Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai
Chairman
World Forum for Peace & Justice

July 28, 2026

The tragic killing of more than a dozen civilians in Rawalakot, Azad Kashmir, has left Kashmiris across the world grieving and searching for answers. No political objective, however noble, can justify the loss of innocent lives. If, as widely reported, these civilians were participating in peaceful protests, then the tragedy becomes even more disturbing. The families of those who lost their loved ones deserve not only our deepest sympathy but also justice.

The international community has already taken notice. On July 17, 2026, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Dr. Volker Türk called for “prompt, thorough and impartial investigations into all deaths that have occurred due to the unrest, both amongst protesters and members of security forces.” Such an investigation is not merely a legal obligation; it is a moral imperative.

But beyond this tragedy lies another uncomfortable truth that must not be ignored. The prevailing situation in Azad Kashmir has damaged the international standing of the Kashmir cause itself. This is perhaps the greatest irony of the present crisis. For decades, Pakistan has argued before the world that the people of Jammu and Kashmir deserve justice, dignity and the right to determine their own future. Those arguments carry moral force only when the same principles are upheld wherever Kashmiris live.

Pretending that the present situation has caused no damage serves no one. The sooner this reality is acknowledged, the sooner meaningful corrective steps can be taken. Denial is not a strategy; it is an invitation to further erosion of international credibility. The warning signs are already evident.

Thirty Members of Parliament and peers from across the United Kingdom, including All-Party Parliamentary Group Chair Imran Hussain MP, recently wrote expressing concern over reports of arrests, restrictions on communication services and the apparent breakdown of dialogue between the authorities and representatives of the Joint Awami Action Committee (JAAC). Their letter emphasized the importance of protecting freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and access to communication.

This should concern everyone who believes in the Kashmir cause. These are many of the very parliamentarians who have consistently spoken against human rights violations in Indian-Occupied Kashmir. Today, they are voicing concerns about Azad Kashmir. Whether one agrees with every criticism or not, the diplomatic consequences are undeniable. Every such development weakens Pakistan’s ability to advocate effectively for Kashmir on the international stage.

Dialogue, therefore, is no longer simply desirable; it is indispensable. History demonstrates that difficult disputes are resolved not through force but through engagement. Even bitter adversaries have eventually found their way to the negotiating table. President Donald Trump, during his first administration, initiated negotiations with the Taliban in Qatar after years of conflict because dialogue was recognized as the only realistic path toward a political solution. If dialogue can be pursued in such deeply entrenched conflicts, surely it can also be pursued between a government and its own citizens.

The Kashmiri diaspora has never questioned Pakistan’s commitment to the Kashmir dispute. Pakistan has repeatedly raised the issue at international forums, including the United Nations Security Council, maintaining that Jammu and Kashmir remains an internationally recognized disputed territory whose future must be determined in accordance with Security Council resolutions and the right of self-determination of the Kashmiri people.

It was none other than Senator Mohammad Ishaq Dar, Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Pakistani who raised the Kashmir issue at the Security Council when Pakistan was holding its presidency in July 2025. He stated that “Kashmir is an internationally recognized disputed territory, and its final status should be resolved per UN Security Council resolutions and the self-determination rights of the Kashmiri people. Dar rejected any superficial measures as substitutes for Kashmiris’ inalienable right of self-determination, as guaranteed by the Security Council resolutions.”

That principled position deserves respect. But principles must be reflected in practice. When allegations emerge of excessive use of force, restrictions on peaceful assembly and limitations on civil liberties in Azad Kashmir, Pakistan’s diplomatic narrative inevitably becomes more difficult to sustain. International opinion is shaped not only by what governments say but by what they do.

The concerns expressed by Amnesty International reinforce this point. In its statement of June 9, 2026, Amnesty called upon the Pakistani authorities to de-escalate the situation, exercise restraint, ensure that force is used only as a last resort and in accordance with international standards, facilitate peaceful assemblies and lift restrictions affecting the Joint Awami Action Committee ahead of regional elections.

These are not demands for political surrender. They are appeals for adherence to universally accepted human rights standards.

Pakistan has shown on more than one occasion that it possesses the diplomatic capacity to encourage dialogue in some of the world’s most difficult disputes. Reports surrounding Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi’s diplomatic engagement prior to the high-level Iran-United States talks underscored Pakistan’s willingness to facilitate communication between parties separated by decades of mistrust. That same commitment to dialogue should now be demonstrated at home.

Our appeal to Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi and the leadership of the Government of Azad Kashmir is simple and sincere: initiate an unconditional dialogue with the leadership of the Joint Awami Action Committee. Such an initiative would not represent weakness. It would reflect confidence, political maturity and respect for democratic values.

Importantly, this is not an isolated appeal. The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, British parliamentarians and Amnesty International have all emphasized the need for dialogue, restraint and respect for fundamental freedoms. Their recommendations deserve careful consideration, not dismissal.

Professor Zafar Khan, the international spokesperson of the Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front led by Yasin Malik, perhaps captured the prevailing sentiment most succinctly when he observed: “Like the Kashmiris, the thinking people in Pakistan are also extremely worried about the current situation in Azad Jammu and Kashmir.” His words should resonate across the political spectrum.

The issue before us is larger than any government, political party or movement. It concerns the credibility of the Kashmir cause itself. Every unnecessary confrontation, every avoidable death and every allegation of human rights violations diminishes the moral authority with which that cause has long been presented before the international community.

The first duty of any state is to protect the lives and dignity of its own people. The first duty of any movement is to preserve its moral legitimacy.

Justice for those killed in Rawalakot, accountability where wrongdoing is established, protection of fundamental freedoms and an immediate process of genuine dialogue are not concessions to anyone. They are essential steps toward restoring public confidence and safeguarding the international credibility of the Kashmir cause.

If Kashmir is indeed a sacred cause—as generations of Pakistanis and Kashmiris have believed—then it must never be weakened by avoidable actions within Azad Kashmir itself. The world is watching. More importantly, history is watching. The choices made today will determine not only how this tragedy is remembered but also how the Kashmir cause is judged in the years to come.

Dr. Fai can be reached at:
WhatsApp: 1-202-607-6435
gnfai2003@yahoo.com