At the centre of the ongoing unrest in Pakistan occupied Jammu-Kashmir lies a challenge that extends beyond electricity tariffs and inflation. The deeper issue is governance and a widening trust deficit between citizens and institutions.

The political unrest witnessed across Pakistan administered Kashmir since 2023 and the parallel grievances emerging in Gilgit-Baltistan represent one of the most significant governance challenges confronting Pakistan in recent years. While public attention has largely focused on the immediate triggers of protests; electricity tariffs, wheat subsidies, inflation and rising costs of living, the underlying causes are far deeper and more structural.

The rise of the Joint Awami Action Committee (JAAC) has transformed local economic grievances into a broader movement demanding accountability, transparency and political responsiveness. The movement has highlighted growing dissatisfaction regarding governance practices, implementation of government commitments and the perceived disconnect between decision makers and ordinary citizens.

At the same time, recurring protests in Gilgit-Baltistan regarding constitutional status, resource utilisation, development priorities and economic opportunities have exposed similar governance fault lines. Although Pakistan administered Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan remain distinct political entities, both regions demonstrate increasing demands for meaningful participation in decision making and a greater share of economic benefits arising from strategic projects.

The central question confronting Pakistan government is whether existing institutions can adapt to rising public expectations regarding accountability, representation and development.

The mountains of Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan have historically been viewed through the lens of geopolitics. However, political developments of the last five years suggest a gradual shift in public priorities.

Increasingly, ordinary citizens are focusing on issues that directly affect their daily lives. The cost of electricity, availability of employment, quality of infrastructure, reliability of public services and effectiveness of governance have become central concerns. These issues have generated a new form of political mobilisation that differs significantly from traditional political movements.

The emergence of the Joint Awami Action Committee represents perhaps the clearest example of this transformation. Unlike conventional political organisations, JAAC derived its legitimacy not from ideological positions or constitutional debates but from its ability to articulate practical concerns affecting ordinary citizens.

The current unrest should therefore be understood not simply as a reaction to economic hardship but as part of a broader process through which citizens seek greater accountability, responsiveness and participation in governance.

 Rise of  Joint Awami Action Committee

The emergence of the Joint Awami Action Committee represents one of the most significant political developments in Pakistan occupied Jammu-Kashmir in recent years. Unlike traditional political parties, JAAC emerged organically from civil society and grassroots activism. Its origins can be traced to growing public dissatisfaction regarding inflation, rising electricity tariffs and the increasing cost of essential commodities.

Initially, the movement focused on economic concerns. Citizens questioned why regions possessing significant hydropower resources continued to face high electricity costs. Many argued that local populations were not receiving adequate benefits from resources generated within their own territory.

What distinguished JAAC from previous protest movements was its ability to unite diverse segments of society. Traders, transport unions, lawyers, students, labour organisations and civil society groups increasingly coordinated their activities under a common platform.

As demonstrations expanded, the movement’s demands evolved. Economic grievances gradually merged with governance concerns. Protesters began demanding greater transparency, accountability and implementation of previous commitments. Public discourse increasingly focused on whether institutions were capable of responding effectively to citizen concerns.

The rise of JAAC reflects broader regional trends where issue-based movements centered on governance, accountability and public services increasingly challenging the traditional political structures.

Accountability and Crisis of Trust

At the centre of the ongoing unrest in Pakistan occupied Jammu-Kashmir lies a challenge that extends beyond electricity tariffs and inflation. The deeper issue is governance and a widening trust deficit between citizens and institutions. Repeated protests indicate growing concern regarding responsiveness, transparency and implementation of commitments. Disputes over agreements reached between protest leaders and authorities have reinforced perceptions that institutions are not adequately accountable. Economic hardship has intensified these concerns, while digital connectivity has enabled citizens to compare governance outcomes across regions and just across the LoC in Jammu & Kashmir. The resulting crisis is therefore not merely administrative but fundamentally political, centered on legitimacy and public confidence.

