The machine guns peeking over parapets of small, sandbagged concrete bunkers and the heavy artillery cannons dug deep into Himalayan Kashmir’s rugged terrain have fallen silent — at least for now.
The Line of Control, a highly militarized de facto border that divides the disputed region between the two nuclear-armed rivals India and Pakistan, and a site of hundreds of deaths, is unusually quiet after the two South Asian neighbors last month agreed to reaffirm their 2003 ceasefire accord.
The somewhat surprising decision prompted a thaw in the otherwise turbulent relations between the countries, but also raised questions about the longevity of the fragile peace, in part due to earlier failures.
The crackdown by Indian forces and attacks by rebels have continued inside Indian-held Kashmir.
Experts say that the ceasefire could stabilize the lingering conflict that has claimed tens of thousands of lives, while Kashmiris say that the rare move should lead to resolution of the dispute.
It was unclear what prompted the two militaries to adhere to the accord that they had largely ignored for years, but experts point to an easing of the countries’ earlier stances following a decision by India to strip Kashmir of its semi-autonomy and take direct control over the region in 2019, and its months-long border standoff with China.
The ongoing costs of clashes along the Line of Control, the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and other foreign policy challenges facing the two countries might have combined to create incentives to pursue a ceasefire, University of Chicago political science professor Paul Staniland said.
Since 2003, the ceasefire has largely held, despite regular skirmishes. India and Pakistan claim the region in its entirety and have fought two wars over it, and in the Indian-controlled portion of Kashmir, militants have fought against Indian rule since 1989.
Each country has accused the other of heightening tensions by significantly ratcheting up border attacks over the past four years, leading to the deaths of soldiers and villagers.
The ceasefire announcement came shortly after China and India agreed to a military disengagement from a portion of their disputed border after a months-long military standoff. It had led to fears of a two-front war between India and China, with the latter assisted by its closest ally, Pakistan.
“Some sort of pressure, possibly from Washington and Beijing for different reasons, is pushing India and Pakistan for wider peace moves in the region,” said Siddiq Wahid, historian and a former vice chancellor of the Islamic University of Science and Technology.
Beijing wants Pakistan to focus on securing its investments as part of the Belt and Road Initiative. Islamabad is a key partner and some Chinese-built highways snake through Pakistani-controlled Kashmir.
On the other hand, the US is courting India to focus its energies on countering China.
“If Pakistan is indeed looking to move toward a new regional role, embracing geopolitics, reducing tensions with India is a must, and if India is going to pivot to deal with a rising China, it has reasons to want to calm relations with Pakistan,” Staniland said. “The real question is whether these reasons remain powerful enough over time.”
The thaw in relations became apparent when Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, an avowed Hindu nationalist, ceased playing up rhetoric against Pakistan and referencing Kashmir in campaigning for elections in four key states.
In Pakistan, too, political leadership and the powerful military have shifted from their earlier position of not engaging with India until it reversed its decision to annul Kashmir’s semi-autonomy.
Last week, Pakistani Chief of Army Staff General Qamar Javed Bajwa said that it was time for the two countries to “bury the past” and resolve the dispute over Kashmir peacefully.
His remarks followed Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan’s repeated calls for good Indian relations, with the caveat that the Kashmir dispute remains at the center of any talks. Since the announcement of the ceasefire, Khan, too, has abandoned his past rhetoric against Modi.
Modi appeared to reciprocate when he sent Khan a letter on March 23 — Pakistan’s Republic Day — seeking cordial relations. While Khan replied on Tuesday last week, he reiterated that lasting peace was mainly contingent on resolving the future of Kashmir.
The rapprochement has sparked skepticism among Kashmiris, who fear the dispute could be pushed to the backburner — given the fast administrative and political changes in the region — by India, which they have likened to a colonial power.
“We are not against talks and want an end to violence, but there has to be an end to repression, too,” said Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, a Kashmiri separatist leader who has been under house arrest since August 2019. “The whole idea behind the negotiations has to be a resolution of the Kashmir issue as per the wishes of its people.”
In the past, Pakistan and India made multiple attempts to broker a deal over Kashmir. They also initiated confidence-building measures, such as exclusive barter trade between the two parts of Kashmir, sporting games and bus services for divided families.
“The ceasefire can lead to relative peace, but one should not expect lasting peace,” said retired Indian Air Marshal Vinod Bhatia, who was director-general of Indian Army Military Operations from 2012 to 2014.
Meanwhile, villagers living along the frontier are paying the price.
The lives of Nader Hussain and Munshi Muhammad Arshad are divided by barbed concertina wire. Hussain lives in Indian-controlled Kashmir and Arshad in the part controlled by Pakistan.
In late November last year, Hussain saw an artillery shell fired by Pakistani soldiers fly toward him in his mountain village. The 50-year-old could not outrun the projectile and lost both legs in the blast. Two other men were killed on the spot.
“The two countries do politics on our bodies, but this must end,” he said.
On the other side, the 45-year-old Arshad, who lost his father to an artillery shell fired by Indian soldiers, hoped for peace.
“But a durable peace will only come when the Kashmir issue is resolved,” he said.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs