Dreaming of a peaceful and just society is a noble pursuit embraced by visionaries throughout history. Such aspirations have often served as catalysts for transformative change, inspiring communities to strive for dignity, fairness, and harmony. However, the situation becomes deeply problematic when these dreams are imposed as unquestionable truths on populations whose lived experiences tell a contrasting story. When a narrative of peace is forcefully presented as reality, it risks becoming a facade that conceals underlying tensions and injustices.
This disconnect was vividly illustrated on March 12, 2026, during the closing ceremony of the 2nd All India Police Kabaddi Cluster 2025–26 held at the MA Stadium in Jammu. The Lieutenant Governor of Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir, Manoj Sinha, proclaimed that the peace currently enjoyed in Kashmir—one that enables families to come together, athletes to compete, and communities to flourish—was achieved at a significant cost. Yet, this statement raises critical questions about the nature of the peace he described. Is it truly peace when the media is heavily censored, dissenting voices are systematically silenced, human rights defenders are imprisoned, and political opposition is stifled? Such conditions challenge the very definition of peace and suggest a more complex and troubling reality beneath the surface.
Adding to this paradox, on the same day as the Lieutenant Governor’s speech, the Supreme Court of India acknowledged the excessive delay in the trial of Shabir Ahmed Shah, a prominent Kashmiri political figure often likened to Nelson Mandela for his enduring struggle. After nearly 39 years of detention without conviction in multiple cases, the Court granted him bail, highlighting the unjustifiable nature of the prolonged legal process. This development starkly contrasts with the official narrative of peace, prompting a critical inquiry: peace for whom, and at what human cost?
The contradictions became even more apparent the following day, March 13, 2026, when Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, the chairman of the Hurriyat Conference and a key religious leader, was once again prevented from leading congregational prayers at the historic Jamia Masjid in Srinagar. This occurred on Jumatul Wida, the final Friday of Ramadan, a day of profound spiritual significance for Muslims, when thousands traditionally gather for prayer. For the seventh consecutive year, the Mirwaiz was barred from addressing his congregation, underscoring the persistent restrictions on religious expression despite official claims of normalcy and peace. Such incidents raise serious doubts about the authenticity of the proclaimed tranquility in the region.
International human rights experts have repeatedly voiced concerns over the shrinking civic space in Kashmir. Mary Lawlor, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders, has consistently highlighted the deteriorating environment for civil society activists. She has called for the immediate release of prominent defenders like Khurram Parvez and urged authorities to halt investigations that appear designed to criminalize legitimate human rights work. Parvez, recognized globally for his advocacy and named among Time Magazine’s 100 most influential people, remains imprisoned, reflecting the harsh realities faced by those championing rights in Kashmir.
Similarly, the detention of journalist Irfan Mehraj has sparked widespread condemnation from legal and human rights organizations. The All India Lawyers’ Association for Justice condemned his arrest as part of a broader crackdown on press freedom and freedom of expression. Amnesty International described the situation as a “travesty,” warning that the space for dissent is rapidly diminishing. The organization highlighted a climate of intimidation, surveillance, and arbitrary detention that stifles any criticism of government policies. Human Rights Watch echoed these concerns, with Meenakshi Ganguly, its deputy Asia director, noting that despite claims of reduced violence, fundamental freedoms remain severely restricted. Kashmiris continue to face obstacles in exercising their rights to free speech, peaceful assembly, and association without fear of reprisal.
For many ordinary residents, the outward appearance of calm—marked by tourists, bustling markets, and late-night shopping—belies a simmering unrest beneath the surface. A young Kashmiri entrepreneur poignantly described this duality, likening the situation to a soda bottle under pressure, seemingly calm but ready to explode. This metaphor captures the fragile and volatile nature of the current environment, where visible normalcy masks deep-seated grievances and frustrations.
Another alarming trend has been the increasing censorship of academic and intellectual work related to Kashmir. In August 2025, several international organizations, including the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT), condemned the ban on 25 scholarly and journalistic publications concerning the region. These groups criticized the move as a direct assault on freedom of expression and academic inquiry. They argued that suppressing research under vague national security claims undermines democratic accountability and violates international human rights standards. The ban threatens not only the voices of scholars but also the preservation of historical records and critical investigations into enforced disappearances, impunity, and human rights abuses.
The broader pattern of repression is difficult to overlook. Laws such as the Public Safety Act (PSA) and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) have faced widespread criticism for enabling prolonged detention without trial. Human rights organizations argue that these laws are increasingly misused to silence journalists, activists, and political opponents. Even within Kashmir, prominent figures like former Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti have called on the administration to end media censorship and ensure journalists can operate freely without fear of intimidation or harassment. These voices, both local and international, starkly contrast with the official portrayal of peace and stability.
True peace cannot be measured solely by the absence of visible conflict or the presence of tourists. It must be gauged by the existence of justice, the protection of fundamental freedoms, and the ability of people to express themselves openly and without fear. The unconditional release of political prisoners such as Shabir Ahmed Shah, Mohammad Yasin Malik, Masarat Aalam, Khurram Parvez, Aasia Andrabi, Sofi Fehmeeda, and Nahida Nasreen would be a significant step toward creating a more conducive environment for peace in Kashmir. If the authorities genuinely believe that peace has been achieved, there should be no hesitation in allowing independent international observers—including United Nations Special Rapporteurs, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and other credible organizations—to visit the region and conduct impartial assessments.
Until such transparency is permitted, the proclaimed peace will remain little more than an official narrative, disconnected from the lived realities of Kashmir’s people. Dreams of peace, no matter how eloquently expressed, cannot replace the fundamental need for justice, freedom, and dignity on the ground.
