Analysis
Israel-Palestine: Negotiations Are the Only Way to Peace
The Israel-Palestine conflict is one of the most intractable and long-running conflicts in the world. It has raged for over a century, with no end in sight. The conflict has claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands of people and displaced millions more. It has also caused immense suffering and hardship. There are many different perspectives on the conflict, and it is important to understand all of them in order to find a solution. However, there is one thing that is clear: more bloodshed will never resolve the conflict.
Table of Contents
Background
The Israel-Palestine conflict has its roots in the late 19th century, when the Zionist movement began to call for the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. At the time, Palestine was part of the Ottoman Empire and was home to a majority of Arabs.
The Zionist movement gained momentum in the early 20th century, as a result of the rise of anti-Semitism in Europe. In 1917, the British government issued the Balfour Declaration, which expressed support for the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine.
After World War I, the Ottoman Empire collapsed and Palestine was placed under British rule. During this period, the Jewish population in Palestine grew significantly due to immigration from Europe.
In 1947, the United Nations voted to partition Palestine into two states, one Jewish and one Arab. The Jewish community accepted the plan, but the Arab community rejected it.
In 1948, Israel declared its independence. The Arab countries that had rejected the partition plan invaded Israel, but they were defeated.
As a result of the war, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were displaced from their homes. These refugees and their descendants have become a major issue in the conflict.
The Two-State Solution
The two-state solution is the most widely accepted international solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict. It calls for the establishment of two independent states, one Israeli and one Palestinian, living side-by-side in peace and security.
There is broad support for the two-state solution among the international community, including the United States, the European Union, and the United Nations. However, there is no consensus on the terms of a two-state solution, and both the Israeli and Palestinian governments have been reluctant to make the necessary compromises.
The One-State Solution
The one-state solution is a less widely accepted solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict. It calls for the establishment of a single, bi-national state in Palestine.
Proponents of the one-state solution argue that it is the only way to ensure true equality and justice for all Palestinians. They also argue that it is the only way to guarantee a sustainable and peaceful solution to the conflict.
Opponents of the one-state solution argue that it is unrealistic and unworkable. They argue that it would be impossible to create a single, bi-national state that would be acceptable to both Israelis and Palestinians. They also argue that it would lead to increased violence and instability in the region.
The Current Situation
The current situation in the Israel-Palestine conflict is dire. There is a lack of trust between the two sides, and both sides are unwilling to make the necessary compromises.
The Israeli government has built a separation barrier that cuts through the West Bank, isolating Palestinian communities and making it difficult for them to access essential services. The Israeli government has also imposed a blockade on the Gaza Strip, which has caused a humanitarian crisis.
The Palestinian Authority (PA), which governs the West Bank, is weak and corrupt. The PA has been unable to provide basic services to its people and has been unable to prevent Hamas from taking control of the Gaza Strip.
Hamas is a terrorist organization that has launched thousands of rocket attacks on Israel. Hamas has also been responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Israeli civilians.
The Way Forward
The only way to resolve the Israel-Palestine conflict is through a negotiated settlement. Both sides need to be willing to make compromises and to build trust.
The international community can play a role in facilitating a negotiated settlement. However, the international community cannot force a solution on the parties. The only way to achieve a lasting peace is for the Israelis and Palestinians to reach an agreement that they are both willing to live with.
Analytical Approach
The Israel-Palestine conflict is a complex and multifaceted conflict. There is no single solution that will satisfy all parties. However, there are some key steps that can be taken to move towards a resolution.
The first step is to build trust between the two sides. This will require both sides to make concessions and to show that they are committed to a peaceful solution.
The second step in resolving the Israel-Palestine conflict is to address the root causes of the conflict. These root causes include:
- The Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip
- The Palestinian refugee problem
- The status of Jerusalem
- The security concerns of both Israelis and Palestinians
The Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip is one of the most pressing issues in the conflict. The occupation has caused widespread economic and social hardship for Palestinians. It has also led to a cycle of violence and mistrust.
The Palestinian refugee problem is another major issue in the conflict. There are currently over six million Palestinian refugees living in the Middle East. These refugees have a right to return to their homes, but Israel has refused to allow them to do so.
The status of Jerusalem is a third major issue in the conflict. Both Israelis and Palestinians claim Jerusalem as their capital. This issue is highly symbolic and religious, and it is very difficult to resolve.
