(Academc International Research ID: ISSN: 0975-3095)
The Balochistan issue and the Kashmir dispute are often compared in political debates, but in reality, they are fundamentally different in origin, legal status, and international recognition. The Kashmir dispute is an internationally acknowledged conflict, rooted in the 1947 partition of the Indian subcontinent and governed by United Nations resolutions that recognize the right of self-determination. It involves multiple parties and remains on the global diplomatic agenda.
UN Presence in Srinagar
Historically, the UNMOGIP (UN Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan) has maintained a field/hq presence in Srinagar seasonally to monitor ceasefire observations along the Line of Control. Its headquarters alternate between Srinagar (May to October) and Islamabad (November to April).
Why the UN Refused to Treat Kashmir’s Accession as Final examines the legal and political reasons the United Nations declined to accept Jammu and Kashmir’s accession to India as a settled fact. When the dispute reached the UN in 1948, it was not treated as an internal matter but as an international conflict involving the unresolved status of a territory whose people had never been consulted. The United Nations Security Council recognized that the Instrument of Accession was signed under conditions of armed conflict, by an unelected ruler, and without the consent of the population—factors that undermined its finality under emerging principles of international law.
Through a series of resolutions, particularly UNSC Resolution 47 (1948), the UN made clear that accession alone could not determine Kashmir’s future. Instead, it affirmed that the will of the people must be ascertained through a free and impartial plebiscite. This position reflected the UN’s post–World War II commitment to self-determination and decolonization, where sovereignty could no longer be imposed through royal decree or wartime coercion.
By refusing to close the issue, the UN acknowledged that legality without legitimacy is insufficient. Kashmir’s continued presence on the UN agenda stands as evidence that its accession was provisional in nature and that the Kashmiri people’s right to self-determination remains unresolved under international law.
What changed in 2019 Article 370 was revoked by India (Aug 2019) Jammu & Kashmir was reorganized into two Union Territories This was a domestic constitutional change
