What are Carbon Markets ?



Carbon Markets: Carbon markets facilitate the trading of emission reductions. Such a market allows countries, or industries, to earn carbon credits for the emission reductions they make in excess of their targets. These carbon credits can be traded to the highest bidder in exchange of money. The buyers of carbon credits can show the emission reductions as their own and use them to meet their reduction targets. Carbon markets are considered a very important and effective instrument to reduce overall emissions.



A carbon market existed under Kyoto Protocol but is no longer there because the Protocol itself expired last year. A new market under Paris Agreement is yet to become functional. Developing countries like India, China or Brazil have large amounts of carbon credits left over because of the lack of demand as many countries abandoned their emission reduction targets. The developing countries wanted their unused carbon credits to be transitioned to the new market, something that the developed nations had been opposing on the grounds that the quality of these credits — the question whether these credits represent actual emission reductions — was a suspect. A deadlock over this had been holding up the finalisation of the rules and procedures of the Paris Agreement.


The Glasgow Pact has offered some reprieve to the developing nations. It has allowed these carbon credits to be used in meeting countries’ first NDC targets. These cannot be used for meeting targets in subsequent NDCs. That means, if a developed country wants to buy these credits to meet its own emission reduction targets, it can do so till 2025. Most countries have presented climate targets for 2025 in their first NDCs.

The resolution of the deadlock over carbon markets represents one of the major successes of COP26.

Achievements of the Glasgow Summit 2021




What was achieved?

Mitigation: The Glasgow agreement has emphasised that stronger action in the current decade was most critical to achieving the 1.5-degree target. Accordingly, it has:

1. Asked countries to strengthen their 2030 climate action plans, or NDCs (nationally-determined contributions), by next year.

2. Established a work programme to urgently scale-up mitigation ambition and implementation.

3. Decided to convene an annual meeting of ministers to raise ambition of 2030 climate actions.

4. Called for an annual synthesis report on what countries were doing.

5. Requested the UN Secretary General to convene a meeting of world leaders in 2023 to scale-up ambition of climate action.

6. Asked countries to make efforts to reduce usage of coal as a source of fuel, and abolish “inefficient” subsidies on fossil fuels
Has called for a phase-down of coal, and phase-out of fossil fuels. This is the first time that coal has been explicitly mentioned in any COP decision. It also led to big fracas at the end, with a group of countries led by India and China forcing an amendment to the word “phase-out” in relation to coal changed to “phase-down”. The initial language on this provision was much more direct. It called on all parties to accelerate phase-out of coal and fossil fuel subsidies. It was watered down in subsequent drafts to read phase-out of “unabated” coal power and “inefficient” fossil fuel subsidies. But even this was not liking to the developing countries who then got it changed to “phase down unabated coal power and phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies while providing targeted support to the poorest and the most vulnerable in line with national circumstances…”. Despite the dilution, the inclusion of language on reduction of coal power is being seen as a significant movement forward.



Adaptation: Most of the countries, especially the smaller and poorer ones, and the small island states, consider adaptation to be the most important component of climate action. These countries, due to their lower capacities, are already facing the worst impacts of climate change, and require immediate money, technology and capacity building for their adaptation activities.

As such, the Glasgow Climate Pact has:

Asked the developed countries to at least double the money being provided for adaptation by 2025 from the 2019 levels. In 2019, about $15 billion was made available for adaptation that was less than 20 per cent of the total climate finance flows. Developing countries have been demanding that at least half of all climate finance should be directed towards adaptation efforts.


Created a two-year work programme to define a global goal on adaptation. The Paris Agreement has a global goal on mitigation — reduce greenhouse gas emissions deep enough to keep the temperature rise within 2 degree Celsius of pre-industrial times. A similar global goal on adaptation has been missing, primarily because of the difficulty in defining such a target. Unlike mitigation efforts that bring global benefits, the benefits from adaptation are local or regional. There are no uniform global criteria against which adaptation targets can be set and measured. However, this has been a long-pending demand of developing countries and the Paris Agreement also asks for defining such a goal.