The security concerns of both Israelis and Palestinians are also a major issue in the conflict. Israelis fear Palestinian terrorism, while Palestinians fear Israeli military aggression.
Possible Solutions
There are a number of possible solutions to the Israel-Palestine conflict. However, all of these solutions require compromises from both sides.
One possible solution is the two-state solution. This solution would involve the establishment of two independent states, one Israeli and one Palestinian, living side-by-side in peace and security.
Another possible solution is the one-state solution. This solution would involve the establishment of a single, bi-national state in Palestine.
Challenges
There are a number of challenges to resolving the Israel-Palestine conflict. These challenges include:
- The lack of trust between the two sides
- The unwillingness of both sides to make the necessary compromises
- The complexity of the issues involved
- The role of regional and international actors
The lack of trust between the two sides is one of the biggest challenges to resolving the conflict. Both sides have been traumatized by the violence of the past, and they are both deeply suspicious of each other.The unwillingness of both sides to make the necessary compromises is another major challenge. Both sides have entrenched positions, and they are both reluctant to give up anything.
The complexity of the issues involved is also a challenge. The conflict is not just about land and borders. It is also about religion, nationalism, and identity. The role of regional and international actors is also a challenge. Some regional and international actors have a vested interest in perpetuating the conflict.The Israel-Palestine conflict is one of the most intractable and long-running conflicts in the world. However, it is important to remember that all conflicts can be resolved, given the will and the courage to do so.
The only way to resolve the Israel-Palestine conflict is through a negotiated settlement. Both sides need to be willing to make compromises and to build trust. The international community can play a role in facilitating a negotiated settlement, but it cannot force a solution on the parties. The only way to achieve a lasting peace is for the Israelis and Palestinians to reach an agreement that they are both willing to live with.
Analytical Approach: A Case Study
One way to analyze the Israel-Palestine conflict is to use a case study approach. This approach involves examining the conflict in detail, including its history, its root causes, and its impact on the people involved.
A case study of the Israel-Palestine conflict would need to consider the following factors:
- The history of the conflict, including the Zionist movement, the Balfour Declaration, the British Mandate, the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, and the subsequent Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
- The root causes of the conflict, including the Israeli occupation, the Palestinian refugee problem, the status of Jerusalem, and the security concerns of both Israelis and Palestinians.
- The impact of the conflict on the people involved, including the loss of life, the destruction of property, and the psychological and emotional trauma.
A case study of the Israel-Palestine conflict would also need to consider the role of regional and international actors. These actors include the United States, the European Union, the United Nations, and the Arab countries.
Conclusion
The Israel-Palestine conflict is a complex and multifaceted conflict. There is no easy solution. However, by understanding the conflict and its root causes, we can start to develop a more informed and nuanced approach to resolving it.A case study approach can be a useful tool for understanding the Israel-Palestine conflict. By examining the conflict in detail, we can gain a better understanding of its history, its causes, and its impact on the people involved.
Discover more from The Monitor
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Analysis
The Kashmir Conflict and the Reality of Crimes Against Humanity
Crimes against humanity represent one of the most serious affronts to human dignity and collective conscience. They embody patterns of widespread or systematic violence directed against civilian populations — including murder, enforced disappearances, torture, persecution, sexual violence, deportation, and other inhumane acts that shock the moral order of humanity. The United Nations Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime against Humanity presents a historic opportunity to strengthen global resolve, reinforce legal frameworks, and advance cooperation among states to ensure accountability, justice, and meaningful prevention.
While the international legal architecture has evolved significantly since the aftermath of the Second World War, important normative and institutional gaps remain. The Genocide Convention of 1948 and the Geneva Conventions established foundational legal protections, and the creation of the International Criminal Court reinforced accountability mechanisms. Yet, unlike genocide and war crimes, there is still no stand-alone comprehensive convention dedicated exclusively to crimes against humanity. This structural omission has limited the capacity of states to adopt consistent domestic legislation, harmonize cooperation frameworks, and pursue perpetrators who move across borders. The Conference of Plenipotentiaries seeks to fill this critical void.

The Imperative of Prevention
Prevention must stand at the core of the international community’s approach. Too often, the world reacts to atrocities only after irreparable harm has been inflicted and communities have been devastated. A meaningful prevention framework requires early warning mechanisms, stronger monitoring capacities, transparent reporting, and a willingness by states and institutions to act before crises escalate. Education in human rights, inclusive governance, rule of law strengthening, and responsible security practices are equally essential elements of prevention.
