India attributed responsibility to Pakistan for the Pahalgam attack but has not publicly released any tangible evidence to support its claim. Instead, it has propagated its narrative primarily through media channels, with TV programmes and commentators insisting on Pakistan’s alleged involvement alongside supposed Kashmiri collaborators. This rhetoric led to a sweeping crackdown in Kashmir, including the demolition of homes of alleged suspects. Human rights organisations condemned this as collective punishment.

Pakistan has denied involvement and called for an international investigation. It has repeatedly requested that India present verifiable evidence. It has also voiced concern over human rights violations in Kashmir and urged India to avoid unilateral action that might further inflame tensions.

Lack of substantiated proof has left much of the international community sceptical. With both countries advancing conflicting narratives, mistrust continued to grow, highlighting the need for de-escalation and independent verification.

In its diplomatic retaliation, India suspended the Indus Waters Treaty, a longstanding water-sharing agreement, and downgraded relations with Pakistan. It closed the Attari border checkpoint, cancelled visas for Pakistani nationals and suspended all travel related to the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation.

Indian authorities closed airspace to Pakistani aircraft and launched ‘Operation Sindoor’, carrying out airstrikes on nine targets in Pakistan, including Pakistan-administered Jammu and Kashmir.

Additionally, India banned 16 Pakistani YouTube channels for allegedly spreading disinformation and issued warnings to the BBC regarding its terminology.

Pakistan suspended Indian flights over its airspace, halted trade and the issuing of visas and expelled Indian diplomats.

Pakistan also signalled its intention to withdraw from the 1972 Simla Agreement, which ended the 1971 Indo-Pakistani War, and demanded an independent international inquiry into the Pahalgam attack. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif called for US and international intervention.

Military confrontations escalated, including reported missile strikes and retaliatory fire across the Line of Control, a de facto border between the parts of Jammu and Kashmir administered by India and Pakistan. Pakistan claimed it shot down five Indian jets and drones, though these claims remain unverified.

Civilians paid the highest price. Families divided across the Line of Control faced severe displacement and hardship amid cross-border fire. The region stood on the edge, with civilians caught between military brinkmanship and diplomatic failure.

The Kashmir dispute is not just a bilateral issue; it’s a flashpoint with global consequences.

As both India and Pakistan possess nuclear weapons, heightened hostilities risk escalating into a catastrophic conflict. The region has long been a hotspot for extremism and radicalisation, with far-reaching implications for global security.

Located at the intersection of South and Central Asia, Kashmir attracts the strategic interests of China, Russia and the USA, while the people of Kashmir face ongoing rights violations, displacement and humanitarian needs.

The conflict also challenges international norms concerning self-determination and territorial integrity. Failure to achieve a resolution risks reinforcing global instability and eroding the credibility of international mechanisms.

Over past decades, various de-escalation efforts — from bilateral agreements to UN Security Council resolutions — have failed to deliver lasting peace. UN observer missions have monitored ceasefire violations but have proven unable to prevent repeated flare-ups.

Mediation attempts by the USA, European states and, more recently, Gulf states, have produced only temporary periods of calm. Persistent lack of sustained political will and mutual trust continues to undermine these efforts.

The international community has yet to apply sufficient sustained pressure for a political solution. Crisis diplomacy has long reached its limits and there’s pressing need to address the root causes of conflict. If the rights and aspirations of Kashmiri people are not recognised, genuine and lasting peace will remain elusive.

In May, as the region stood on the edge of full-scale war, India and Pakistan agreed to a ceasefire. Early calls for restraint by the USA and mediation efforts from Gulf countries had been unsuccessful. It was the direct intervention of Donald Trump that led to the ceasefire. While Pakistan accepted this role, India initially tried to downplay it. Still, the ceasefire was officially confirmed through a military hotline between the two countries.

The agreement brought political pressure for Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, criticised domestically for giving in to foreign influence. However, most observers agree the ceasefire was only possible due to strong US diplomacy. The situation underscores the fragility of India-Pakistan relations and the urgent need for long-term dialogue, a key concern for civil society working for peace in the region.

The ceasefire remains in place, but the situation is fragile. Inflammatory rhetoric and deep-rooted mistrust persist. A military pause is not enough; lasting peace requires a deeper shift.

Current international responses are reactive and fail to address the core issue: the unresolved status of Kashmir and the exclusion of Kashmiri voices. This is both morally and strategically problematic.

A dual-track approach is essential. First, India and Pakistan must restart broad-based dialogue to address all key issues, including Kashmir, terrorism, trade and water. They should strengthen confidence-building measures such as cross-border exchanges, humanitarian cooperation and economic ties. Pakistan must take credible steps to dismantle terrorist networks, while India must address legitimate concerns around repression and political marginalisation. It is crucial to de-escalate hostile rhetoric and foster domestic reconciliation.

At the same time, the global community – including China, Saudi Arabia, the UK and the USA – must support inclusive dialogue that centres Kashmiri voices. They should help mediate, provide incentives and back an independent ceasefire monitoring mechanism. Continued advocacy for human rights in both parts of Kashmir is essential.

India has a key role to play. Building trust means restoring political autonomy, ensuring accountability for rights abuses, investing in jobs and development and freeing political prisoners.

The ceasefire offers a narrow window for real change. But without bold action, the region risks sliding back into violence, with serious consequences for civil society and peace.