The Kashmir dispute is often narrated through a familiar sequence: tribesmen entered Kashmir from Pakistan, Maharaja Hari Singh sought military assistance from India, and the conflict subsequently became an India-Pakistan war. But according to political scientist Dr Ishtiaq Ahmed, the story is far more complicated.
In a conversation with New Wave History, Ahmed argues that the roots of the Kashmir conflict predate the tribal incursion of October 1947. He points to the revolt in Poonch in August 1947, involving demobilised soldiers who had served in the British Indian Army and the Maharaja's forces. Their confrontation with the Dogra state, he says, was followed by violence against Hindus and Sikhs in the region, while subsequent attacks and communal violence widened the conflict.
Ahmed places these developments within the larger political struggle over the princely state. Jammu and Kashmir was Muslim-majority, while its ruler, Maharaja Hari Singh, was Hindu and initially wanted to remain independent. Meanwhile, Sheikh Abdullah's National Conference had its strongest base in the Kashmir Valley, while the Muslim Conference was influential in Poonch and Jammu.
The tribal advance from Pakistan in October 1947 transformed the situation further. Ahmed highlights the looting at Baramulla, arguing that the delay allowed Indian forces time to reach Srinagar. Hari Singh subsequently signed the Instrument of Accession to India, after which Indian troops entered the state.
The conflict then acquired another devastating dimension in Jammu. Ahmed notes that the Muslim population of Jammu fell dramatically after 1947, with many killed or forced to flee. This demographic transformation became an enduring part of the Kashmir tragedy.
The dispute eventually reached the United Nations after India appealed for international intervention. Ahmed stresses that the UN framework envisaged a plebiscite, but also laid down conditions concerning the withdrawal of forces. In his assessment, the failure of both sides to implement those conditions left the dispute effectively frozen. The UN's 1948 framework did indeed set out a sequence involving demilitarisation and a plebiscite.
Ahmed's most controversial conclusion is that the Line of Control should ultimately be accepted as the international border, with India retaining the territory it controls and Pakistan retaining its side. For him, the history of Kashmir demonstrates how a combination of local grievances, competing national projects, communal violence and geopolitical calculations transformed an internal political crisis into one of South Asia's most enduring international disputes.
His broader scholarship similarly emphasises the importance of examining Partition through archival material and first-hand testimony, rather than relying exclusively on competing national narratives.