Civil society organizations, academic institutions, moral leaders, and human rights defenders play a vital role in documenting abuses, amplifying the voices of victims, and urging action when warning signs emerge. Their protection and meaningful participation must therefore be an integral component of any preventive strategy. Without civic space, truth is silenced — and without truth, accountability becomes impossible.
Accountability and the Rule of Law
Accountability is not an act of punishment alone; it is an affirmation of universal human values. When perpetrators enjoy impunity, cycles of violence deepen, victims are re-traumatized, and the integrity of international law erodes. Strengthening judicial cooperation — including extradition, mutual legal assistance, and evidence-sharing — is essential to closing enforcement gaps. Equally important is the responsibility of states to incorporate crimes against humanity into domestic criminal law, ensuring that such crimes can be prosecuted fairly and independently at the national level.
Justice must also be survivor centered. Victims and affected communities deserve recognition, reparations, psychological support, and the assurance that their suffering has not been ignored. Truth-seeking mechanisms and memorialization efforts help restore dignity and foster long-term reconciliation.
The Role of Multilateralism
The Conference reinforces the indispensable role of multilateralism in confronting global challenges. Atrocities rarely occur in isolation; they are rooted in political exclusion, discrimination, securitization of societies, and structural inequalities. No state, however powerful, can confront these dynamics alone. Shared norms, coordinated diplomatic engagement, and principled international cooperation are vital to preventing abuses and responding when they occur.
Multilateral commitments must also be matched with political will. Declarations are meaningful only when accompanied by implementation, transparency, and accountability to both domestic and international publics.
Technology, Media, and Modern Challenges
Contemporary conflicts and crises unfold in an increasingly digital and interconnected world. Technology can illuminate truth — enabling documentation, verification, and preservation of evidence — but it can also be weaponized to spread hate, dehumanization, and incitement. Strengthening responsible digital governance, countering disinformation, and supporting credible documentation initiatives are essential tools for both prevention and accountability. Journalists, researchers, and human rights monitors must be protected from reprisals for their work.
Climate-related stress, demographic shifts, and political polarization further complicate the landscape in which vulnerabilities emerge. The Conference should therefore promote a holistic understanding of risk factors that may precipitate widespread or systematic violence.
A Universal Commitment — With Local Realities
While the principles guiding this Convention are universal, their application must be sensitive to local histories, languages, cultures, and institutional realities. Effective implementation depends on national ownership, capacity-building, judicial training, and inclusive policymaking that engages women, youth, minorities, and marginalized communities. The pursuit of justice must never be perceived as externally imposed, but rather as an expression of shared human values anchored within domestic legal systems.
The Kashmir Conflict and the Reality of Crimes Against Humanity
Crimes against humanity do not emerge overnight. They develop through sustained patterns of abuse, erosion of legal safeguards, and the normalization of repression. Jammu and Kashmir presents a contemporary case study of these dynamics.
Under international law, crimes against humanity encompass widespread or systematic attacks directed against a civilian population, including imprisonment, torture, persecution, enforced disappearance, and other inhumane acts. Evidence emerging from Kashmir—documented by UN experts, international NGOs, journalists, and scholars—demonstrates patterns that meet these legal criteria.
The invocation of “national security” has become the central mechanism through which extraordinary powers are exercised without effective judicial oversight. Draconian laws are routinely used to silence dissent, detain human rights defenders, restrict movement, and suppress independent media. This securitized governance has produced what many Kashmiris describe as the “peace of the graveyard”—an imposed silence rather than genuine peace.
Early-warning frameworks for mass atrocities are particularly instructive. Gregory Stanton identifies Kashmir as exhibiting multiple risk indicators, including classification and discrimination, denial of civil rights, militarization, and impunity. These indicators, if left unaddressed, historically precede mass atrocity crimes.
The systematic silencing of journalists, as warned by the Committee to Protect Journalists, and the targeting of academics and diaspora voices—such as the denial of entry to Dr. Nitasha Kaul and the cancellation of travel documents of elderly activists like Amrit Wilson—demonstrate repression extending beyond borders.
The joint statement by ten UN Special Rapporteurs (2025) regarding one of internationally known human rights defender – Khurram Parvez – underscores that these are not isolated incidents but part of a broader pattern involving arbitrary detention, torture, discriminatory treatment, and custodial deaths. Together, these acts form a systematic attack on a civilian population, triggering the international community’s responsibility to act.
