Elections In IIOJK Cannot Resolve Kashmir Dispute: Mirwaiz

Mirwaiz Umar Farooq criticizes IIOJK elections, asserting they won't resolve Kashmir's conflict amid political suppression.

As the final phase of local elections nears in Indian-Illegally Occupied Kashmir (IIOJK), resistance leader Mirwaiz Umar Farooq has expressed concerns. He believes the elections will not resolve the long-standing conflict. This conflict lies at the heart of Kashmir’s dispute between India and Pakistan.

Mirwaiz, who has spent much of the last five years under house arrest, criticized the polls. He stated that the elections are taking place while authorities silence voices opposing India’s control over the region. He pointed out that the elections do not address the larger conflict. This conflict arose after Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government revoked Kashmir’s semi-autonomy in 2019. In an interview with The Associated Press, he dismissed the elections. The Indian government has labeled them a “festival of democracy,” but he considers them a distraction.

“These elections cannot be the means to address the larger Kashmir issue,” said Mirwaiz. He also serves as a Muslim cleric and custodian of Srinagar’s historic grand mosque. This mosque is a focal point for anti-India sentiment.

The multi-stage elections will create a local government and a regional legislature with limited powers. The final phase is set for Tuesday, October 1, 2024. This marks the first such elections in a decade. It is also the first vote since 2019, when the Indian government stripped Jammu and Kashmir of its statehood. The region was reduced to a union territory governed directly by New Delhi.

The Kashmir Conflict and the Elections

The local elections in Indian-Illegally Occupied Kashmir (IIOJK) unfold in an environment of deep frustration and political suppression. This situation follows India’s 2019 revocation of the region’s semi-autonomous status, a move widely regarded by Kashmiris as an illegal annexation. While India touts the elections as a democratic exercise, many Kashmiris view them as superficial. They find the elections particularly lacking in the absence of true political dialogue or representation for those who seek self-determination.

Pakistan has historically supported the Kashmiris’ right to self-determination, in line with the United Nations resolutions, while India’s actions have often been viewed as an attempt to solidify control over the region by curtailing political freedoms and altering its demographic and political landscape. These elections, therefore, do little to address the plight of Kashmiris, who continue to face human rights abuses, political disenfranchisement, and heavy military presence. For many, the elections are a reminder that genuine peace and resolution will not come through a truncated local government but through addressing the fundamental aspirations of the Kashmiri people for freedom and justice.

News Desk

Your trusted source for insightful journalism. Stay informed with our compelling coverage of global affairs, business, technology, and more.

Recent

An analysis of Qatar’s neutrality, Al Jazeera’s framing of Pakistan, and how narrative diplomacy shapes mediation and regional security in South Asia.

Qatar’s Dubious Neutrality and the Narrative Campaign Against Pakistan

Qatar’s role in South Asia illustrates how mediation and media narratives can quietly converge into instruments of influence. Through Al Jazeera’s selective framing of Pakistan’s security challenges and Doha’s unbalanced facilitation with the Taliban, neutrality risks becoming a performative posture rather than a principled practice. Mediation that avoids accountability does not resolve conflict, it entrenches it.

Read More »
An analysis of how Qatar’s mediation shifted from dialogue to patronage, legitimizing the Taliban and Hamas while eroding global counterterrorism norms.

From Dialogue to Patronage: How Qatar Mainstreamed Radical Movements Under the Banner of Mediation

Qatar’s diplomacy has long been framed as pragmatic engagement, but its mediation model has increasingly blurred into political patronage. By hosting and legitimizing groups such as the Taliban and Hamas without enforceable conditions, Doha has helped normalize armed movements in international politics, weakening counterterrorism norms and reshaping regional stability.

Read More »
AI, Extremism, and the Weaponization of Hate: Islamophobia in India

AI, Extremism, and the Weaponization of Hate: Islamophobia in India

AI is no longer a neutral tool in India’s digital space. A growing body of research shows how artificial intelligence is being deliberately weaponized to mass-produce Islamophobic narratives, normalize harassment, and amplify Hindutva extremism. As online hate increasingly spills into real-world violence, India’s AI-driven propaganda ecosystem raises urgent questions about accountability, democracy, and the future of pluralism.

Read More »
AQAP’s Threat to China: Pathways Through Al-Qaeda’s Global Network

AQAP’s Threat to China: Pathways Through Al-Qaeda’s Global Network

AQAP’s threat against China marks a shift from rhetoric to execution, rooted in Al-Qaeda’s decentralized global architecture. By using Afghanistan as a coordination hub and relying on AQIS, TTP, and Uyghur militants of the Turkistan Islamic Party as local enablers, the threat is designed to be carried out far beyond Yemen. From CPEC projects in Pakistan to Chinese interests in Central Asia and Africa, the networked nature of Al-Qaeda allows a geographically dispersed yet strategically aligned campaign against Beijing.

Read More »
The Enduring Consequences of America’s Exit from Afghanistan

The Enduring Consequences of America’s Exit from Afghanistan

The 2021 US withdrawal from Afghanistan was more than the end of a long war, it was a poorly executed exit that triggered the rapid collapse of the Afghan state. The fall of Kabul, the Abbey Gate attack, and the return of militant groups exposed serious gaps in planning and coordination.

Read More »