Finance: Every climate action has financial implications. It is now estimated that trillions of dollars are required every year to fund all the actions necessary to achieve the climate targets. But, money has been in short supply. Developed countries are under an obligation, due to their historical responsibility in emitting greenhouse gases, to provide finance and technology to the developing nations to help them deal with climate change. In 2009, developed countries had promised to mobilise at least $100 billion every year from 2020. This promise was reaffirmed during the Paris Agreement, which also asked the developed countries to scale up this amount from 2025. The 2020 deadline has long passed but the $100 billion promise has not been fulfilled. The developed nations have now said that they will arrange this amount by 2023.

What does the Glasgow Agreement say?

Following are the major observations of the Glasgow Summit :

1. A deal aimed at staving off dangerous climate change has been struck at the COP26 summit in Glasgow.

2. Expressed “deep regrets” over the failure of the developed countries to deliver on their $100 billion promise. It has asked them to arrange this money urgently and in every year till 2025.

3. Initiated discussions on setting the new target for climate finance, beyond $100 billion for the post-2025 period.

4. Asked the developed countries to provide transparent information about the money they plan to provide.

5. Loss and Damage: The frequency of climate disasters has been rising rapidly, and many of these cause largescale devastation. The worst affected are the poor and small countries, and the island states. There is no institutional mechanism to compensate these nations for the losses, or provide them help in the form of relief and rehabilitation. The loss and damage provision in the Paris Agreement seeks to address that.


Introduced eight years ago in Warsaw, the provision hasn’t received much attention at the COPs, mainly because it was seen as an effort requiring huge sums of money. However, the affected countries have been demanding some meaningful action on this front. Thanks to a push from many nations, substantive discussions on loss and damage could take place in Glasgow. One of the earlier drafts included a provision for setting up of a facility to coordinate loss and damage activities. However, the final agreement, which has acknowledged the problem and dealt with the subject at substantial length, has only established a “dialogue” to discuss arrangements for funding of such activities. This is being seen as a major let-down.

What are Carbon Markets ?

Glasgow Summit 2021



Carbon Markets: Carbon markets facilitate the trading of emission reductions. Such a market allows countries, or industries, to earn carbon credits for the emission reductions they make in excess of their targets. These carbon credits can be traded to the highest bidder in exchange of money. The buyers of carbon credits can show the emission reductions as their own and use them to meet their reduction targets. Carbon markets are considered a very important and effective instrument to reduce overall emissions.



A carbon market existed under Kyoto Protocol but is no longer there because the Protocol itself expired last year. A new market under Paris Agreement is yet to become functional. Developing countries like India, China or Brazil have large amounts of carbon credits left over because of the lack of demand as many countries abandoned their emission reduction targets. The developing countries wanted their unused carbon credits to be transitioned to the new market, something that the developed nations had been opposing on the grounds that the quality of these credits — the question whether these credits represent actual emission reductions — was a suspect. A deadlock over this had been holding up the finalisation of the rules and procedures of the Paris Agreement.


The Glasgow Pact has offered some reprieve to the developing nations. It has allowed these carbon credits to be used in meeting countries’ first NDC targets. These cannot be used for meeting targets in subsequent NDCs. That means, if a developed country wants to buy these credits to meet its own emission reduction targets, it can do so till 2025. Most countries have presented climate targets for 2025 in their first NDCs.

The resolution of the deadlock over carbon markets represents one of the major successes of COP26.

Five terms that came up at the climate change conference in Glasgow 2021


The main task for COP26 was to finalise the rules and procedures for implementation of the Paris Agreement. Most of these rules had been finalised by 2018, but a few provisions, like the one relating to creation of new carbon markets, had remained unresolved.

After two weeks of negotiations with governments debating over provisions on phasing out coal, cutting greenhouse gas emissions and providing money to the poor world, the annual climate change summit came to an end on Saturday night with the adoption of a weaker-than-expected agreement called the Glasgow Climate Pact.



