By Kayla Malcy, MA International Affairs, 2022
The conflict between India and Pakistan over Kashmir has existed since partition in 1947. Kashmir has precipitated 2 of the 3 Indo-Pakistani wars and a slew of militant groups and attacks on both sides of the line of control. Alongside the physical violence of the Kashmir conflict, there has been a clear formation of national narratives to suit each country’s objectives. If India and Pakistan plan to move towards sustained peace, they will have to reconcile their opposing identity narratives and repair their relationships with the Kashmiri people.
The conflict explained
The partition of British India placed Kashmir in a nearly impossible position. While the Maharaja of Kashmir, part of the Hindu minority ruling a Muslim majority, wished for independence, both India and Pakistan wanted Kashmir within their own borders. The Maharaja agreed to join the Indian state in exchange for protection from Pakistani forces, instigating the first Indo-Pakistani war as well as the cascade of conflicts that followed. The current line of control divides the Kashmiri territory into Indian administered Kashmir and Pakistan administered Kashmir.
Rising tensions
With talks coming to a standstill in 2016, Kashmir has seen a marked increase in violent conflict. Attacks by militant groups against the Indian military were seen in both 2017 and 2018. Indian security forces clashed with both militants and demonstrators. An attack on an Indian Army convoy by the terrorist group Jaish-e-Mohammad, associated with the Pakistani Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI), killed 40 soldiers in February of 2019 reigniting the prolonged conflict between India and Pakistan.
In August 2019, India moved thousands of troops into Kashmir. The Indian government then revoked Article 370, which gave Jammu and Kashmir its partial autonomy and statehood, and 35A, which provided residents privileges such as land ownership. Cellular and landline services were shut down to all of Kashmir and India imposed the longest ever internet shut down in a democracy.
Pakistani National Identity Narratives
Pakistan’s founding identity as a safe haven for Muslims reinforces the sentiment that Kashmir, with a population roughly 60% Muslim, belongs with it. Arguments over the meaning of Pakistan’s name also contribute to its identity. In Pakistan’s official language of Urdu, ‘Pak’ means pure. ‘Pak’ then combined with ‘-stan’ forms the meaning of ‘the land abounding in the pure’ or as it is often translated, ‘the land of the pure’. An alternate reading of Pakistan’s name is as an acronym for the four northern states of former British India: Punjab, Afghania, Kashmir, and Sindh. In both cases, the retention of Kashmiri territory is critical to the Pakistani national identity.
A large facet of both the Pakistani and Indian identity narratives is opposition to the enemy. For Pakistan, riling up anti-Indian sentiment can distract from other political issues. In their view, India is a tyrant abusing the Muslim Kashmiris, which Pakistan, as a Muslim country, has the duty to protect. Additionally, the idea that India has never fully accepted partition and is simply waiting to take Pakistan back is thrown out to heighten Pakistani feelings of defensiveness.
Indian National Identity Narratives
India’s population is majority Hindu and while the Indian constitution guarantees freedom of religion, the governing party, the BJP, is Hindu nationalist at its core. These ideals and the construction of Muslims as ‘the other’ puts Indian national identity in direct opposition to Pakistani national identity. India takes enormous pride in being world’s largest democracy. This narrative of democratic idealism has often shielded India from criticism among western powers. Another aspect of Indian identity is self-reliance which can be traced back to Gandhi. Even today PM Modi’s platform contains five pillars of self-reliance.
Just as Pakistani politicians use anti-Indian sentiment, Indian politicians use the same tactic of riling up anti-Pakistan sentiment in order to distract from other political issues. In fact, 2019 Pew Research surveys show that 76% of Indian’s see Pakistan as a threat; only 7% do not view Pakistan as a threat. Claims of Pakistani sponsored violence in Kashmir never fail to anger the populace of India and redirect attention from other issues. India sees itself as the rightful heir to Kashmir due to the Hindu Maharaja’s decision to join India. India focuses in on this claim in their attempts to delegitimize Pakistani claims to Kashmir.
