has 53 members, out of which 41 are directly elected from territorial constituencies within PoJK, while 12 seats are reserved.
Such constituencies are spread across Pakistani cities like Lahore, Rawalpindi, and Karachi. Their inclusion ensures that Islamabad can influence the Assembly's composition by mobilising votes outside the territory.
The "reserved seats" are at the heart of the ongoing protests, as many see them as tools for Islamabad to manipulate the political balance in its favour and maintain dominance.
Thus, successive Pakistani governments have invested considerable diplomatic energy in discussing territories administered by India, while often receiving far less scrutiny for their own stewardship of regions under Islamabad's control.
Shehbaz Sharif's latest reference to Kashmir at the UN may again satisfy a domestic political audience, but does little to answer these fundamental questions.
The issue is thus not simply what Pakistan says about Kashmir. It is what Pakistan has done, or failed to do, in these parts that it has controlled for generations.
