Maria Rehman & Joshua Bowes
The heavy nuclearization of South Asia has made the region a hotbed of political tension and a quagmire for international peace and stability. The two nuclear neighbours, India and Pakistan, have fought four major wars over the disputed Kashmir since their independence from the British in 1947.
The Kashmir conflict has been a bone of contention between New Delhi and Islamabad for decades, and the heavy militarization of the countries’ 1600 km long border has made the region a geopolitical hotspot.
Growing in local and regional importance is the often-forgotten northern region of Kashmir, named Gilgit-Baltistan (GB), strategically important for both India and Pakistan. However, as a result of longstanding tensions in the border regions, the identity of GB has become falsely conflated with that of Kashmir.
For decades, the people of GB have faced poor governance and mistreatment at the hands of state authorities. For a peaceful and democratic Pakistan to flourish, the government should not sacrifice the rights of the people just in the hopes of a plebiscite in Kashmir.
Such a suppression of freedoms is likely to backfire, and the people of GB who willingly joined Pakistan in the past can potentially turn against the state.
Repressive Governance and Relationship with India
GB is a semi-autonomous region in the northernmost part of Pakistan and borders India, Afghanistan, and China. It is a mountainous and sparsely populated region administered by Pakistan and has an area of 27118 square miles.
Since its independence, the region has remained economically and politically neglected due to its rugged terrain and low population density, so much so that even the lands it lost to India never became a part of the geopolitical discourse.
The 1971 war marked the separation of East Pakistan, now known as Bangladesh, from Pakistan. In the Battle of Turtuk of the 1971 war, the Indian army occupied Turtuk and three other villages, including Chulungkha. Pakistan never got those territories back.
Indian PM Narendra Modi confessed the involvement of India in the independence of Bangladesh. However, what remains forgotten is the loss of impoverished and neglected villages of GB to India, which had and still has tremendous repercussions on the locals. Families were separated, and the locals underwent abrupt changes in their national identities without consent.
In recent years, the region has been gaining attention from Pakistani and Indian media and governments. Its importance is due to several factors, including the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), India’s revocation of Article 370, and the Pakistani government’s increased efforts to promote tourism through social media.
GB’s relative deprivation has long been due to its poor infrastructure. However, the area’s strategic location proved an asset to Pakistan, as CPEC development started in GB, which is Pakistan’s only region connecting China and Pakistan.
The Indian government has always considered GB an illegally occupied part of Pakistan. However, the development of CPEC brought about increased acrimony in relations between the two historic rivals. The Foreign Minister of India, Sushma Swaraj, raised her concerns over CPEC in her meeting with the Chinese counterpart Wang Yi in 2016, showing “resolute” opposition to the project.
The BJP government also maintains an aggressive stance on GB affairs. The Indian government demands Pakistan to return it while showing unwillingness to negotiate over the Indian-occupied Kashmir. Kashmir is an increasingly strategic region for India, especially against heightened Chinese influence across the Asia-Pacific. India’s territorial power play to break the land bridge of GB between Pakistan and China can benefit its broader geopolitical ambitions.
Gilgit-Baltistan as a Geostrategic Locale
Another major factor behind GB’s growing importance is the revocation of Article 370 in the Indian constitution, which gave special status to the Indian-occupied Kashmir (IoK) by the BJP government. Since the people of GB gained independence from the Dogra rule to join Pakistan, Pakistan refrained from giving constitutional status to GB, even though it was not originally a part of the border Kashmir.
The idea was that this measure would help Pakistan get higher votes in a plebiscite over the Kashmir issue. However, India resorted to offence in the case of GB, too, after the revocation of the special status of Kashmir, adding to the insecurities of Pakistan.
Currently, the entire region of IoK is going through demographic changes due to the revocation of Article 370, which favours India. Therefore, jeopardising the security of GB in hopes of a Plebiscite is detrimental to the region’s security, even if a plebiscite occurs.
Indian aggression towards Pakistan is not limited to its diplomatic stance. India also contests Pakistan’s legitimacy in fifth-generation warfare, best characterised as non-kinetic military action. For instance, the Indian media gives overwhelming coverage to the protests in GB and provides discursive support for its stance.
For example, even the demonstrations over price hikes are considered separatist movements by the Indian press. The Indian media outlets do not mention that the people of GB got independence from the Dogra Raj and joined Pakistan by their own will as it goes against their stance, which portrays Pakistan as an occupying force.
As discussed earlier, major misconception that often clouds the understanding of the status of GB is its conflation with Kashmir. While the two regions share some cultural commonalities, they are distinct. The people of GB, for instance, do not consider themselves Kashmiris.
The GB people celebrate a separate Independence Day each year on November 1st, marking their freedom from Dogra Raj. It’s important to note that the locals of GB, with the help of Gilgit scouts, fought against the Kashmiri forces for the whole year and drove the Dogras out, a historical event that underscores the people’s will.
Contemporary geopolitical discourse often overlooks their fight for freedom. Policymakers on both sides must educate themselves about history and refrain from dispossessing the people of GB of their unique identity.
It is equally crucial for Pakistan to cater to the needs of the local population lest it will lose the diplomatic war on Kashmir that it has currently based on the issue of human rights abuses.
Even in the 21st century, the people in GB face load-shedding of up to 20 hours per day. The entire region has no medical or engineering college, leading to immense brain drain from the area.
One cannot overlook the heavy-handedness of security agencies in the region where human rights violations are exacerbating the living conditions of the people, turning them against Pakistan.
The Future of Gilgit-Baltistan
Facing many challenges that the central government overlooks, GB is an increasingly taut land in South Asia. India highlights the dissatisfaction of the locals towards Pakistan without presenting historical context, exaggerating the negative public opinion.
The region’s entrenchment within Pakistan’s tense border landscape means that security concerns are ever-present, compounding the state’s ability to govern fairly and effectively. Authoritarian leadership has left an absence of attention to local interests, which, for an increasingly sensitive region, could be detrimental to the dignity and integrity of GB and its people.
Mere promises of development and accolades for the region’s natural beauty cannot solve the locals’ pressing challenges.
*Maria Rehman is a Graduate Research Assistant at the Frank Batten School of Leadership and Public Policy, University of Virginia; Joshua Bowes is a Research Associate at the South Asia Foresight Network (SAFN) with The Millennium Project in Washington, D.C.
**The opinions in this article are the author’s own and may not represent the views of The Diplomatic Insight. The organization does not endorse or assume responsibility for the content.
