The violence, centred on Rawalakot and followed by a shutdown across Muzaffarabad, Mirpur and other towns, has exposed a widening gap between Pakistan’s official claim to champion Kashmiri rights and the force used against protesters demanding greater local representation, cheaper electricity, subsidised flour and curbs on the influence of non-resident constituencies in the territory’s legislature.
The immediate trigger was the banning of the Joint Awami Action Committee, a broad civil society platform that has led repeated protests over governance and economic grievances. Authorities moved against the group ahead of a planned march to Muzaffarabad, citing public order and security concerns. Dozens of activists were detained, arrest warrants were issued for leading organisers and communications restrictions were imposed as security forces deployed across major roads and urban centres.
The death toll remains disputed. Officials have acknowledged fatalities among both protesters and security personnel, while local activists and Kashmir-based sources have alleged a higher number of civilian casualties after live fire was used during clashes. Hospitals treated scores of wounded, including people with gunshot injuries, as families accused police and paramilitary units of firing into crowds rather than using calibrated crowd-control measures.
The confrontation has placed Field Marshal Asim Munir under renewed scrutiny. Elevated to Pakistan’s highest military rank last year after the country’s confrontation with New Delhi, Munir has repeatedly projected himself as a defender of the Kashmir cause. The crackdown in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, however, has sharpened criticism that the military establishment’s rhetoric on Kashmir sits uneasily with the treatment of dissent in the territory under Pakistan’s control.
The Joint Awami Action Committee has framed its campaign around bread-and-butter issues and political rights rather than secessionist demands. Its 38-point charter includes demands for cheaper wheat flour, lower electricity tariffs, accountability in public spending and the abolition of 12 legislative seats reserved for refugees from Jammu and Kashmir living elsewhere in Pakistan. The committee argues that the seats distort representation by allowing non-residents to influence the politics of a 45-member assembly.
The reserved seats have become the most contentious issue ahead of the July 27 legislative election. The Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir ruled this week that the seats enjoy constitutional protection and cannot be removed without a constitutional amendment. That decision hardened the impasse after talks between the committee and federal and territorial officials failed to produce a settlement.
Authorities have accused elements within the protest movement of attacking police, vandalising property and threatening public order. Police said security personnel were killed and injured in Rawalakot after protesters turned violent. Protest organisers reject the charge that the movement is armed or externally driven, saying the ban criminalised a civil rights campaign that had drawn broad support from traders, transporters, students and local communities.
The strike call brought daily life to a halt across large parts of the territory. Shops remained shut, public transport was suspended and road links were disrupted as thousands attempted to join demonstrations despite the ban. The internet blackout and arrests deepened public anger, with residents saying the measures had cut off families from information during a fast-moving crisis.
The unrest has roots in a long-running dispute over governance in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. The territory has its own president, prime minister, courts and legislative assembly, but defence, foreign affairs, currency and major communications remain under Pakistan’s control. Critics say this structure gives Islamabad decisive authority while limiting meaningful local autonomy.
Economic grievances have intensified over the past two years as households faced higher living costs, electricity bills and unemployment. Protests last year forced authorities to accept most of the committee’s demands, but the unresolved issues over legislative seats and elite privileges remained politically combustible. The latest confrontation shows those grievances have not been defused.
New Delhi condemned the crackdown and described the violence as evidence of Pakistan’s repressive control over the territory. Islamabad is expected to reject that charge and frame the unrest as a law-and-order issue. The political effect, however, may be harder to contain. Images of deserted streets, funeral gatherings and security forces confronting protesters have revived questions over Pakistan’s ability to claim moral authority on Kashmir while suppressing protest in the part it administers.