Battle of the Narratives
These conflicting identity narratives play out in Kashmir, especially the religious ones. Pakistani claims that India’s recent actions are proof of India targeting Muslim populations in Kashmir and stripping them of their rights. India claims that Pakistan is a hotbed for Islamic terrorism and is directly responsible for militant attacks against Indian security forces in Kashmir. Calling out the other’s actions in this way only serves to increase blame and widen the gap in dialogue.
The weight of both narratives changed with the 2019 events and the release of the 2019 UNHCR report on Kashmir, which concerned abuses by security forces on both sides of the line of control. With the repeal of Article 370 and subsequent shutdown of internet services and Kashmir lock down, India has lost some of the legitimacy its democratic narrative carried before. Revoking Article 35A has also caused concerns that the BJP is attempting to change the religious demographics of Kashmir by opening up property ownership to the non-Kashmiri Hindu majority in India. These actions coupled with recent announcement of India’s democratic backsliding further solidified the Pakistani narrative of an unjust India with no respect for Muslims as an occupational force, not a rightful ruler.
While opinions within Kashmir remain divided as to whom Kashmir belongs, if anyone at all, movements to reinstate Article 370 and, alternatively, to separate from India continue in Kashmir. The Indian and Pakistani focus on messaging to the opposing government has long sidelined the Kashmiri people leaving their voices unheard. If any progress is to be made both India and Pakistan will need to address, at a minimum, the aspects of their identity narratives based on the fear of the other.
For a detailed analysis by the author on the subject, Click Here.
The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author. They do not express the views of the Institute for Public Diplomacy and Global Communication or the George Washington University.
Main photo: Authorities clash with demonstrators, provided by Kashmir Global
A great explanation of the narratives behind the two identities! Also a very detailed look into why these countries are facing the troubles that they are! Great job!
Has Pakistan made any moves to capitalise on the disenfranchisment of the Kashmiri people by pushing for cession from India?
Fascinating, and very informative. I feel like you gave me a great sense of the conflict in a very short amount of time. I’d be curious to learn more about what parties or organizations are pushing for peace talks. Anyone of political strength? Do you know if there are any groups out there trying to set the record straight/start a dialogue?
And a broader question for our time: how does one best fight against narratives that are designed to galvanize jingoism and shut down dialogues?
Overall really interesting to read. I appreciated your explanations since I do not have much background knowledge on the region or conflict. This was great to read, thanks!
A succinct summation of the issue and the narratives at play in a very complicated hotspot! I think the points made about the way the traditional narratives have fallen down in the face of recent events is particularly salient. While the Kashmiri deserve to be heard and taken into account, how likely is it that both Pakistani and Indian approaches will change when they work so well to incite their populations? It may be the way forward, but it seems that each side needs to want to move forward in order for it to work.
Fantastic article on a highly complex conflict and regional rivalry. I was happy to see Article 370 mentioned as recent actions by the BJP question many of their democratic narratives around Kashmir and add further legitimacy to Pakistan’s claim of protecting Muslims. I would love to know your opinion and assessment of the UAE negotiations and the ceasefire agreed upon in February and how this could play into your article. Ceasefire agreements have been violated before, but I wonder what this development means for future negotiations with Gulf States, as India and Pakistan have historically delegated their rivalry and Kashmir as a bilateral issue.
Excellent synopsis of the history behind the conflict, and the narratives each government deploys both to legitimize actions internationally and mobilize domestic opinion. It is ironic that India has taken steps in the past several years that undercut its own narrative in the eyes of other democratic states, but satisfies domestic constituencies while doing so, and thus has an incentive to continue. This is a dynamic that plays out in many other states. What began as geopolitical rivalry now has a self-reinforcing narrative mechanism due to echo-chambers on both sides.
This article does an excellent job bringing the reader up to date with the complicated situation in Kashmir, especially in describing how the dueling narratives of India and Pakistan overwhelm the local voices. I appreciated the links to further information and find that the article increases my curiosity about this region. One would hope that the revelations of the UN report, efforts to reinstate Article 370, and movements within Kashmir will lead to positive change.
After reading the dispute of these two countries, I can’t help but wonder what are the narratives from Kashmir’s citizens. How strong is the claim for independence? What are their identity narratives? I ask these questions because the dispute they are in surely created interesting identity narratives.
As someone who is not very familiar with the region and the history of the conflict, this article did an amazing job of bringing me up to speed and explaining this complex situation in an easy-to-understand manner. When most people think of narratives, I think they’re usually drawn to just think within the binary of two states battling against each other, but this case brings in a third actor with unique narratives as well. Thus, I think one of the most important things you mention is how the narrative of Kashmir is completely missing voices from Kashmir itself. I’d be interested to read more about any identity narratives it holds, building upon your existing mentions of security and religious persecution.
Do you think that part of the solution could involve offering counternarratives that explain the other sides’ criticism utilizing historical and factual context? Also, because the people of Kashmir are usually left out of this conversation, I’d love to see the involvement of Kashmiri civil society within the public diplomacy solution.
Kayla, I think this is a really interesting breakdown of the narratives between India, Pakistan and Kashmir. Do you think that narratives within Kashmir would support joining Pakistan more than India or separating into their own country? And how do religious narratives within India work against their claim over Kashmir?
Great blog post, Kayla. What struck me was how so much of either master narrative/identity is wrapped up in the “other,” rather than the great things each country can offer. Even still, India holds so much value as the largest democratic country, but are they backing that up by support civil society? If India or Pakistan were to elect someone more progressive to office, what language might they use to start moving the country’s master narrative to one that is more internal?
Kayla, your entire analysis is powerful beyond words, but your final statement of “If any progress is to be made both India and Pakistan will need to address, at a minimum, the aspects of their identity narratives based on the fear of the other” stood out to me the most. I think it is important to conceptualize an identity narrative as defining not just “what we think of ourselves” but also “what we think of them” and it is unsurprising that both India and Pakistan have essentially built their identities out of the fear of the other. Unfortunately, I do not think it is going to stop, as you have pointed out that it is electorally profitable for both parties to rake up aggressive sentiments against the other. So, I suppose the question is, would would it take for India and Pakistan to define an identity narrative beyond their fear and suspicion of each other? And how can Kashmiri voices be amplified and brought into the debate?
I would also encourage you to analyze the Kashmiri Pandit/Kashmiri Hindu exodus in the late 1980s, where more than 200,000 Hindu Kashmiris (colloquially known as Kashmiri Pandits) were forced to leave Kashmir and migrate to other parts of India because of rising Islamist insurgency. The Hindu vs Muslim has always been a part of India and Pakistan’s identity narratives, but it was the Exodus that provided the issue narrative and put into motion more contemporary Indian politics surrounding Kashmir. The exodus has been brought up frequently within India as well while mustering support for the abrogation of Article 370. Perhaps another helpful line of research might be India’s support for Bangladesh’s independence from Pakistan and its support of insurgency in Balochistan.
Great job Kayla in explaining the contest narratives around a contested territory and the history behind them. I am curious though, which narrative does the international community buys more? If I had to guess India’s narrative of Pakistan being a hotbed for Islamic terrorism is more salient than Pakistan’s claim over Kashmir.
Really great article! I learned a lot about these competing identity narratives. The weaponization of the “other” to distract the domestic population from internal political ineptitude and corruption is an extremely effective tactic. It reminds me of how the US is doing the same in regards to Russia and China. A history of ethnic and religious tension baked into the core of these identity narratives has much to do with the current conflict. You mention the partition of India at the beginning. I’d be interested to learn more about how British colonialism exacerbated these internal ethnic divides and how a history of imperialist subjugation helped form the modern identity narratives for both India and Pakistan.