Kashmir’s Curfew Generation: A Six-Year Portrait

Six years after India stripped Jammu and Kashmir of its special status on August 5, 2019, the region remains caught in a state of stability and instability. It is caught between deeper constitutional ties to India, ongoing political push back, and an international dispute that has yet to end.

When New Delhi scrapped Articles 370 and 35A, it did not simply change a few laws; it transformed the relationship between Kashmir and the rest of India. What was once a territory whose future was contested by India, Pakistan, and many Kashmiris themselves is now firmly under India’s legal and administrative control.

But it was not just about paperwork. Troops were deployed across the region, and authorities imposed a sweeping lockdown on communication and movement. Whole towns and cities went quiet overnight. A new generation of Kashmiris has grown up in this environment, and many call them the “curfew generation.”

Right after the 2019 decision, resistance ran deep. Authorities clamped down hard, restricting movement, cutting phone lines and internet access, and banning large gatherings.

Human Rights Watch pointed out that people could not use their cell phones or even landlines, while getting to a doctor or picking up groceries became difficult. Officials said these measures were necessary to maintain order and security, but their impact extended into every part of daily life.

Schools closed. Shops shuttered. Families struggled to stay in touch, and simple things like seeing a friend became difficult. These restrictions also limited people’s ability to speak out, organise, or even discuss politics with one another. For a generation, living under curfew did not simply mean dealing with restrictions; it became a central part of life itself.

Resistance did not vanish. It became more limited through the early 2020s, constrained by tighter security and a changing political environment. While security measures intensified, something else happened too: domicile and land rules underwent a major overhaul.

 In 2020, officials broadened the rules governing who could live in the region, obtain government jobs, and qualify for other benefits.

By the end of that year, the Ministry of Home Affairs said it had issued more than 3.2 million new domicile certificates.

Those critical of these changes see potential problems ahead. They warn that these policies could do more than change the demographic composition of Muslim-majority Kashmir; they could gradually reshape the region’s identity.

For many, the concern is about more than numbers. It is about whether these demographic shifts could eventually erode the deep-rooted political and cultural claims Kashmiris make for autonomy and self-determination.

Some have compared this situation to other long-running territorial disputes, particularly debates around Israeli settlements and demographic policies in the West Bank. It is not a perfect comparison, since the histories and laws involved are different.

But there is a broader question underneath: Can changing who lives in a region and how it is governed shift the political identity of a disputed place over time? In Kashmir, that question feels especially urgent. If these policies continue for another ten years, what will the region look like?

The way the world has reacted over the last six years has shaped the story as well. Critics say India’s 2019 move went against the framework established by the UN for Jammu and Kashmir, particularly Security Council resolutions 38 and 47, which address the conflict and the promise of a plebiscite.

 In August 2019, the UN Secretary-General reminded all sides that the UN’s position remained unchanged, grounded in the Charter and those Security Council resolutions, and called on all parties to avoid steps that could alter Kashmir’s status.

The principle of self-determination is also reflected in Article 1 of both the ICCPR and ICESCR. But since 2019, the lack of meaningful international action has made one thing increasingly apparent: when strategic interests are at stake, they often matter more than adherence to international rules.

Pakistan continues to raise Kashmir on the global stage, particularly at the United Nations and through annual statements marking August 5. In 2024, Islamabad reaffirmed its support for Kashmiri self-determination, and in 2025, it urged the UN Security Council to act on its own resolutions concerning Kashmir.