The Glasgow meeting was the 26th session of the Conference of Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, or COP26. The main task for COP26 was to finalise the rules and procedures for implementation of the Paris Agreement. Most of these rules had been finalised by 2018, but a few provisions, like the one relating to creation of new carbon markets, had remained unresolved. However, due to clear evidence of worsening of the climate crisis in the six years since the Paris Agreement was finalised, host country United Kingdom was keen to ensure that Glasgow, instead of becoming merely a “procedural” COP, was a turning point in enhancing climate actions. The effort was to push for an agreement that could put the world on a 1.5 degree Celsius pathway, instead of the 2 degree Celsius trajectory which is the main objective of the Paris Agreement.

PLIGHT OF WOMEN IN AFGHANISTAN

BY DAKSHITA NAITHANI

The Afghan women, maybe more than anybody else, have dreaded the Taliban’s return. There have been many advances in women’s rights over the last 20 years, which appear to be set to erase nearly overnight.

A quick lesson from history…

The Taliban, a political and military force, is said to have started in Islamic schools in Northern Pakistan in the early 1990s. Its aim was to restore order in Afghanistan following the withdrawal of Soviet troops in 1989, as well as to impose a harsh form of Sharia law. By 1998, the organisation had seized 90% of Afghanistan’s territory.

Once in control, the organisation garnered worldwide condemnation for a slew of human-rights violations. The ban on female education above the age of ten as well as harsh limitations on day-to-day liberties, were among the stringent mores imposed on women and its influence has frequently threatened to expand beyond, to places like Pakistan, where the organisation memorably shot teenager Malala Yousafzai in 2012. Women were treated worse than at any previous period or by any other culture throughout its rule (1996–2001). They were prohibited from working, leaving the house without a male escort, seeking medical assistance from a male doctor, and being compelled to cover themselves from head to toe, including their eyes. Women who had previously worked as physicians and teachers were compelled to become beggars or even prostitutes in order to feed their families during the Taliban’s rule.

Following the 9/11 attacks, it was thought that the Taliban were harbouring Al-Qaeda soldiers, thus an US-led international operation was started against Afghanistan. As a consequence, the Taliban were deposed from power, an Afghan government was established, and soldiers occupied the country for 20 years. It destabilised several regions of the nation due to battles with US and UK forces on a regular basis, and Afghan people were continued to be assaulted. Many would agree that the political and cultural status of Afghan women had improved significantly since the Taliban’s collapse in late 2001.

The Bush administration’s acceptance of women’s rights and empowerment as rationale for its assault on the Taliban is long gone. So it was under the Barack Obama administration, when then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated that the Taliban’s repudiation of al-Qaida and promise to support the Afghan constitution and safeguard women’s rights were preconditions for US discussions with them. The rejection of al-Qaida has yet to be declared openly and publicly less than 10 years later; the constitutional order and women’s rights are still subject to intra-Afghan talks and will be influenced by the changing balance of military power.

In February 2020, US-Taliban peace talks were concluded, with the US pledging a quiet departure in exchange for an end to hostilities. Afghan leaders and top military generals have warned that the government will collapse without foreign assistance. It looks like the worst has transpired only weeks before Biden’s deadline of September 11th.

The Taliban rule wreaked havoc on the institutions and the economy, which had already been ravaged by decades of conflict and the Soviet scorched-earth counterinsurgency policy.

The post-Taliban constitution of 2004 granted Afghan women a wide range of rights, and the political epoch brought social and economic progress, which greatly improved the socioeconomic situation. From a crumbling health-care system with almost no healthcare available to women during the Taliban years, the post regime built 3,135 functional facilities by 2018, giving more than 80 percent of Afghans access to a medical facility within two hours’ drive.

 Less than 10% of females were enrolled in elementary schools in 2003; by 2017, that figure had risen to 33%, while female secondary school attendance increased from 6% to 39%. As a result, 3.5 million Afghan females were enrolled in education, with 100,000 of them enrolled in academic institutions. Women’s life expectancy increased from 56 to 66 years in 2017 and maternal mortality fell from 1,100 per 100,000 live births in 2000 to 396 per 100,000 in 2015. By 2020, women made up 21% of Afghan public workers, including 16% of top management positions, and 27% of Afghan parliamentarians.

