Ginkgo Gulzar
(Academc International Research ID: ISSN: 0975-3095)
(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.
In contrast, Balochistan is a province within Pakistan, and its unrest is widely considered an internal political and governance issue. It does not carry international legal status, UN mediation, or disputed territorial claims between states. While grievances in Balochistan relate to development, representation, and rights, equating it with Kashmir oversimplifies complex realities and distorts historical facts.
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).
The revocation of Article 370 by India in August 2019 altered the internal constitutional and administrative framework of Jammu and Kashmir by ending its special status and reorganizing it into two Union Territories. However, this domestic legal change did not resolve the long-standing international dispute over the region. Jammu and Kashmir continues to be regarded as a disputed territory in United Nations discourse, based on earlier UN Security Council resolutions that called for a peaceful settlement between India and Pakistan. While India maintains that the accession of Jammu and Kashmir in 1947 was final and that the matter is an internal issue, Pakistan and international bodies continue to view the region’s status as unresolved. Consequently, despite administrative changes within India, the broader territorial dispute remains diplomatically and legally contested at the international level.
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Article 370 was revoked by India (Aug 2019)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
What did not change
UN Security Council resolutions were not withdrawn
Pakistan continues to dispute the territory
UN documents and statements still refer to Kashmir as disputed
Different positions (important)
India: Kashmir is an integral part of India; dispute is bilateral, UN has no role
UN: Status remains unresolved under earlier resolutions
Key legal point
A domestic constitutional act cannot by itself change an international dispute
Only a mutually accepted settlement can do that
One-line exam answer
Revocation of Article 370 changed India’s internal governance of Jammu & Kashmir but did not end its disputed status at the international/UN level.