POJK and Balochistan: Similar Fault Lines, Different Challenges

Although Pakistan occupied Jammu-Kashmir and Balochistan differ substantially in history and political context, both reveal recurring debates regarding resource utilisation, local participation and development outcomes. In both regions, citizens frequently question whether the benefits generated from local resources are distributed equitably. Another similarity concerns perceptions of centralised decision making and limited local influence over major policy choices. However, important differences remain. The movement in POJK has largely remained civil and issue based, while Balochistan has experienced a prolonged insurgency alongside political activism. The comparison highlights how governance grievances can evolve into broader political challenges when populations feel excluded from decision making processes.

Lessons from East Pakistan

The history of East Pakistan and the emergence of Bangladesh in 1971 remains a significant lesson in political legitimacy, representation and governance. Historians point to a combination of political exclusion, economic disparities and institutional failures as contributing factors. The contemporary relevance of this experience lies not in drawing direct parallels but in recognising the importance of responsive institutions and public trust. States derive resilience from legitimacy as much as from administrative capacity. The lesson for policymakers is that sustainable stability requires meaningful participation, accountable governance and confidence that institutions represent citizen interests.

Gilgit-Baltistan: Pakistan’s Emerging Strategic Challenge

Gilgit-Baltistan occupies a critical strategic position linking South Asia, Central Asia and China. Its importance has increased significantly with regional connectivity projects and the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). Despite this strategic significance, recurring public debates concerning constitutional status, subsidies, electricity shortages, trade restrictions and local participation in development have generated periodic protests. Many residents argue that while the region contributes substantially to national strategic objectives, local communities do not always perceive proportional economic benefits. This tension between strategic priorities and local expectations represents one of the most significant governance challenges facing policymakers.

Comparative Development Across LOC

The digital age has transformed public awareness. Citizens increasingly compare governance outcomes, infrastructure, education, healthcare and economic opportunities across regions mainly in Jammu & Kashmir. Such comparisons influence perceptions of governance effectiveness and political legitimacy. Arguably, comparative narratives has shaped the public expectations and it has placed pressure on Pakistan government to demonstrate tangible development outcomes. Infrastructure, tourism, public services and employment opportunities have become important indicators through which populations evaluate governance performance.

Pakistan’s Strategic Dilemma

Pakistan faces a complex challenge in balancing security, development and political responsiveness. Pakistan administered Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan remain strategically important regions. However, democratic protest movements differ fundamentally from conventional security threats. While administrative and security measures may restore temporary stability, long term legitimacy depends upon public confidence, institutional credibility and meaningful participation. Policymakers therefore face the challenge of addressing governance concerns without overt or covert use of Pakistan Army to silence the people by use force or fear of jail.

Future Outlook and Policy Implications

The government of Pakistan immediately needs to restore confidence of the people of the region by increased participation in governance and central institutions. Exploitation of the resources allowed by Pakistan Army and China needs to stop. Failure to address recurring grievances, however, risks perpetuating cycles of protest and mistrust. The broader lesson is that development and governance must progress together. Citizens increasingly expect institutions to be accountable, responsive and capable of delivering measurable improvements in quality of life. Pakistan has to accept the internal challenges first without attributing all its problems to Indian state.

Conclusion

The ongoing protests in Pakistan occupied Jammu-Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan highlight the growing importance of governance, accountability and public trust in contemporary politics. Economic concerns provided the initial catalyst for mobilisation, but the underlying debate increasingly concerns institutional responsiveness and legitimacy. Sustainable stability will depend not only on strategic considerations but also on the ability of institutions to address citizen expectations through transparent governance, meaningful participation and effective development policies. Pakistan needs to take cue from 1971 on how largescale suppression of homogenous communities can lead to outburst of violent protest. The country needs to look inside rather than involve itself in more that what it can chew.

The truth is stark, data-backed, and irrefutable: India is building lives in Jammu and Kashmir. Pakistan is destroying them in PoJK.

In the ongoing war of narratives between India and Pakistan over Jammu & Kashmir, facts have finally caught up with fiction. While Pakistan peddles a tired tale of prosperity in Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK) and Gilgit-Baltistan (GB), the truth tells a dramatically different story, one of neglect, repression, and economic decay on its side, and of transformation, investment, and democratic inclusion in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir.