This Conference offers a critical opportunity to reaffirm that sovereignty cannot be a shield for crimes against humanity. Kashmir illustrates the urgent need for:
- Preventive diplomacy grounded in early warning mechanisms.
- Independent investigations and universal jurisdiction where applicable.
- Stronger protections for journalists, scholars, and human rights defenders, including Irfan Mehraj, Abdul Aaala Fazili, Hilal Mir, Asif Sultan and others.
- Victim-centered justice and accountability frameworks for Mohammad Yasin Malik, Shabir Ahmed Shah, Masarat Aalam, Aasia Andrabi, Fehmeeda Sofi, Nahida Nasreen and others.
Recognizing Kashmir within the crimes-against-humanity discourse is not political—it is legal, moral, and preventive. Failure to act risks entrenching impunity and undermining the very purpose of international criminal law.
Conclusion
The United Nations Conference of Plenipotentiaries carries profound moral, legal, and historical significance. It represents not only a technical exercise in treaty development but a reaffirmation of humanity’s collective promise — that no people, anywhere, should face systematic cruelty without recourse to justice and protection. By advancing a comprehensive Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime against Humanity, the international community strengthens its resolve to stand with victims, confront impunity, and uphold the sanctity of human dignity.
The success of this effort will ultimately depend on our willingness to transform commitments into action, principles into practice, and aspiration into enduring protection for present and future generations.
Dr. Fai submitted this paper to the Organizers of the Preparatory Committee for the United Nations Conference of Plenipotentiaries on Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Humanity on behalf of PCSWHR which is headed by Dr. Ijaz Noori, an internationally known interfaith expert. The conference took place at the UN headquarters between January 19 – 30, 2026.
Discover more from The Monitor
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Analysis
What Is Nipah Virus? Symptoms, Risks, and Transmission Explained as India Faces New Outbreak Alert
KOLKATA, West Bengal—In the intensive care unit of a Kolkata hospital, shielded behind layers of protective glass, a team of healthcare workers moves with a calibrated urgency. Their patient, a man in his forties, is battling an adversary they cannot see and for which they have no specific cure. He is one of at least five confirmed cases in a new Nipah virus outbreak in West Bengal, a stark reminder that the shadow of zoonotic pandemics is long, persistent, and profoundly personal. Among the cases are two frontline workers, a testament to the virus’s stealthy human-to-human transmission. Nearly 100 contacts now wait in monitored quarantine, their lives paused as public health officials race to contain a pathogen with a terrifying fatality rate of 40 to 75 percent.
This scene in India is not from a dystopian novel; it is the latest chapter in a two-decade struggle against a virus that emerges from forests, carried by fruit bats, to sporadically ignite human suffering. As of January 27, 2026, containment efforts are underway, but the alert status remains high. There is no Nipah virus vaccine, no licensed antiviral. Survival hinges on supportive care, epidemiological grit, and the hard-learned lessons from past outbreaks in Kerala and Bangladesh.
For a global audience weary of pandemic headlines, the name “Nipah” may elicit a flicker of recognition. But what is Nipah virus, and why does its appearance cause such profound concern among virologists and public health agencies worldwide? Beyond the immediate crisis in West Bengal, this outbreak illuminates the fragile interplay between a changing environment, animal reservoirs, and human health—a dynamic fueling the age of emerging infectious diseases.

Table of Contents
Understanding the Nipah Virus: A Zoonotic Origin Story
Nipah virus (NiV) is not a newcomer. It is a paramyxovirus, in the same family as measles and mumps, but with a deadlier disposition. It was first identified in 1999 during an outbreak among pig farmers in Sungai Nipah, Malaysia. The transmission chain was traced back to fruit bats of the Pteropus genus—the virus’s natural reservoir—who dropped partially eaten fruit into pig pens. The pigs became amplifying hosts, and from them, the virus jumped to humans.
The South Asian strain, however, revealed a more direct and dangerous pathway. In annual outbreaks in Bangladesh and parts of India, humans contract the virus primarily through consuming raw date palm sap contaminated by bat urine or saliva. From there, it gains the ability for efficient human-to-human transmission through close contact with respiratory droplets or bodily fluids, often in家庭or hospital settings. This capacity for person-to-person spread places it in a category of concern distinct from many other zoonoses.
