India calls out Pakistan over Jammu and Kashmir remarks, demands territory vacated

India has strongly criticized Pakistan over its recent remarks regarding Jammu and Kashmir, with the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) asserting that Pakistan’s ongoing sponsorship of cross-border terrorism remains the primary barrier to peace and security in the region. In response to statements made by the Pakistan Foreign Office, India reiterated its longstanding demand that Pakistan must vacate the illegally occupied territory and cease its interference in India’s sovereign matters.

MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal directly addressed Pakistan’s comments, stating that the real issue was not the status of Jammu and Kashmir but rather Pakistan’s active support for terrorism across the border. He noted that this continued interference has been the most significant obstacle to stability in South Asia. “Instead of spreading lies, Pakistan should vacate Indian territory under its illegal and forcible occupation,” Jaiswal stated while addressing media queries.

The Indian government’s sharp response follows Pakistan’s reaction to Prime Minister Narendra Modi‘s remarks on India-Pakistan relations during a podcast interview with Lex Fridman. In the discussion, Modi emphasized that India has made repeated efforts to foster peace, but these efforts have been met with hostility and betrayal from Islamabad. He further stated that he hopes wisdom will prevail among Pakistan’s leadership to improve bilateral relations.

How Did Pakistan Respond to Modi’s Podcast Remarks?

Following Modi’s statements, the Pakistan Foreign Office swiftly issued a rebuttal, dismissing his remarks as “misleading and one-sided.” Pakistan claimed that the Jammu and Kashmir dispute remains unresolved due to India’s failure to uphold its commitments to the United Nations, the people of Kashmir, and Pakistan. Islamabad also accused India of fomenting instability in Pakistan, alleging that New Delhi has engaged in activities such as targeted assassinations and subversion within its borders.

In response, India rejected these accusations, highlighting that Pakistan has long been identified as a hub of cross-border terrorism. Modi reinforced this view in his podcast, describing Pakistan as an “epicenter of turmoil, not just for India, but for the world.” The Indian government has repeatedly cited evidence of Pakistan-based militant groups launching attacks on Indian soil, further complicating diplomatic efforts between the two nations.

What Is the Historical Context of the India-Pakistan Dispute Over Kashmir?

The dispute over Jammu and Kashmir dates back to the partition of India in 1947, when British India was divided into two separate nations—India and Pakistan. The division led to territorial conflicts, with both countries staking claims over Kashmir. The princely state of Jammu and Kashmir initially remained independent but later acceded to India following an invasion by Pakistani-backed forces.

The conflict led to the first India-Pakistan war in 1947-1948, which ended with the establishment of the Line of Control (LoC), dividing the region between areas administered by India and Pakistan. Despite multiple conflicts over the decades—including wars in 1965 and 1999—the territorial status remains a flashpoint, with Pakistan continuing to claim Kashmir as a disputed region and India asserting it as an integral part of its sovereignty.

India has consistently argued that Pakistan’s support for cross-border terrorism undermines any possibility of a peaceful resolution. New Delhi maintains that terrorist organizations operating from Pakistan have been responsible for numerous attacks, including the 2008 Mumbai attacks and the 2019 Pulwama bombing. This persistent issue has led India to take a firm stance against engaging in talks with Pakistan until Islamabad dismantles its terrorist networks.

How Do Geopolitical and Security Issues Shape India-Pakistan Relations?

The ongoing tensions between India and Pakistan extend beyond territorial disputes, influencing security policies, military strategies, and diplomatic efforts. India has frequently raised concerns about Pakistan’s role in harboring terrorist organizations, with global watchdogs such as the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) placing Pakistan on its grey list for failing to curb terror financing.

Pakistan, on the other hand, continues to seek international intervention, pushing for third-party mediation in the Jammu and Kashmir dispute. However, India has firmly rejected external involvement, stating that all issues must be resolved bilaterally. This stance aligns with India’s broader foreign policy approach, which emphasizes direct dialogue over multilateral negotiations.

The broader implications of these hostilities have also affected regional economic stability and diplomatic ties. Trade relations between the two nations have remained largely restricted, with India revoking Pakistan’s Most Favored Nation (MFN) status in 2019 following the Pulwama attack. In response, Pakistan downgraded diplomatic ties and halted bilateral trade.

What Does This Mean for Future India-Pakistan Relations?

Despite multiple diplomatic interventions over the years, the India-Pakistan conflict over Jammu and Kashmir shows little sign of resolution. India remains steadfast in its demand that Pakistan must first address its support for cross-border terrorism before any meaningful engagement can take place. Meanwhile, Pakistan continues to challenge India’s stance on Kashmir, keeping the dispute alive on international platforms.

With Prime Minister Modi reaffirming India’s position and Pakistan countering with accusations of its own, the situation remains highly volatile. The Indian government’s latest response underscores its unwavering commitment to maintaining sovereignty over Jammu and Kashmir while holding Pakistan accountable for regional instability. As both nations continue to navigate complex geopolitical challenges, the future of their relationship will likely depend on whether Pakistan takes tangible steps toward addressing India’s security concerns.