 These benefits for women have been dispersed inequitably, with women in metropolitan areas benefiting considerably more than women in rural regions. Despite formal legal empowerment, life for many rural women has not improved much since the Taliban era, notably in Pashtun regions but also among other rural minority groups. Many Afghan males are staunch conservatives. Families often let their daughters to complete a primary or secondary education before proceeding with planned marriages. The burqa is worn by the majority of Afghan women in rural regions without any pushing from the Taliban.

What is the situation for women in Afghanistan now?

Women’s rights in Afghan had arguably maintained pace with many other Western countries prior to the 1970s. Women were granted the right to vote in 1919, one year after women in the United Kingdom. In the 1950s, gender segregation was eliminated, and in the 1960s, a constitution was enacted that included women in political life. As the region became more unstable in the 1970s, these rights were steadily eroded.

Only 38% of the international humanitarian response plan for Afghanistan is financed as of August 2021. This gap might result in the loss of specialised protection services for 1.2 million children, putting them at risk of abuse, recruitment, child labour, early and forced marriages, and sex abuse. About 1.4 million females, many of whom are survivors of domestic abuse, would be left without access to safe spaces where they may receive full care.

Females, who have experienced life with rights and freedoms, are among the most exposed as a result of the Taliban’s fast progress in Afghanistan. As the Taliban capture control of Kabul, they risk losing their hard-won achievements.

Those cries for aid may be too late as the capital city falls into the clutches of Islamist rebels. There have been several stories of the Taliban going door-to-door and compiling a list of women and girls aged 12 to 45 who are then compelled to marry Taliban warriors. Women are told that they cannot leave the house without a male escort, that they cannot work or study, and that they cannot wear anything they want. Schools are also being shuttered.

There is a lot to lose for a whole generation of Afghan women who entered public life – legislators, journalists, local governors, physicians, nurses, teachers, and public administrators. While they worked alongside male colleagues and in communities that were unfamiliar with people in positions of power to help establish a truly democratic civil society, they also wanted to pave the way for future generations to follow in their footsteps.

The Taliban offers itself a broad range of possibilities by claiming that they will “protect” women’s rights under sharia but refusing to explain how women’s rights and life in Afghanistan will alter if they achieve their goals. Even if the government did not openly adopt as cruel a system for women as in the 1990s, the Taliban’s dispositions are quite likely to undermine women’s rights, impose cultural prohibitions on women, and reduce socio-economic possibilities for them.

In summary, even with this change in behaviour, the Taliban in power would almost certainly strive to curtail Afghan women’s legal rights, exacerbating their social, economic, and political circumstances. How much and in what manner, is the question.

Afghanistan- A war-torn nation

With Al-Qaeda militants carrying out coordinated attacks on American soil,also known as 9/11 Attacks and Taliban government refusing to hand over the main culprit behind these attacks ‘Osama Bin Laden’. A war was declared by US and it’s allies against terrorism and Afghanistan was invaded in 2001.

US tried it’s best to avoid the mistakes done by British & Russia (then USSR),it gained some success by driving out the Taliban government and killing the Terrorists. This whole operation have costed US more than $800 billions and more than 2300 soldiers lives. While on the other side, Afghan civilians had been caught in between this war and have suffered at the hands of both US & Terrorists (Al-Qaeda & Taliban) .

There is a popular saying about Afghanistan – ‘The Graveyard Of Empires’ for those who have tried to conquer it. Afghanistan is tough to rule, not only because of its terrain but also of the hostilities between the different tribes present there.

US Navy seals carried out a mission code-named ‘Operation Neptune Spear’ and killed Laden on 2nd May 2011 in Pakistan. US thought that by killing Laden they had achieved their goal but they were mistaken.

India aided in the overthrow of the Taliban-led government and has been the largest regional provider of humanitarian and reconstruction aid in the country. India have provided over $3 billion in assistance and every year it continues to do so.

Challenges ahead for Afghanistan and it’s neighbours

Taliban is slowly gaining pace and have formed alliance with other terror outfits to overthrow the present government. Civil war is not far, after US withdrawal. Fight is going on between Afghan security forces supported by civilians against the Taliban.