Budgetary Commitment: India’s Investments Leave Pakistan Behind

Let’s begin with the basics—money.

The development budget for Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) in 2025–26 stands at a remarkable ₹1,12,310 crore (USD 12.9 billion), reflecting India’s strong financial commitment to the region’s growth. In sharp contrast, the Annual Development Programme for Pakistan-occupied Jammu & Kashmir (PoJK) amounts to just PKR 49 billion (USD 1.77 billion).

On a per capita basis, the disparity is even more striking: India allocates approximately USD 1,032 per person in J&K, while Pakistan spends only USD 393 per person in PoJK.

India’s per capita investment in J&K is nearly three times what Pakistan spends in PoJK. That alone exposes the hollowness of Pakistan’s claims of parity or superiority in developmental efforts. These aren’t just numbers; they represent hospitals built, schools upgraded, roads constructed, and lives improved.

Education: A Tale of Two Systems

India has placed a strong emphasis on educational excellence in Jammu & Kashmir, transforming the region into an emerging hub of academic and professional institutions. Today, J&K is home to nine state universities, two central universities, and four Institutes of National Importance—including IIT Jammu, IIM Jammu, NIT Srinagar, and NIFT Srinagar.

The region also boasts eleven medical colleges, fourteen engineering colleges, and two AIIMS campuses—one operational in Samba and another upcoming in Awantipora. In stark contrast, Pakistan-occupied Jammu & Kashmir (PoJK) lags far behind with only seven universities and four medical colleges. Compounding the problem are chronic shortages of qualified faculty, poor remuneration, and mismanaged institutions—conditions that render PoJK’s education system ill-equipped to prepare its youth for the future.

The contrast is equally severe in terms of job creation. In PoJK, youth are either absorbed into the government sector or pushed into the Pakistan Army’s Northern Light Infantry. Meanwhile, in J&K, expanding industry, tourism, and startups are opening up new avenues for educated youth, with the support of central government schemes like Startup India, Digital India, and the Industrial Development Scheme for the UT.

Healthcare: Pakistan’s Neglect, India’s Transformation

Healthcare is another area where Indian-administered Jammu & Kashmir is significantly ahead of its Pakistani-occupied counterpart. With a total of 5,534 health institutions—comprising 4,433 government and 1,101 private facilities—J&K maintains a doctor-patient ratio of 1:1658, reflecting a relatively robust healthcare infrastructure.

In stark contrast, PoJK has only 73 hospitals and health centres, with an alarming doctor-patient ratio of 1:4916, exposing the deep neglect and systemic healthcare crisis in the region under Pakistani control.

J&K’s Infant Mortality Rate (IMR) is 23, three times better than PoJK. In 2023, J&K was declared #1 in India for IMR reduction, slashing it by 8 points in one year. AIIMS, district hospitals, telemedicine, and Ayushman Bharat cards are bridging the last-mile health delivery gap.

By contrast, PoJK residents have to protest for basic access to emergency care, suffer under dilapidated facilities, and rely on non-local doctors due to persistent staff shortages.

Freedom, Democracy & Governance: J&K Joins India; PoJK Remains Pakistan’s Colony

Since the abrogation of Article 370 in 2019, Jammu & Kashmir has been fully and firmly integrated into the constitutional and political framework of India. The region now enjoys full representation in both houses of the Indian Parliament, participates in the nationwide electoral process, and benefits from central welfare schemes on par with other Indian states.

Additionally, the implementation of Panchayati Raj has empowered local governance, bringing decision-making closer to the grassroots and strengthening democratic institutions in the Union Territory.

Meanwhile, PoJK and GB are not even listed in Article 1 of Pakistan’s own Constitution. Their legal status is determined by the highly dubious Karachi Agreement of 1949, signed behind closed doors without any GB representation. PoJK is run via an ‘interim constitution,’ and GB via an executive order, not a law passed by any legislature.

