Interview with the Mehnatkash Tareek (Sympathizing Group of LIT-CI in Pakistan), 31 May 2025

 

 

 

Note of the Editor: Below we publish an interview with a leading comrade of Mehnatkash Tareek (Workers Movement, sympathizing group of LIT-CI in Pakistan, https://mehnatkashtareek.org) about recent developments in Kashmir and the India-Pakistan conflict. The comrades published – together with New Wave (Mazdoor Inquilab, sympathizing group of LIT-CI in India (https://newwavemaha.wordpress.com), – a statement on the latest confrontation. (see https://newwavemaha.wordpress.com/2025/05/11/statement-on-the-terror-attack-in-kashmir/; https://litci.org/en/statement-on-the-terror-attack-in-kashmir/)

 

For the RCIT’s statement on the latest India-Pakistan conflict see https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/asia/no-to-the-reactionary-warmongering-between-india-and-pakistan/. Other articles on the current conflict can be viewed at a special sub-page on our website: https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/asia/collection-of-articles-on-the-liberation-struggle-in-kashmir/.

 

 

 

* * * * *

 

 

 

Question: Hi, comrade, thanks for taking the time for this interview. Could you briefly summarise your view on the situation in Kashmir?

 

Answer: Dear Comrade, it can be said that a pre-revolutionary situation is emerging in Kashmir following the exposure of the repressive dual policies pursued by both the Indian and Pakistani states. The revocation of Article 370 in August 2019, which stripped Jammu Kashmir of its special autonomy, marked a turning point. Many Kashmiris saw this as an attack on their political identity and autonomy, and it alienated a significant portion of the population. The subsequent division of Jammu Kashmir into Union Territories (Jammu Kashmir, and Ladakh) under direct federal rule has been a contentious issue, with many locals viewing it as a denial of self-determination. There is widespread anger over the human rights violations in the region, including extrajudicial killings, arbitrary detentions, forced disappearances, and the excessive use of force by Indian security forces. Human rights organizations have consistently reported these violations, which have only increased under the militarized environment in Kashmir. Mass arrests of political leaders, journalists, and activists critical of the government have been a part of a broader attempt to suppress dissent. The freedom of expression and freedom of assembly in Kashmir are highly restricted, adding to the grievances of the local population. Kashmir has witnessed increasing youth-led protests in the form of stone-pelting, civil disobedience, and demonstrations against Indian policies. The resistance movement has grown in intensity over the years, especially after the killing of Burhan Wani in 2016, a young militant leader, whose death sparked widespread protests. The protests further intensified after India abrogated Article 370 of the Indian Constitution and imposed a forcible lockdown on the people of Jammu and Kashmir.

 

This time the region has witnessed a surge in violence, including a deadly attack on April 22, 2025, in Anantnag district, where 26 tourists were killed. In response, Indian security forces have intensified operations, leading to widespread civilian casualties and displacement. For instance, a combing operation in Kishtwar district has been ongoing for over a week, with reports of civilian injuries and property damage. The heightened security measures have also led to arbitrary arrests and harassment of local youth.

 

Pakistan has historically used a multi-layered approach — a mix of emotional, religious, political, and military tools — to keep the Kashmiri population emotionally and ideologically attached to its cause. This has been especially visible in its outreach to Indian-administered Jammu Kashmir (JK). However, the effectiveness and sincerity of these efforts have been questioned over time, specially after India abrogated Article 370 on August 5, 2019. Pakistan quickly positioned itself as the "defender" of Kashmiri rights. However, over time, Pakistan’s rhetoric fell apart in the eyes of many Kashmiris — both in Indian-administered and Pakistan-administered regions. The result: Pakistan was increasingly seen as exposed, ineffective, and insincere.

 

A critical review of Pakistan’s actions on Kashmir could be summarized as follows:

 

1. No Tangible Action – Only Rhetoric

 

* Loud diplomacy, no results: Pakistan promised to "go to any lengths" for Kashmir, yet did nothing substantial —

 

* Symbolic gestures: They downgraded diplomatic ties with India, held a few protests, and renamed a highway. Kashmiris saw this as theatrical, not meaningful.

 

* No material help: No economic, political, or logistical support ever reached the common people of Kashmir from Pakistan. (Kashmiris saw big speeches but no real solidarity).

 

2. Failed to Rally Global Support

 

* No international action against India: Despite lobbying at the UN, OIC, and global capitals, Pakistan failed to get even a resolution or strong condemnation of India’s move.

 

* Islamic world stayed neutral or backed India: Key Muslim nations like Saudi Arabia and UAE maintained ties with India — some even honoured Indian leaders post-370.

 

* Kashmiris noticed: People in the Valley and PoK (Pakistan-occupied Kashmir) saw that Pakistan had no real international leverage. (Pakistan's global Kashmir campaign fizzled out).

 

3. Terrorism Label Damaged Credibility

 

* World sees Pakistan as part of the problem: Its history of harbouring militant groups (like Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed) undermined its moral authority on Kashmir.

 

* India used this against them effectively, painting Pakistan as a state sponsor of terrorism.

 

* Kashmiris — especially younger generations — are increasingly tired of violence and do not see Pakistan’s support for militancy as helpful.

 

4. Oppression in Pakistan-Administered Kashmir & Gilgit-Baltistan

 

* Kashmiris in PoK (AJK) and GB began protesting against Pakistan’s own oppressive governance:

 

- No full constitutional rights

 

- No control over natural resources

 

- Crackdowns on dissent

 

* Double standards exposed: Pakistan criticizes India’s control in JK, but denies autonomy and suppresses rights in its own administered regions. (“You want to free Indian Kashmir, but you’ve chained us already”)

 

5. Using Kashmir as a Bargaining Chip, Not Cause

 

* Many Kashmiris believe Pakistan uses the Kashmir issue for internal politics, military agendas, or to distract from domestic failures.