There’s little hope that Taliban will agree on the terms mentioned in peace talks . War-torn Afghanistan is now at the same stage before US invasion and onus now is on China,india,pakistan,Iran to maintain peace and provide stability in the Afghanistan.

The perpetual war between the two countries

You must have seen a video which got viral few days back where a boy was seen damaging the walls of a temple that is currently being built in Islamabad(Pakistan). Another example like this was where a five year old boy was seen warning the Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan that if he will allow the the temples to be built, he will “kill all the Hindus”. Imagine a five year child speaking in his childish voice and warning such higher authority which may seem funny, but on the other hand this is a very important matter for the society that some people of Pakistan are filling up their children’s mind with filth and not showing them the right way where they should treat everyone as equal irrespective of caste, colour, gender plus nationality. I do agree with some of the things that the conflict between India and Pakistan is never ending but at least we can try to change the minds of the youth who will take the country forward.

Let me begin with the actual story where the Pakistani Government has decided to release funds for the Hindu temple to be built in Islamabad. This decision was made for the Minority class- the Hindu’s in Pakistan who also have the right to worship God in the temples. This plan was committed in the year 2017 by Nawaz Sharif’s government but it got delayed due to some issues. This is not the first time where the government has taken such step, before this the government took many initiatives for Hindu pilgrimage like they renovated Katas Raj Temple– a buddhist temple for the Hindus to worship. The Government has also helped the Sikh community with building gurudwaras for them like The Peshawar Gurudwara and the Nankana Sahib in Sailkot which was renovated for the sikhs.

aljazeera.com

Well, all of these things are small stepping stones by the Government for the minority so that they can also live like normal people without the barriers of religion. But on the other hand some projects have been backlashed by the Muslims of Pakistan where in a recent example the Pakistani government was planning to celebrate the legacy of Maharaja Ranjit Singh with statue, but it ended up causing a controversy on social media and in less than two months the statue was vandalised by the people. How will the country progress like this where the people are still not agreeing to some basic terms of accepting their fellow citizens as equal, building a temple or a gurudwara will never harm the other religion in fact all of these initiatives will bring the conflicts to an end. I am not saying that we Indians are the best and we don’t do such things, we are still facing major conflicts between Hindu and Muslim and there is no other solution to bring an end to this but there are Gurudwaras, Temples, Mosque and Church which are built together on the same lane and people respect that.

But why are these issues still arising, why can’t the soldiers just guard the country peacefully? The major reason for this is ‘Education‘ where the children are taught some facts which are against Hindus and Muslims, the facts which are putting them apart instead of living in tranquility and in harmony. The youth is being taught the wrong subjects with wrong facts and the society is also playing a major role in this, where they term minority people with funny names, where they are always referred to as a ‘minority class‘ instead of terming them as equal citizens.

All these examples and statements are not to hurt anyone be it from any religion or country. Building a temple or a gurudwara or even a mosque will never help the people to understand and have respect for the other religious sentiments, but education is and will be the only factor to bring everyone together and to treat everyone as equal, not becoming religion bias.

“My religion is ver simple, my religion is Kindness.” -Dalai Lama

India’s Kashmir Conflict

The Conflicted Map Of J&K with Ladakh

With over seven decades crossed since 1947 followed a continuous stretch of never-ending bloodsheds in the Kashmir valley or for the reason of it.  Just in past 27 years, around 41,000 lives have been lost due to this Indo-Pak dispute. The Indian army had lost many of its brave soldiers who sacrificed themselves for the safety and security of people in the valley and rest of India. With more than 950,000 soldiers deployed in Kashmir, making it world’s most strongly guarded place, shows the threat level in the valley. The current Kashmir when compared to the Maharaja Hari Singh’s Kashmir is divided into 3 major parts. Two pieces of territory are illegally occupied by the Pakistan (30%) and China (15%). The regions under Pakistan are Gilgilt, Baltistan and the Pakistan occupied Kashmir (POK) and the region under China is Aksai-Chin which is vastly inhabited by humanity.

