Azad Kashmir’s present crisis should not be reduced to a childish contest between a virtuous street and a heartless state. The grievances that fed the Jammu Kashmir Joint Awami Action Committee did not fall from the sky. Electricity bills hurt people. Flour prices hurt people. Elite privilege offended people. Governments in Muzaffarabad and Islamabad allowed resentment to gather for years, and when politics failed to hear the citizens, the citizens found another platform.
That much must be admitted.
But legitimacy earned through protest can also be wasted through stubbornness. A movement that begins by demanding relief can lose its moral weight if it starts treating every forum for settlement as a trap and every constitutional question as a street slogan. That is why JAAC’s boycott of the All Parties Conference on the 12 refugee seats was not a small tactical choice. It was a political mistake.
Every crisis in Muzaffarabad is watched, amplified and misused beyond the Line of Control.
The AJK government’s APC was not a miracle cure. It was, however, the correct democratic instrument for a matter that touches the structure of the Legislative Assembly, the status of displaced Kashmiris, the coming elections and the wider Kashmir cause.
JAAC should have attended.
It could have entered the room, challenged the government, confronted the political parties, demanded a legal roadmap, asked for timelines and put its case before the people through argument rather than absence. It could have said: we came, we argued, we exposed them. Instead, it stayed away and gave its critics the easiest possible line: when a table was finally set, the committee preferred the street.
This is where the committee must face an uncomfortable question. If its case is strong, why fear a forum? If its demand has public support, why not test it before lawyers, legislators, refugee representatives, civil society and the press? Noise can hide weakness. Dialogue exposes it.
The government side claims that the May 30 talks were not casual or cosmetic.
This does not mean the government deserves a medal. Governments often move only when the road is blocked, and the bazaar is shut. But once pressure opens a door, a responsible movement enters that door. Pressure is a tool. It cannot become a substitute for government, constitution and law.
Take the 12 refugee seats. One may criticise their electoral use. One may question whether they distort AJK governments. One may demand reforms, safeguards, cleaner voter lists, transparent constituency management and a legal review. All this is fair. But the people represented through these seats are not disposable numbers. They are Kashmiris displaced from Indian-administered territory.
A movement claiming to defend Kashmiri rights should be careful before it demands the silencing of Kashmiri refugees.
The official briefing says AJK’s own annual income is around Rs60 billion, while its budget is above Rs300 billion, with roughly Rs240-250 billion coming from the federal government. If major taxes are abolished without a replacement plan, the gap will not be paid by slogans. It will be paid by salaries, schools, hospitals, roads, water schemes and development funds. The committee cannot simply say “end taxes” without explaining which public service should shrink and whose wage should be delayed.
The government must admit that people are overburdened and that privileges at the top are morally indefensible. JAAC must admit that a state cannot run on anger alone. AJK needs cheaper electricity, better services, fewer perks, cleaner administration and a fairer tax structure. It does not need an empty treasury dressed up as revolution.
The government must not use JAAC’s boycott as an excuse for arrogance. It should keep the door open, publish a clear timetable, create a legal-constitutional committee, invite refugee representatives directly, explain the financial consequences of each demand and put every accepted commitment on record.
There is also the larger Kashmir dimension. Azad Kashmir is not a routine provincial theatre where every confrontation remains local. Every crisis in Muzaffarabad is watched, amplified and misused beyond the Line of Control. Internal disorder weakens the moral argument Pakistan and Kashmiris make internationally. This does not mean dissent should be silenced. It means dissent must be disciplined.
The writer is a freelance columnist.