“Nipah sits at a dangerous intersection,” explains a virologist with the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Emerging Diseases unit. “It has a high mutation rate, a high fatality rate, and proven ability to spread between people. While its outbreaks have so far been sporadic and localized, each event is an opportunity for the virus to better adapt to human hosts.” The WHO lists Nipah as a priority pathogen for research and development, alongside Ebola and SARS-CoV-2.
Key Symptoms and Progression: From Fever to Encephalitis
The symptoms of Nipah virus infection can be deceptively nonspecific at first, often leading to critical delays in diagnosis and isolation. The incubation period ranges from 4 to 14 days. The illness typically progresses in two phases:
- Initial Phase: Patients present with flu-like symptoms including:
- High fever
- Severe headache
- Muscle pain (myalgia)
- Vomiting and sore throat
- Neurological Phase: Within 24-48 hours, the infection can progress to acute encephalitis (brain inflammation). Signs of this dangerous progression include:
- Dizziness, drowsiness, and altered consciousness.
- Acute confusion or disorientation.
- Seizures.
- Atypical pneumonia and severe respiratory distress.
- In severe cases, coma within 48 hours.
According to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the case fatality rate is estimated at 40% to 75%, a staggering figure that varies by outbreak and local healthcare capacity. Survivors of severe encephalitis are often left with long-term neurological conditions, such as seizure disorders and personality changes.
Transmission Routes and Risk Factors
Understanding Nipah virus transmission is key to breaking its chain. The routes are specific but expose critical vulnerabilities in our food systems and healthcare protocols.
- Zoonotic (Animal-to-Human): The primary route. The consumption of raw date palm sap or fruit contaminated by infected bats is the major risk factor in Bangladesh and India. Direct contact with infected bats or their excrement is also a risk. Interestingly, while pigs were the intermediate host in Malaysia, they have not played a role in South Asian outbreaks.
- Human-to-Human: This is the driver of hospital-based and家庭clusters. The virus spreads through:
- Direct contact with respiratory droplets (coughing, sneezing) from an infected person.
- Contact with bodily fluids (saliva, urine, blood) of an infected person.
- Contact with contaminated surfaces in clinical or care settings.
This mode of transmission makes healthcare workers exceptionally vulnerable, as seen in the current West Bengal cases and the devastating 2018 Kerala outbreak, where a nurse lost her life after treating an index patient. The lack of early, specific symptoms means Nipah can enter a hospital disguised as a common fever.
The Current Outbreak in West Bengal: Containment Under Pressure
The Nipah virus India 2026 outbreak is centered in West Bengal, with confirmed cases receiving treatment in Kolkata-area hospitals. As reported by NDTV, state health authorities have confirmed at least five cases, including healthcare workers, with one patient in critical condition. The swift response includes:
- The quarantine and daily monitoring of nearly 100 high-risk contacts.
- Isolation wards established in designated hospitals.
- Enhanced surveillance in the affected districts.
- Public advisories against consuming raw date palm sap.
This outbreak echoes, but is geographically distinct from, the several deadly encounters Kerala has had with the virus, most notably in 2018 and 2023. Each outbreak tests India’s increasingly robust—yet uneven—infectious disease response infrastructure. The Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) and the National Institute of Virology (NIV) have deployed teams and are supporting rapid testing, which is crucial for containment.
Airports in the region, recalling measures from previous health crises, have reportedly instituted thermal screening for passengers from affected areas, a move aimed more at public reassurance than efficacy, given Nipah’s incubation period.
Why the Fatality Rate Is So High: A Perfect Storm of Factors
The alarming Nipah virus fatality rate is a product of biological, clinical, and systemic factors:
- Neurotropism: The virus has a strong affinity for neural tissue, leading to rapid and often irreversible brain inflammation.
- Lack of Specific Treatment: There is no vaccine for Nipah virus and no licensed antiviral therapy. Treatment is purely supportive: managing fever, ensuring hydration, treating seizures, and, in severe cases, mechanical ventilation. Monoclonal antibodies are under development and have been used compassionately in past outbreaks, but they are not widely available.
- Diagnostic Delays: Early symptoms mimic common illnesses. Without rapid, point-of-care diagnostics, critical isolation and care protocols are delayed, increasing the opportunity for spread and disease progression.
- Healthcare-Associated Transmission: Outbreaks can overwhelm infection prevention controls in hospitals, turning healthcare facilities into amplification points, which increases the overall case count and mortality.
