The ongoing unrest in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) has laid bare the deep contradictions in Pakistan's governance model — one that relies on coercion rather than consent — while simultaneously exposing the hollowness of Islamabad's self-proclaimed role as a champion of Kashmiri rights, according to a detailed analysis published in Eurasia Review. The report, authored by A Jathindra, geopolitical analyst and founding director of the Trinco Centre for Strategic Studies, an independent think tank based in Sri Lanka, argues that the crisis is no longer a local flashpoint but a test of international resolve.

What Is Driving the Protests

The Joint Awami Action Committee (JAAC) — a broad-based civil society coalition uniting traders, transporters, lawyers, students, and activists — has spearheaded the unrest with a 38-point charter of demands. These include reducing electricity tariffs, subsidised pricing for wheat flour, ending perks for lawmakers, and abolishing 12 reserved assembly seats that critics say are instruments of military dominance in PoK's legislature.

The latest wave of protests, which erupted on 9 June, zeroed in on those 12 refugee seats in the Legislative Assembly. According to critics, these seats allow Pakistan to manipulate government formation and suppress genuine local representation. Slogans heard across PoK — 'Pakistani Forces Out', 'Kashmir Under Attack', and 'We Want Basic Rights' — reflect the depth of popular frustration.

Islamabad's Response: Repression and Militarisation

As clashes escalated in Rawalakot, authorities moved swiftly to contain the movement. Mobile networks and internet services were suspended across the region. The government formally proscribed JAAC, accusing it of inciting terrorism and disturbing public order — a charge the organisation and its supporters have rejected as politically motivated.

The crackdown intensified with mass arrests, raids, and the deployment of 14,000 additional security personnel. Jathindra wrote: 'The bloodshed during the JAAC protests has stripped away Pakistan's democratic facade, exposing a regime that responds to bread and butter grievances with repression and militarisation. What began as a campaign for affordable food and fair representation has swelled into a broadbased mobilisation… Instead of dialogue, Islamabad has chosen to criminalise dissent, turning a grassroots movement into a manufactured security threat.'

A decisive turning point came with the killing of a senior JAAC figure in Rawalakot, whom protesters claim was ambushed by security forces. Violent clashes subsequently spread across Poonch district, with eyewitnesses reportedly stating that casualties were higher than official figures acknowledged.

International Rights Bodies Sound the Alarm

On 16 June, the International Human Rights Foundation (IHRF) strongly condemned the crackdown, documenting the suspension of internet and mobile networks, the deployment of federal paramilitary troops, and the mass arbitrary arrest of over 100 activists and leaders. The IHRF also cited travel restrictions barring outsiders from entering PoK and the arrest of journalist Sohrab Barkat under Pakistan's Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act.

The IHRF stated: 'Branding a civil society body as terrorist on vague grounds, while simultaneously sealing the region from outside scrutiny, constitutes a disproportionate and unlawful violation of the right to freedom of association.'

The rights body further documented a recurring pattern of deadly crackdowns on JAAC protests, including violence in May 2024 and October 2025 that claimed multiple lives. It called on Pakistani authorities to immediately halt the use of deadly force, lift the internet shutdown, release all arbitrarily detained individuals, and revoke the ban on JAAC. It also urged an independent investigation into all civilian deaths — including the alleged extrajudicial killing of activist Shahzeb Habib — with full access for international observers.

The Broader Implications for South Asia

Jathindra argues the PoK crisis carries consequences well beyond the region: 'It underscores the fragility of Pakistan's governance model, which relies on coercion rather than consent, and exposes contradictions in its foreign policy: while projecting itself as a champion of Kashmiri rights internationally, Pakistan suppresses those very rights in territories under its control.'

The analyst added that the crisis highlights an urgent need to address governance deficits and human rights violations in conflict-affected regions, and raises pressing questions about the role of international actors in holding states accountable under international law. With the IHRF's call for independent oversight still unanswered, the situation in PoK is likely to remain a focal point for human rights advocates and regional analysts in the months ahead.