The Indian controlled Kashmir (55%) owns 60 per cent of the population of Kashmir in total. The Jammu and Kashmir initially under the Sikh Empire of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, saw a shift in powers with arrival of east India company and british. The empire then switched into the Dogra Empire which was overtaken by Maharaja Gulab Singh and this continued until the independence of India in the year 1947. It was this time, when the britishers before leaving Indian territory kept an opportunity for all the 565 princely states of Indian peninsula to either join an Islamic state named Pakistan or a democratic republic of India. This stretched the long run tensions between the communities of muslims (in favour of an Islamic state) and the rest of people into a massacre of centuries. A bloodshed that no one in the world saw before, it is estimated that up to one million people were killed during the violence in 1947, and around 50,000 women were abducted. Some 12 million people were displaced from their homes in the divided province of Punjab alone, and up to 20 million in the subcontinent as a whole. Few princely states opt to merge with Islamic state of Pakistan and majority of them joined the republic of India. Kashmir on the other side chose to remain an independent state under Maharaja Hari Singh. He decided to stay independent because he expected that the State’s Muslims would be unhappy with accession to India, and the Hindus and Sikhs would become vulnerable if he joined Pakistan. On 11 August 1947, the Maharaja dismissed his prime minister Ram Chandra Kak, who had advocated independence. Observers and scholars interpret this action as a tilt towards accession to India. Pakistanis decided to pre-empt this possibility by wresting Kashmir by force if necessary. Pakistan made various efforts to persuade the Maharaja of Kashmir to join Pakistan. In July 1947, Mohammad Ali Jinnah is believed to have written to the Maharaja promising “every sort of favourable treatment,” followed by the lobbying of the State’s Prime Minister by leaders of Jinnah’s Muslim League party. Faced with the Maharaja’s indecision on accession, the Muslim League agents clandestinely worked in Poonch (west territory of Kashmir) to encourage the local Muslims to an armed revolt, exploiting an internal unrest regarding economic grievances. The authorities in Pakistani Punjab waged a ‘private war’ by obstructing supplies of fuel and essential commodities to the State. Later in September, Muslim League officials in the Northwest Frontier Province, including the Chief Minister Abdul Qayyum Khan, assisted and possibly organized a large-scale invasion of Kashmir by Pathan tribesmen. Several sources indicate that the plans were finalised on 12 September by the Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan, based on proposals prepared by Colonel Akbar Khan and Sardar Shaukat Hayat Khan. One plan called for organising an armed insurgency in the western districts of the state and the other for organising a Pushtoon tribal invasion. Both were set in motion.

With Pakistan’s tribesmen invasion, the Kashmir was set on fire, loot, and atrocities to Kashmiris by the Pathan’s were so grieve that it could be hardly penned down. The pathan’s did whatever they could to terrorize Kashmiri’s, they abducted, raped and murdered thousands of girls and women of all ages. This was being done to scare Kashmir and its ruler for their indecision for accession into Islamic state of Pakistan. The Pakistan’s muslim league and its military knew this for sure, that newly formed independent nation of Jammu & Kashmir is heavily outnumbered with its line of defence and weapons. The Maharaja made an urgent plea to Delhi for military assistance. Upon the Governor General Lord Mountbatten’s insistence, India required the Maharaja to accede before it could send troops. Accordingly, the Maharaja signed an instrument of accession on 26 October 1947, which was accepted by the Governor General the next day.

While the Government of India accepted the accession, it added the proviso that it would be submitted to a “reference to the people” after the state is cleared of the invaders, since “only the people, not the Maharaja, could decide where Kashmiris wanted to live.”; it was a provisional accession. The largest political party, National Conference, headed by Sheikh Abdullah, endorsed the accession. In the words of the National Conference leader Syed Mir Qasim, India had the “legal” as well as “moral” justification to send in the army through the Maharaja’s accession and the people’s support of it. The Indian troops, which were airlifted in the early hours of 27 October, secured the Srinagar airport. The visiting journalist at Srinagar city witnessed an incredible sight where volunteers of National Conference (Local political party of Kashmir) was patrolling the city from tribal Pakistani invaders and Minority Hindus, Sikhs were moving freely among Kashmiri Muslims. This was a true example of community harmony in Kashmir.

