why kashmir has most violent situation.
Answers
Answered by
3
India claims the entire princely state of Jammu and Kashmir, and, as of 2010, administers approximately 43% of the region. It controls Jammu, the Kashmir Valley, Ladakh, and the Siachen Glacier.[3] India's claims are contested by Pakistan, which administers approximately 37% of the region, namely Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan.[4][5]China currently administers the remaining 20% mostly uninhabited areas, the Shaksgam Valley, and the Aksai Chin region.
The present conflict is in Kashmir Valley.[6]The root of conflict between the Kashmiri insurgents and the Indian government is tied to a dispute over local autonomy[7] and based on the demand for self-determination.[8][9][10]Democratic development was limited in Kashmir until the late 1970s, and by 1988, many of the democratic reforms introduced by the Indian Government had been reversed. Non-violent channels for expressing discontent were thereafter limited and caused a dramatic increase in support for insurgents advocating violent secession from India.[7] In 1987, a disputed state election[11] created a catalyst for the insurgency when it resulted in some of the state's legislative assembly members forming armed insurgent groups.[12][13][14] In July 1988 a series of demonstrations, strikes and attacks on the Indian Government began the Kashmir Insurgency.
Although thousands of people have died as a result of the turmoil in Jammu and Kashmir,[15] the conflict has become less deadly in recent years.[16][17] Protest movements created to voice Kashmir's disputes and grievances with the Indian government, specifically the Indian Military, have been active in Jammu and Kashmirsince 1989.[16][17] Elections held in 2008 were generally regarded as fair by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and had a high voter turnout in spite of calls by separatist militants for a boycott. The election resulted in the creation of the pro-India Jammu and Kashmir National Conference, which then formed a government in the state.[18][19] According to Voice of America, many analysts have interpreted the high voter turnout in this election as a sign that the people of Kashmir endorsed Indian rule in the state.[20] But in 2010 unrest erupted after alleged fake encounter of local youth with security force.[21] Thousands of youths pelted security forces with rocks, burned government offices and attacked railway stations and official vehicles in steadily intensifying violence.[22] The Indian government blamed separatists and Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistan-based militant group for stoking the 2010 protests.[23]
Elections held in 2014 saw highest voters turnout in 26 years of history in Jammu and Kashmir.[24][25][26][27] However, analysts explain that the high voter turnout in Kashmir is not an endorsement of Indian rule by the Kashmiri population, rather most people vote for daily issues such as food and electricity.[28][29] An opinion poll conducted by the Chatham House international affairs think tank found that in the Kashmir valley – the mainly Muslim area in Indian Kashmir at the centre of the insurgency – support for independence varies between 74% to 95% in its various districts.[30][31] Support for remaining with India was, however, extremely high in predominantly Hindu Jammu and Buddhist Ladakh.
According to scholars, Indian forces have committed many human rights abuses and acts of terror against Kashmiri civilian population including extrajudicial killing, rape, torture and enforced disappearances. Crimes by militants have also happened but are not comparable in scale with the crimes of Indian forces.[9][32][33] According to Amnesty International, as of June 2015, no member of the Indian military deployed in Jammu and Kashmir has been tried for human rights violations in a civilian court, although there have been military court martials held.[34]Amnesty International welcomed this move but cautioned that justice should be consistently delivered and prosecutions of security forces personnel be held in civilian courts. Amnesty International has also accused the Indian government of refusing to prosecute perpetrators of abuses in the region.[35]
Kashmir's accession to India was provisional,and conditional on a plebiscite,[36] and for this reason had a different constitutional status to other Indian states.[37] In October 2015 Jammu and Kashmir High Court said that article 370 is "permanent" and Jammu and Kashmir did not merge with India the way other princely states merged but retained special status and limited sovereignty under Indian constitution.[38]
In 2016 (8 July 2016 – present) unrest erupted after killing of a Hizbul Mujahideenmilitant Burhan Wani by Indian security forces.[39]
The present conflict is in Kashmir Valley.[6]The root of conflict between the Kashmiri insurgents and the Indian government is tied to a dispute over local autonomy[7] and based on the demand for self-determination.[8][9][10]Democratic development was limited in Kashmir until the late 1970s, and by 1988, many of the democratic reforms introduced by the Indian Government had been reversed. Non-violent channels for expressing discontent were thereafter limited and caused a dramatic increase in support for insurgents advocating violent secession from India.[7] In 1987, a disputed state election[11] created a catalyst for the insurgency when it resulted in some of the state's legislative assembly members forming armed insurgent groups.[12][13][14] In July 1988 a series of demonstrations, strikes and attacks on the Indian Government began the Kashmir Insurgency.
Although thousands of people have died as a result of the turmoil in Jammu and Kashmir,[15] the conflict has become less deadly in recent years.[16][17] Protest movements created to voice Kashmir's disputes and grievances with the Indian government, specifically the Indian Military, have been active in Jammu and Kashmirsince 1989.[16][17] Elections held in 2008 were generally regarded as fair by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and had a high voter turnout in spite of calls by separatist militants for a boycott. The election resulted in the creation of the pro-India Jammu and Kashmir National Conference, which then formed a government in the state.[18][19] According to Voice of America, many analysts have interpreted the high voter turnout in this election as a sign that the people of Kashmir endorsed Indian rule in the state.[20] But in 2010 unrest erupted after alleged fake encounter of local youth with security force.[21] Thousands of youths pelted security forces with rocks, burned government offices and attacked railway stations and official vehicles in steadily intensifying violence.[22] The Indian government blamed separatists and Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistan-based militant group for stoking the 2010 protests.[23]
Elections held in 2014 saw highest voters turnout in 26 years of history in Jammu and Kashmir.[24][25][26][27] However, analysts explain that the high voter turnout in Kashmir is not an endorsement of Indian rule by the Kashmiri population, rather most people vote for daily issues such as food and electricity.[28][29] An opinion poll conducted by the Chatham House international affairs think tank found that in the Kashmir valley – the mainly Muslim area in Indian Kashmir at the centre of the insurgency – support for independence varies between 74% to 95% in its various districts.[30][31] Support for remaining with India was, however, extremely high in predominantly Hindu Jammu and Buddhist Ladakh.
According to scholars, Indian forces have committed many human rights abuses and acts of terror against Kashmiri civilian population including extrajudicial killing, rape, torture and enforced disappearances. Crimes by militants have also happened but are not comparable in scale with the crimes of Indian forces.[9][32][33] According to Amnesty International, as of June 2015, no member of the Indian military deployed in Jammu and Kashmir has been tried for human rights violations in a civilian court, although there have been military court martials held.[34]Amnesty International welcomed this move but cautioned that justice should be consistently delivered and prosecutions of security forces personnel be held in civilian courts. Amnesty International has also accused the Indian government of refusing to prosecute perpetrators of abuses in the region.[35]
Kashmir's accession to India was provisional,and conditional on a plebiscite,[36] and for this reason had a different constitutional status to other Indian states.[37] In October 2015 Jammu and Kashmir High Court said that article 370 is "permanent" and Jammu and Kashmir did not merge with India the way other princely states merged but retained special status and limited sovereignty under Indian constitution.[38]
In 2016 (8 July 2016 – present) unrest erupted after killing of a Hizbul Mujahideenmilitant Burhan Wani by Indian security forces.[39]
umerbashir011:
voters turn out see statics last 4 years
Answered by
0
Becoz regularly most fights and exploitation by terrorist and soldiers occurs in that place..It made the The Paradise (Kashmir) into Violent areaa...Hope it helps u..Mark me as brainliest
Similar questions