The Kashmir conflict, rooted in the flawed partition of British India, remains a significant source of tension between India and Pakistan.

As Pakistan and India commemorate 77 years of independence, the Kashmir dispute remains a stark reminder of the chaos that ensued during the partition of British India in 1947. The Radcliffe Line, meant to establish borders for the nascent states, is viewed in Pakistan as a profound betrayal. This line, alongside India’s strategic moves, planted the seeds of discord that have perpetuated the Kashmir conflict—an issue that continues to strain relations between the two nations.

The Radcliffe Line emerged from the hasty and disordered process of dividing British India into two independent dominions: India and Pakistan. Cyril John Radcliffe, a British lawyer unfamiliar with the region, was tasked with drawing the borders in a mere five weeks. This monumental task required an intricate understanding of the subcontinent’s complex socio-political and cultural fabric—expertise that Radcliffe himself admitted he lacked.

The line was intended to create a contiguous Muslim-majority Pakistan and a Hindu-majority India. However, the process was marred by opacity, pressures from the departing British administration, and lobbying by influential Indian leaders. The result was a flawed partition that displaced millions, leading to one of history’s largest and bloodiest migrations.

Kashmir, a princely state with a Muslim-majority population, seemed destined to join Pakistan. According to the partition’s guiding principles, regions with Muslim majorities were to accede to Pakistan, while those with Hindu majorities would join India. However, Hari Singh, the Hindu Maharaja of Kashmir, initially opted for independence, hoping to avoid joining either dominion.

India’s involvement in Kashmir was a calculated maneuver. As tensions in the region escalated, Pakistan supported Kashmiri rebels seeking accession to Pakistan. In response, the Maharaja hurriedly signed the Instrument of Accession to India in October 1947, allegedly under duress and in exchange for military support against the rebellion. This accession, though conditional and intended to be ratified by a plebiscite, was never legitimized. India, despite its initial commitment, repeatedly delayed and ultimately avoided holding the promised plebiscite, denying Kashmiris the right to decide their own future.

India’s influence on the partition process and its aftermath is undeniable. While the Radcliffe Line is criticized for its flawed execution, India’s political engineering during the partition significantly contributed to subsequent territorial disputes, particularly in Kashmir.

A prominent example of this manipulation was the handling of the Gurdaspur district in Punjab. Initially expected to be awarded to Pakistan due to its slight Muslim majority, Gurdaspur was instead given to India, providing a crucial land route to Kashmir. This decision, widely believed to have been influenced by Indian leaders, was instrumental in India asserting control over Kashmir following the Maharaja’s accession.

Furthermore, India’s determination to maintain control over Kashmir was driven by strategic interests rather than adherence to the partition’s principles. Kashmir’s geographic location and its significance as a water source for both nations made it a valuable asset that India was unwilling to relinquish. By securing Kashmir, India not only gained control over a vital region but also established a buffer zone against Pakistan, weakening Pakistan’s strategic depth.

The Kashmir conflict has sparked numerous confrontations between India and Pakistan, including three major wars and countless skirmishes along the Line of Control (LoC). For Pakistan, Kashmir represents an unfinished chapter of partition—a region that, based on the religious and cultural affiliations of its people, rightfully belongs to it. The denial of Kashmir’s accession to Pakistan is viewed as a grave injustice, perpetuated by India’s refusal to honor its commitment to a plebiscite.

The international community’s response to the Kashmir dispute has been largely ineffective. Despite multiple United Nations resolutions calling for a plebiscite, India has maintained its control over the region, while Pakistan has consistently advocated for the Kashmiri people’s right to self-determination. The recent revocation of Article 370 by the Indian government, which granted special autonomy to Jammu and Kashmir, has further inflamed tensions, drawing widespread condemnation from Pakistan.

As Pakistan marks its 77th Independence Day, the Kashmir dispute remains a focal point of its national identity. The legacy of the Radcliffe Line and India’s actions during partition have left an indelible mark on South Asian history. The people of Kashmir continue to suffer from the consequences of a flawed partition and subsequent geopolitical maneuvering by India.

For Pakistan, the struggle for Kashmir transcends territorial claims; it is about justice, self-determination, and fulfilling the promises made during partition. Resolving the Kashmir dispute is essential for lasting peace in South Asia. The international community must recognize the historical injustices inflicted upon the Kashmiri people and support their right to determine their future.

The road to peace is fraught with challenges, but it is a path that must be pursued for the millions affected by this decades-long conflict. On this 77th anniversary of independence, Pakistan reaffirms its commitment to the cause of Kashmir and to the principles of justice and self-determination that underpin its creation. The story of Kashmir is not just a chapter in the history of partition; it is an ongoing struggle for freedom and dignity—a struggle that Pakistan will continue to support until its rightful conclusion.