Despite the government's proactive stance on counter-terrorism and a marked decline in separatist politics, many voices from the region maintain that the core political dispute remains unresolved. Even after the abrogation of Article 370, the bifurcation of the state, and the transformation of Jammu and Kashmir into a Union Territory, a significant section of the Kashmiri population continues to feel politically unsettled.
More than eleven years into the BJP-led central rule, the security landscape of Kashmir has drastically changed. Militancy has been nearly eradicated, and separatist leaders have either faded into obscurity or adopted a passive stance.
However, the political sentiment on the ground paints a more nuanced picture. Locals argue that while guns have fallen silent, the aspirations of the people remain unanswered.
Recently, a fresh wave of political discussions was triggered by what appeared to be an ‘inadvertent’ or ‘calculated’ international reference to the Kashmir dispute. U.S. President Donald Trump, during a global interaction, brought up the issue again, reviving debates that many believed had been shelved.
This development has once more stirred public discourse in the Valley.
A prominent lawyer and political activist from Doda summed up the prevailing sentiment. “Jammu and Kashmir is still a region divided between India, Pakistan, and China. How can we say the dispute is over?” he questioned. “Until India and Pakistan become genuine neighbours and friends, clarify their positions on Kashmir, and—most importantly—engage the Kashmiri people meaningfully, it would be premature to call this a settled matter.”
For the issue to be resolved, Pakistan must ensure its territory is not used for terrorism in Kashmir. In turn, India should recognise and believe such commitments and sincerely open the gates for Track II diplomacy, which has historically played a role in breaking ice when official channels stagnate.
Moreover, India should reconsider its decision to suspend the Indus Water Treaty, a longstanding symbol of cooperation between the two nations. Likewise, Pakistan must revisit its stance on the Shimla Agreement and reaffirm its commitment to peaceful bilateralism.
Amidst all this, one of the most heartening changes in recent years has been the transformation in public mood across Kashmir. For the first time in decades, people from all walks of life came out openly to condemn violence—not just politically, but morally and socially.
The strongest symbol of this change was witnessed after the tragic killing of tourists in Pahalgam. Unlike in the past, when such incidents—especially those that targeted members of specific communities, such as in the Chenab Valley—often went unprotested, this time people took to the streets, denouncing the act as inhumane and unacceptable.
This widespread public rejection of violence signals a new phase of civil maturity and must be acknowledged as a critical development.
Today, the common Kashmiri is not driven by slogans of azadi or secession but yearns for dignity, peace, and progress. The horrors of prolonged conflict have made the people weary of bloodshed. Most now see dialogue—not confrontation—as the only acceptable path forward.
As the region moves ahead, it is crucial for both New Delhi and Islamabad to acknowledge the ground realities. Lasting peace in Kashmir will not come merely from security operations or administrative overhauls. It requires a bold political outreach, mutual trust, and the inclusion of Kashmiri voices in shaping their destiny.
The silence of guns must now be followed by the sound of meaningful dialogue—and a sincere commitment to regional reconciliation.
Have you liked the news article?