Global Implications and Preparedness
While the current Nipah virus outbreak is a local crisis, its implications are global. In an interconnected world, no outbreak is truly isolated. The World Health Organization stresses that Nipah epidemics can cause severe disease and death in humans, posing a significant public health concern.
Furthermore, Nipah is a paradigm for a larger threat. Habitat loss and climate change are bringing wildlife and humans into more frequent contact. The Pteropus bat’s range is vast, spanning from the Gulf through the Indian subcontinent to Southeast Asia and Australia. Urbanization and agricultural expansion increase the odds of spillover events.
“The story of Nipah is the story of our time,” notes a global health security analyst in a piece for SCMP. “It’s a virus that exists in nature, held in check by ecological balance. When we disrupt that balance through deforestation, intensive farming, or climate stress, we roll the dice on spillover. West Bengal today could be somewhere else tomorrow.”
International preparedness is patchy. High-income countries have sophisticated biosecurity labs but may lack experience with the virus. Countries in the endemic region have hard-earned field experience but often lack resources. Bridging this gap through data sharing, capacity building, and joint research is essential.
Prevention and Future Outlook
Until a Nipah virus vaccine becomes a reality, prevention hinges on public awareness, robust surveillance, and classical public health measures:
- Community Education: In endemic areas, public campaigns must clearly communicate the dangers of consuming raw date palm sap and advise covering sap collection pots to prevent bat access.
- Enhanced Surveillance: Implementing a “One Health” approach that integrates human, animal, and environmental health monitoring to detect spillover events early.
- Hospital Readiness: Ensuring healthcare facilities in at-risk regions have protocols for rapid identification, isolation, and infection control, and that workers have adequate personal protective equipment (PPE).
- Accelerating Research: The pandemic has shown the world the value of platform technologies for vaccines. Several Nipah virus vaccine candidates are in various trial stages, supported by initiatives like the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). Similarly, research into antiviral treatments like remdesivir and monoclonal antibodies must be prioritized.
The future outlook is one of cautious vigilance. Eradicating Nipah is impossible—its reservoir is wild, winged, and widespread. The goal is effective management: early detection, swift containment, and reducing the case fatality rate through better care and, eventually, medical countermeasures.
Conclusion: A Test of Vigilance and Cooperation
The patients in Kolkata’s isolation wards are more than statistics; they are a poignant call to action. The Nipah virus India outbreak in West Bengal is a flare in the night, illuminating the persistent vulnerabilities in our global health defenses. It reminds us that while COVID-19 may have redefined our scale of concern, it did not invent the underlying risks.
Nipah’s high fatality rate and capacity for human-to-human transmission demand respect, but not panic. The response in West Bengal demonstrates that with swift action, contact tracing, and community engagement, chains of transmission can be broken, even without a magic bullet cure.
Ultimately, the narrative of Nipah is not solely one of threat, but of trajectory. It shows where we have been—reactive, often scrambling. And it points to where we must go: toward a proactive, collaborative, and equitable system of pandemic preparedness. This means investing in research for neglected pathogens, strengthening health systems at the grassroots, and respecting the delicate ecological balances that, when disturbed, send silent passengers from the forest into our midst. The goal is not just to contain the outbreak of today, but to build a world resilient to the viruses of tomorrow.
Discover more from The Monitor
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Analysis
Systematic Inhumane Persecution in Jammu & Kashmir
This written communication draws the attention of the United Nations and its human rights mechanisms to persistent and grave violations in Jammu and Kashmir, which cumulatively raise serious concerns under international human rights law and international criminal law, including the threshold of crimes against humanity.
For decades, the civilian population of Jammu and Kashmir has lived under one of the world’s most militarized environments. Since August 2019 in particular, restrictions on civil liberties have intensified, marked by arbitrary arrests, prolonged detentions without trial, torture and ill-treatment, extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, and collective punishment under the guise of national security.
On 24 November 2025, ten UN Special Rapporteurs issued a joint statement condemning “reports of arbitrary arrests and detentions, suspicious deaths in custody, torture and other ill-treatment, lynchings, and discriminatory treatment of Kashmiri and Muslim communities.”
These concerns echo findings previously documented by Michelle Bachelet,the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) in its 2019 report, which warned of an entrenched culture of impunity and lack of accountability for serious violations.