 

* The lack of genuine support post-370 revealed that Pakistan is more interested in “owning the issue” than solving it. (Kashmiris felt like pawns in Pakistan’s geopolitical chessboard).

 

6. No Unity, Just Exploitation

 

* Pakistan failed to unify Kashmiri voices or support any broad-based Kashmiri leadership.

 

* Instead, it backs fringe pro-Pakistan elements or extremist voices, which further alienates ordinary Kashmiris.

 

* Meanwhile, pro-freedom Kashmiri leaders have no support from Pakistan, making its sincerity highly questionable. (“Pakistan does not want a free Kashmir. Pakistan want a divided, controlled one.”)

 

In the eyes of many Kashmiris today — especially the youth — Pakistan is no longer seen as a savior but as another occupier with a different face.

 

So both Indian- and Pakistani-administered parts of Kashmir are experiencing what could be termed a pre-revolutionary atmosphere — where deep grievances are bubbling under the surface, especially among the youth. While there's no immediate revolutionary explosion, the long-term neglect, repression, and alienation make the region volatile and unpredictable.

 

Q: Which perspective do you advocate as a solution for the people of Kashmir?

 

A: A sovereign, independent Kashmir that is not part of either India or Pakistan. Our group position is to call for a nationally unified socialist federation of Jammu Kashmir.

 

Q: What is your position on the conflict between India and Pakistan?

 

A: The conflict between India and Pakistan is one of the most enduring and dangerous rivalries in the world, rooted in history, territorial disputes, nationalism, and conflicting identities. At its core lies the Kashmir issue, but the tension has evolved to include military standoffs, proxy wars, and nuclear deterrence.

 

Masses of both India and Pakistan must rise together to question the ongoing conflict over Jammu Kashmir , with slogan (Free Kashmir) and urge their governments to invest military spending into education, healthcare, and development instead.

 

Q: What do left-wing organisations say on the situation in Kashmir and the conflict with Pakistan?

 

A: Most left wing organisations often discusses the rights of oppressed nationalities – including the right to self-determination—mainly in terms of language and cultural identity. However, it remains hesitant and inconsistent when it comes to supporting these movements on material and political grounds. As national movements gain strength and momentum, the left is attempting to win their support. Yet, it continues to reject partial or incomplete solutions, insisting that the right to self-determination—including the right to secession—can only be realized within a socialist federation. Ironically, within leftist parties themselves, the biggest obstacle to genuine democratic centralism is the lack of internal democracy. They condition the situation in Jammu Kashmir by saying that the question of the independence of Jammu and Kashmir is not possible without a socialist federation of Pakistan and India. They subordinate oppression as a consequence of exploitation and, ignoring the question of oppression, consider the question of exploitation itself as a class question.

 

Q: How do you see the situation of ethnic/national minorities in Pakistan (like the Baloch people)?

 

A: We propose a referendum for Balochistan which would mean holding a democratic vote where the people of Balochistan decide on their political future – whether to remain part of Pakistan, seek greater autonomy, or opt for independence.

 

Q: How do you view the conflict between the government and Imran Khan’s PTI?

 

A: The conflict between the Pakistani government – particularly the establishment – and Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) has been a major political drama shaping Pakistan’s recent history. We see Imran Khan as the opposition to the present regime, but critically so, because he has never presented a comprehensive mass manifesto addressing the real problems (along with genuinely democratic question) of the people, starting from the superstructure. He has never spoken out against the IMF, the new liberal economic policies, or the military budget. Instead, PTI has organized protests and sit-ins that have dragged the masses into futile actions, only to be called off eventually. This suggests that Imran Khan is controlled by a faction within the establishment that uses his party in their internal conflicts. That is why we are proposing that genuine mass issues be raised and addressed directly with his party workers.

 

Q: Which role does Chinese imperialism play in Pakistan?

 

A: China finances massive infrastructure projects in Pakistan, especially under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). Much of this investment comes in the form of loans. If Pakistan struggles to repay these debts, China can exert pressure or demand control over strategic assets (like ports, energy plants, or highways), limiting Pakistan’s economic sovereignty. Chinese companies often build and operate critical infrastructure, such as the Gwadar Port and power plants. This means China controls important economic gateways and resources in Pakistan, giving it leverage over Pakistan’s trade and economy. Pakistan may be pressured to align its foreign policy and strategic decisions with China’s interests. For example, Pakistan often supports China’s position on issues like Taiwan and Xinjiang, sometimes at the cost of its own diplomatic flexibility. Pakistan relies heavily on Chinese military hardware and technology, which creates a dependency. This makes it harder for Pakistan to maintain an independent defense policy, tying it closer to China’s strategic goals.

 

Chinese projects sometimes displace local communities or cause environmental damage, leading to internal unrest. This weakens Pakistan’s social cohesion and forces the government to balance local opposition with Chinese demands.

 

Q: Are there any final words which you would like to add?

 

A: For us, the following issues are key for revolutionary strategy:

 

Expose All Forms of Imperialism and Elitism — whether they come in military uniforms, political slogans, or foreign investments.

 

* Build a Mass-Based Political Alternative (with centrality of working class) — grounded in real issues: repression, exploitation and democratic participation.

 

* Push for Sovereignty and Self-Reliance — economically, politically, and socially — breaking out of the cycle of dependency on global powers like China or institutions like the IMF.

 

* Educate and organize — grassroots political education is key. Without understanding the structures of control — both internal and external — no meaningful change is possible.

 

* Build international solidarity of working class!