After securing Sri Nagar, the Indian army troops were set to retrieve other portions of Kashmir, captured by the Pakistani tribesmen and military. Yet, in the meantime the then prime minister of India, Mr J. L. Nehru made an announcement over all India radio, that India would seek United Nation’s (UN) mediation into this matter. This was greatly opposed by the then home minister of India, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel. Later, with intervention of United Nations group under Sir Owen Dixon (UN mediator) who came up with a plan of seizing the military conflict by mapping a stamp on territories already under control. This led regions already secured by the two countries under their jurisdictions and UN formed a Line of Control between the western and Eastern parts of Kashmir. To this day, India claims the entire region of Kashmir as per the legal instrument of accession signed by the Maharaja of Kashmir, making the whole of Kashmir an integral part of Republic Of India.

Later in the year of 1962, another war broke but this time it was between India and China. The war zone was the regions of Ladakh province to the east of Kashmir. After this Indo-China war of ’62, China captured another part of Maharaja Hari singh territory, the Aksai-Chin. India to this date demands both of its territories and had raised its voice into United Nations Security Council from time to time in the recent past. Whatever is good for Kashmir and safe for Kashmiri dreams should be implemented, to make sure that no more innocent lives are lost, no more brave soldiers are sacrificed for the love of their motherland.

The conflict of Kashmir…

On February 14th 2019, a suicide bomber attacked a convoy of Indian security forces. “We’re getting reports of multiple casualties in a roadside…” He killed at least 40 Indian soldiers here in Kashmir. “The deadliest attack the region has seen this century.” The bomber was part of an Islamic militant group based in Pakistan. “Jaish-e-Mohammed claimed responsibility for that attack.” 12 days later, India carried out airstrikes in Northwestern Pakistan. Then Pakistan shot down at least one Indian aircraft around here. “The most serious escalation in years.” Kashmir is one of the most disputed places on Earth. Over the course of 70 years, it’s been at the center of three wars fought between two massive armies. It’s heavily occupied by more than half a million Indian troops and a deadly collection of militias and terrorist groups.

How Memory of Indian Partition Is Preserved Across Borders | Time
Kashmir is the stage for the relentless conflict between India and Pakistan. But focusing on the two countries can obscure what’s really at stake: The voice of Kashmiris who are caught in a vicious cycle of violence. Kashmir is one of the most strategic places in the world, where 3 powerful countries collide: India, Pakistan, and China. China invaded and took this slice of Kashmir from India. And was given this one by Pakistan. India and Pakistan control these parts, but lay claim to more. This region is at the center of a brutal conflict over these disputed borders. So it’s important to start when they were being drawn. In the mid-1800s, India was a patchwork of several hundred provinces and princely states under British rule. A century later, when British India won independence, the British left and hastily decided to split the region into two. These areas would be a new Muslim-majority country, Pakistan. And this would be the mostly Hindu, but secular, India. The partition was bloody. “Communal hatred flares up within the Punjab.” “1 million people become refugees overnight.” “They flee from savagery and butchery that has never been exceeded, even in India’s stormy history.” Amid the chaos, some princely states were given the choice to join either country. In most cases, the ruling monarchs followed the will of their people. But this state, called “Jammu & Kashmir” was different. It was right along this new border and had a Muslim-majority population, but was ruled by a Hindu monarch. When asked to pick a side, the ruler chose to stay neutral Fearing that the monarch would join India, the Kashmiri population rebelled here in 1947 Armed tribesmen from Pakistan soon joined the fight.

