The Escalation Between India and Pakistan Over Kashmir: A Historical Perspective

By Mohamad Hammoud

The recent military escalation between India and Pakistan over Kashmir marks the latest flare-up in a rivalry that dates back to the very creation of the two nations in 1947. This week’s clashes, involving cross-border shelling and drone incursions, are not isolated incidents but part of a long-standing cycle of violence rooted in historical grievances, territorial claims, and hardened nationalism. To understand the stakes of this confrontation, it is necessary to trace how India and Pakistan emerged, how Kashmir became contested, and how decades of unresolved tensions have led to repeated conflict.

The Partition of British India and the Birth of Two Nations

The origins of the Kashmir conflict lie in the chaotic partition of British India in 1947. After nearly two centuries of colonial rule, Britain withdrew, dividing the subcontinent into two independent dominions: India, a secular but Hindu-majority state, and Pakistan, envisioned as a homeland for Muslims.

Partition triggered one of the largest and bloodiest mass migrations in history. Communal violence erupted across the region, killing up to two million people and displacing over fifteen million. Amid the turmoil, the future of more than 560 princely states, which had enjoyed semi-autonomy under British rule, remained unresolved. Each princely ruler was left to decide whether to accede to India or Pakistan.

Kashmir: A Legacy of Unresolved Sovereignty

Among these princely states, Jammu and Kashmir became the most contentious. A Muslim-majority region ruled by a Hindu Maharaja, Hari Singh, Kashmir's fate was precarious. Initially seeking independence, Singh’s position collapsed when Pakistani tribal forces invaded in October 1947. Facing rebellion and external aggression, he sought military assistance from India and signed the Instrument of Accession.

Indian forces were airlifted into Kashmir, repelling the invaders but igniting the first Indo-Pakistani war. The conflict ended in 1949 with a United Nations-brokered ceasefire that divided Kashmir along what became known as the Line of Control. India retained two-thirds of the territory; Pakistan administered the remainder, known as Azad Kashmir.

However, the larger issue remained unresolved. India maintained that the Maharaja’s accession was final. Pakistan insisted that, given the Muslim majority, Kashmir rightfully belonged to it. A promised plebiscite, allowing Kashmiris to choose their future, was never held. Instead, both sides entrenched their claims, setting the stage for decades of hostility.

Wars and the Deepening of Hostilities

The 1947-48 war was only the beginning. In 1965, a second Indo-Pakistani war erupted, again centered on Kashmir. A third war in 1971, though focused on the secession of East Pakistan and the birth of Bangladesh, further deepened hostility.

Following the 1971 war, the Simla Agreement was signed, committing both sides to resolve disputes bilaterally. Yet, this diplomatic accord did little to ease tensions. Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, Kashmir became heavily militarized. In 1989, a full-scale insurgency broke out in Indian-administered Kashmir, fueled by local discontent and Pakistani support for militant groups.

In 1999, just a year after both nations tested nuclear weapons, the Kargil War erupted when Pakistani forces and militants occupied Indian positions along the Line of Control. India repelled the offensive, but the conflict underscored the terrifying risks of escalation between two nuclear-armed rivals.

The 2019 Shift: Revocation of Article 370

Tensions reached a new high in 2019 when India's government, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, revoked Article 370 of the Constitution, stripping Jammu and Kashmir of its special autonomous status. For decades, Article 370 had allowed the region to have its own constitution and significant self-rule.

The move effectively integrated Kashmir fully under Indian federal control. Pakistan condemned the action as illegal and downgraded diplomatic ties. India responded with sweeping security measures in Kashmir, including curfews, mass arrests, and a near-total communications blackout.

This Week’s Escalation

Against this backdrop, this week’s violence unfolded.  A deadly attack struck Pahalgam, a popular tourist destination in Indian-administered Kashmir, killing 26 civilians—25 Indians and one Nepalese national. Indian authorities quickly blamed Pakistan-based militant groups for the assault, although no organization officially claimed responsibility.

In response, India launched a series of sharp diplomatic and economic measures. It suspended key provisions of the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty, expelled Pakistani diplomats, halted visa services for Pakistani nationals, and closed the vital Wagah land crossing. Although Indian media speculated about potential military retaliation, New Delhi has so far refrained from launching airstrikes across the Line of Control. Instead, reports indicated a surge in cross-border shelling, heightening fears of a broader confrontation.

Meanwhile, both militaries have reinforced their positions along sensitive stretches of the border, and Indian defense sources reported drone incursions across the Line of Control. Although the standoff has not yet matched the intensity of previous crises, the situation remains dangerously unstable. With nationalist fervor rising on both sides and international actors calling for restraint, the risk of miscalculation—and escalation into wider conflict—looms large.

The Broader Consequences

The situation remains highly volatile. Both India and Pakistan are led by nationalist governments, sensitive to internal pressures and unwilling to appear weak. International actors, including China, the United States, and Gulf nations, have urged restraint, but their influence is limited against entrenched domestic narratives that frame Kashmir not merely as a territorial dispute, but as a matter of national honor.

This latest escalation underscores how fragile peace remains in one of the world’s most militarized regions. While both sides understand the catastrophic risks of war—especially nuclear war—powerful forces of nationalism, grievance, and historical memory often overwhelm diplomatic caution.

Without a settlement that addresses the aspirations of the Kashmiri people, the cycle of violence and retaliation will likely continue. This week’s clashes offer another grim reminder that the legacy of partition remains unresolved, and its costs continue to rise.