Independent experts on mass atrocities have sounded early warnings. Gregory Stanton, Founder of Genocide Watch, has stated that Kashmir exhibits multiple risk factors associated with genocide, including extreme militarization, denial of identity, suppression of dissent, and systemic impunity.
Freedom of expression and access to information have been severely curtailed. The Committee to Protect Journalists has repeatedly warned that journalism in Kashmir has been effectively criminalized, leaving the population voiceless.
Award-winning journalists and scholars—such as Masarat Zahra and Dr. Nitasha Kaul (British Academic) —have faced harassment, travel bans, and reprisals, including the denial of entry to India, amounting to transnational repression.
The recent attachment of properties belonging to members of the Kashmiri diaspora who advocate a peaceful resolution of the Kashmir dispute is deeply alarming. These measures appear aimed at intimidating and silencing dissenting voices and preventing the international community from understanding the reality on the ground.
Equally disturbing is the forthcoming trial of Mohammad Yasin Malik before the Supreme Court of India, where the government is seeking the death penalty, a move that has sent shockwaves across Kashmir and among human rights advocates worldwide. The recent convictions of Asiya Andrabi, Nahida Nasreen and Fahmeeda Sofi serve no legitimate purpose other than to suppress political expression and peaceful advocacy.
The continued incarceration of Shabir Ahmed Shah and Masarat Alam, without credible justification, further underscores a pattern of repression aimed at dismantling legitimate political leadership in Kashmir. The prolonged confinement of Khurram Parvez, an internationally known human rights advocate violates all norms of international standards.
These actions collectively reflect a troubling pattern of repression and raise serious concerns under international human rights law. Urgent intervention by the United Nations is essential to protect fundamental freedoms, uphold the rule of law, and prevent further deterioration of the human rights situation in Jammu and Kashmir.
My concerns are consistent with observations made by other United Nations independent experts, international NGO’s, scholars and academics.
Mary Lawlor, UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders said on the targeting of Kashmiri civil society: “The continued use of counter-terrorism legislation to silence human rights defenders in Jammu and Kashmir is deeply alarming. Peaceful human rights work must never be criminalized under the guise of national security.”
Dr. Fernand de Varennes, UN Special Rapporteur on Minority Issues (2020): “Restrictions imposed in Jammu and Kashmir appear to be inconsistent with international human rights norms, particularly those protecting minorities.”
International Commission of Jurists (ICJ): “The prolonged denial of civil liberties in Jammu and Kashmir raises serious concerns under international law, including the prohibition of collective punishment and arbitrary detention.”
Amnesty International: “India’s claims of ‘normalcy’ in Kashmir are contradicted by widespread repression, including arbitrary detentions, communication blackouts, and collective punishment of civilians.”
Human Rights Watch: “Impunity for security forces remains the norm, fostering further abuses and denying justice to victims.”
Timely and principled intervention by the United Nations is essential to restore confidence in the rule of law, protect fundamental freedoms, and bring a measure of sanity and accountability to the situation in Jammu and Kashmir.
This submission urges the United Nations to:
- Initiate independent international investigations into alleged crimes against humanity in Jammu and Kashmir.
- Press for the repeal or reform of laws enabling arbitrary detention and collective punishment.
- Persuade India to release Mohammad Yasin Malik, Shabbir Ahmed Shah, Masar Aalam, Asiya Andrabi, Nahida Nasreen, Fahmeeda Soofi, Khurram Parvez and others immediately.
- Ensure access to UN Special Procedures, international observers, and independent media.
- Call for accountability and remedies for victims, consistent with international law.
Silence and inaction risk normalizing repression. The situation in Jammu and Kashmir demands sustained international scrutiny and principled engagement.
Discover more from The Monitor
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
-
Featured5 years agoThe Right-Wing Politics in United States & The Capitol Hill Mayhem
-
News4 years agoPrioritizing health & education most effective way to improve socio-economic status: President
-
China5 years agoCoronavirus Pandemic and Global Response
-
Canada5 years agoSocio-Economic Implications of Canadian Border Closure With U.S
-
Democracy4 years agoMissing You! SPSC
-
Conflict5 years agoKashmir Lockdown, UNGA & Thereafter
-
Democracy4 years agoPresident Dr Arif Alvi Confers Civil Awards on Independence Day
-
Digital5 years agoPakistan Moves Closer to Train One Million Youth with Digital Skills