India and Pakistan in Kashmir border skirmish - BBC News
The monarch turned to India for military help and in exchange agreed to join them, which sparked the first Indo-Pakistan war in Kashmir. “Continuing thus increased the threat to world peace and brought the dispute to the eye of the United Nations . The UN Security Council brokered a ceasefire in 1949, which established this line with Pakistan controlling this side and India this one. It also asked Pakistani tribesmen to withdraw and Indian troops to follow, so that Kashmir could hold a direct vote to decide its own future. But neither held up their end of the deal. Pakistan argued that Kashmir’s Muslim-majority population rightfully belonged with them. While India insisted that Kashmir was handed over to them by the Hindu monarch. So they doubled down and added Kashmir to their constution. Both countries continued to tighten their grip around it for many years . “Kashmir. Fighting is going on and heavy casualties in men and equipment have been inflicted on the aggressor.”

India-Pakistan: Latest news on Kashmir crisis
In 1965, the second India-Pakistan war broke out in Kashmir. Thousands of people were killed between the huge armies on both sides. A ceasefire ended the war, but didn’t change this line. Kashmir was kept divided and occupied. And another war broke out in 1971. This time the focus wasn’t in Kashmir — it was in East Pakistan. Here, India helped rebels fight for independence and dealt Pakistan a devastating defeat. This region became a new country, Bangladesh, and Pakistan lost its eastern half. This made Kashmir more important than ever: It became one of the most militarized places on Earth, as India and Pakistan deployed planes, tanks, artillery, and soldiers along the Line of Control. On the political front, in ’87, India reportedly rigged an election, declaring a pro-India party as the winner. Now this was a big turning point for many Kashmiris, who felt they were again denied the chance to vote. Thousands took to the streets in Indian-controlled Kashmir to protest the occupation. But India met the movement for independence with harsh resistance. Which quickly escalated to more violence.
“In January security forces opened fire on demonstrating separatists, turning a two-year old struggling movement into a full-blown popular uprising.” “More than 600 people are killed in clashes between troops and separatists.” Kashmiri militias, just like the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front, started recruiting Muslim youth to fight for independence. And increasingly attacked the Indian military. Pakistan saw an opportunity in this insurgency. They helped introduce a new kind of militant group: Radical Islamic fighters who fought for a more pro-Pakistan Kashmir. By the mid ’90s, these groups dominated the insurgency. India responded with incredible military force, deploying 500,000 troops to Kashmir. And they cracked down on militants and protestors. Unarmed civilians were killed and many more were forced to flee the violence. And in ’98 the stakes were raised yet again. “Today India conducted three underground nuclear tests.” “Pakistan today successfully conducted five nuclear tests.” Kashmir became a battleground between two nuclear-armed nations and another war broke out in 1999. “More evidence of the attacks being launched on the Indian-controlled area of Kargil.” “The past two days have seen a number of the fiercest fighting thus far .” “Militant Muslim fighters have also crossed over into some parts of Indian-ruled Kashmir.” The 1999 war ended with another ceasefire, but that did not stop either country.

India-Pakistan cross-border shelling hits Kashmir | News | Al Jazeera

Over the years, Pakistan’s militant groups got bolder and launched terror attacks in Kashmir and outside of Kashmir. In 2001, members of Lashkar-e-Taiba bombed India’s parliament building in New Delhi killing 14 people. And in 2008, 10 militants from the same group killed 174 people and wounded 300 in Mumbai. Meanwhile, Indian military cracked down in Kashmir, firing bullets and pellets on unarmed protesters. Leaving hundreds wounded and blind. This is the vicious cycle of violence. The Indian Army’s crackdown drives some Kashmiris to join Pakistani-backed militant groups, who carry out violence against the Indian forces. It’s a cycle that Kashmiri civilians are stuck in the middle of. Which brings us back to 2019. The suicide bomber was 19-year old Adil Ahmed Dar from Pulwama, Kashmir. According to his parents, in 2016, Indian police officers stopped him and humiliated him by forcing his face into the ground. The same year he was shot in the leg at a protest. The next year, Dar left home with his brothers, to join Jaish-e-Mohammed, a Pakistani-supported militia that radicalized him and trained him to be a suicide bomber. A year later, he drove explosives into an Indian military convoy. For more than 70 years India and Pakistan have driven a cycle of violence, retaliation, and exploitation in Kashmir. But beneath it all is the Kashmiri’s wish to make a choice. A wish that continues to be suppressed, again and again, by violence.