Worse, PoJK’s constitution bans anyone from even questioning its accession to Pakistan. Section 4(7)(3) of the 1974 Act makes any political expression against Pakistan’s claim a punishable offence. This is not democracy, it’s colonialism in disguise.

Discrimination, Repression, and Sectarian Violence

While J&K thrives in a secular, pluralistic democracy, where Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, and Christians co-exist, PoJK and GB are trapped in systemic discrimination.

In Pakistan-occupied Jammu & Kashmir (PoJK) and Gilgit-Baltistan (GB), religious persecution and sectarian discrimination remain deeply entrenched. Since Ahmadis, are constitutionally declared as non-Muslims in Pakistan, they face daily persecution and systemic exclusion from public life.

In Gilgit-Baltistan, Shia Muslims—despite forming the majority—suffer from state-backed discrimination, targeted killings, and institutional bias. Sectarian violence is alarmingly common, and authorities have repeatedly failed to ensure basic law and order in key areas such as Gilgit, Skardu, and Chilas.

Enforced Disappearances and Suppression of Dissent

While Indian-administered Jammu & Kashmir enjoys a vibrant media landscape, active political debate, and the freedom to protest without fear, Pakistan-occupied Jammu & Kashmir (PoJK) and Gilgit-Baltistan (GB) have become zones of repression for activists and dissenters. Journalists, students, and political figures routinely disappear without a trace, often without any official explanation.

The United Kashmir People’s National Party (UKPNP) and the Awami Action Committee have consistently raised concerns about enforced disappearances and custodial killings. In a chilling incident from May 2025, two young men from PoJK, Zarnosh Naseem and Jibran Naseem, were executed by Pakistani forces and falsely branded as “terrorists,” further intensifying public outrage and highlighting the climate of fear and impunity in the region.

Such acts have triggered widespread unrest. In both 2024 and 2025, mass protests swept across PoJK and GB demanding lower electricity tariffs, subsidised flour, and basic governance. Islamabad responded not with reform, but with detentions, intimidation, and media blackouts.

Infrastructure and Connectivity: A World Apart

India is rapidly connecting Jammu & Kashmir to the rest of the country through a modern transport revolution. The recently inaugurated Chenab Bridge, now the world’s highest railway bridge, stands as a symbol of engineering excellence and integration.

Simultaneously, the Delhi-Amritsar-Katra-Srinagar expressway is progressing at a swift pace, promising seamless travel and economic connectivity. Jammu & Kashmir now boasts over 1.4 lakh kilometers of road network—more than any region with similar terrain—significantly enhancing mobility, trade, and access to essential services.

Meanwhile, in PoJK and GB, poor road infrastructure, irregular power supply, and limited internet access have crippled economic activity. Tourism, which flourishes in Indian J&K, is negligible in PoJK due to insecurity and lack of facilities.

Natural Resources: Looted by Pakistan, Denied to Locals

Despite their mineral richness, PoJK and GB have no control over local resources. Coal, uranium, water, and timber are all exploited by Pakistan’s elite and military-industrial complex. Locals get no royalties, no jobs, and no say.

In Indian J&K, recent policy changes have encouraged local entrepreneurship in mining, horticulture, handicrafts, and IT, with transparent auction processes and guaranteed revenue sharing with panchayats and district bodies.

A Contrast That Can No Longer Be Denied

It’s no longer a contest between two narratives—it’s a contrast between two stark realities. On one side is Jammu & Kashmir: democratic, rapidly developing, and increasingly integrated with the world’s fastest-growing major economy. On the other side lie Pakistan-occupied Jammu & Kashmir (PoJK) and Gilgit-Baltistan, where people are denied basic rights, exploited by the Pakistani state, and left to languish under military domination and a string of broken promises.

Pakistan must stop using PoJK as cannon fodder for its failed Kashmir policy. The world must now call it out for what it is, an occupying force in a region it neither nurtures nor understands.

The truth is stark, data-backed, and irrefutable: India is building lives in Jammu and Kashmir. Pakistan is destroying them in PoJK.

Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not reflect Milli Chronicle’s point-of-view.