The 22 April massacre of 28 tourists in Kashmir shows the fragility of regional peace and the enduring volatility of the India-Pakistan relationship. The attack, linked to post-2019 policy shifts in Kashmir, highlights how demographic change, diplomatic stalemate, and a lack of local agency continue to fuel cycles of violence and regional instability.
On 22 April, a group of tourists visiting Baisaran, a scenic meadow near Pahalgam in Indian-administered Kashmir, was ambushed by four suspected militants. The attack left at least 28 people dead and more than a dozen injured. Among the victims were Indian nationals from multiple states and two foreign citizens, one from the UAE and one from Nepal. The Resistance Front (TRF), an offshoot of Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba, claimed responsibility.
This was not just a terrorist attack, it was a statement. One that exposes how unresolved and politically explosive the Kashmir dispute still is.
What is the Kashmir conflict?
To understand the significance of this attack, we need to revisit history. When British India was partitioned in 1947, princely states were given the choice to join either India or Pakistan. Kashmir, a Muslim-majority region ruled by a Hindu king, initially chose to remain independent. But after an invasion by tribal militias from Pakistan, the ruler signed an agreement to accede to India. This triggered the first war between India and Pakistan.
Since then, Kashmir has been a deeply contested region. Both countries claim it in full but control parts of it. The Line of Control (LoC) divides Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir from Pakistan-administered territories.
Kashmir has seen three wars, multiple insurgencies, and decades of political unrest. For many local Kashmiris, the conflict is also about political identity and autonomy, caught between two states, with little say of their own.
The Article 370 flashpoint
In 2019, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government made a controversial move; it revoked Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, which had given Jammu and Kashmir a degree of autonomy since independence. The state was also split into two federally governed territories.
To many Kashmiris, this felt like a betrayal. For Pakistan, it was seen as India changing the status of a disputed territory unilaterally. The move sparked protests and a fresh wave of militancy.
The Pahalgam attack was reportedly motivated by opposition to the settlement of “non-locals” in Kashmir, a trend enabled by the 2019 policy shift. Militants see the changing demographics and promotion of tourism as part of a broader plan to dilute Kashmir’s Muslim identity.
India-Pakistan: A cold peace
Since 2021, both countries have avoided major clashes. Ceasefire agreements have mostly held. But there has been no formal dialogue or peace process. Relations remain tense, and cross-border militancy still flares up occasionally.
Pakistan continues to raise the Kashmir issue at international forums. India, on the other hand, insists that Kashmir is its internal matter and that militancy is driven by Pakistan-based groups. This diplomatic deadlock has created a fragile silence, but one that can break at any time, as Pahalgam sadly shows. What Now?
The Indian government has promised swift action. Security in the region has been tightened. International leaders have condemned the attack, with some expressing solidarity. But these words do little to address the root problem.
India has taken significant diplomatic steps to downgrade its relations with Pakistan in the aftermath of the attack. Following a high-level security cabinet meeting, Indian authorities announced the immediate closure of the main land border crossing between the two countries. Special visas previously granted to Pakistani nationals for travel to India have also been suspended. In a further move, several top Pakistani military advisors currently in New Delhi have been ordered to leave the country within a week. India has also announced the suspension of the decades-old Indus Waters Treaty with Pakistan, citing cross-border involvement in the recent Kashmir attack. As India tries to project Kashmir as a peaceful tourist hub, attacks like these reveal the deep scars still present. The silence of the international community on Kashmir, especially after 2019, has allowed tensions to simmer.
If both countries continue to avoid meaningful dialogue, and if the grievances of Kashmiris are not heard, the cycle of violence will likely continue, hurting civilians on all sides.
Conclusion
The Pahalgam attack is a sobering reminder that despite moments of calm, the Kashmir conflict remains deeply unresolved and prone to violent flare-ups. While India seeks to present the region as open for development and tourism, underlying political, demographic, and security tensions continue to fuel instability. The lack of sustained diplomatic engagement between India and Pakistan, combined with the marginalisation of Kashmiri voices, risks entrenching grievances and perpetuating militancy. Going forward, the greatest challenge will be breaking this cycle: restoring trust, addressing political and social alienation, and creating space for dialogue. Without such steps, peace will remain fragile, and civilians—regardless of nationality—will continue to bear the brunt of a conflict that refuses to fade.
Akshit Tyagi has worked full-time as a business and financial journalist in India for Republic TV and part-time for other esteemed news media organisations. You can follow Akshit on X @AkshitTyagii.
This article is published under a Creative Commons License and may be republished with attribution.
