Kashmir’s Cold Front: The Shifting Geography of Terror

Analysis

By Mehraj Bhat 

The political and security challenges in Jammu & Kashmir have long demanded a nuanced and pragmatic approach—one that accounts for the region’s layered complexities and calls for a robust state apparatus to safeguard both its people and India's territorial integrity. Recent incidents, particularly the Pahalgam terror attack, expose serious vulnerabilities in our security framework and signal the urgency of systemic reform.

A strong state in Jammu & Kashmir is not a rhetorical aspiration but a strategic imperative. In a region grappling with cross-border terrorism, domestic insurgency, and external geopolitical gamesmanship, the state must serve as both a guarantor of security and a restorer of governance and public trust. General Bipin Rawat, India’s former Chief of Defence Staff, rightly noted, “We need to redefine our strategy in Kashmir—beyond just military operations, there needs to be an integrated approach involving intelligence, diplomacy, and public engagement.” This integrated framework must move beyond short-term deployments and instead embrace a sustained, institutional response to the region’s long-standing fault lines.

Among the most dangerous yet often understated threats is the growing nexus between narco-trafficking and terrorism. The use of drug money to fund militancy has added a complex and insidious layer to the conflict. Heroin, flowing through smuggling routes from Afghanistan and Punjab, is now a primary financial artery for terror groups operating in and around Jammu & Kashmir. This not only fuels militancy but also corrodes local society by pushing vulnerable youth into addiction or recruitment. As South Asia analyst Michael Kugelman warns, “The region’s stability is crucial not just for South Asia but for global security.” Tackling narco-terrorism demands enhanced border management, a joint counter-narcotic mechanism, and international cooperation, especially with countries confronting similar hybrid threats.

The Pahalgam attack has also revealed the deterioration of human intelligence on the Indian side. The attackers, reportedly asking tourists about their religion before opening fire, were both confident and informed, suggesting local facilitation and precise reconnaissance. The reduced CRPF footprint in vulnerable areas like Baisaran, over-reliance on under-resourced local police, and the weakening of local-level intelligence grids all indicate a system outpaced by evolving threats. As former Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran noted, “The security challenges in Kashmir are not just a question of borders but a fundamental test of India’s ability to manage internal security while upholding its sovereignty.” Strengthening HUMINT and integrating real-time surveillance, grassroots intelligence cells, and civil cooperation must become non-negotiable pillars of our counter-terror apparatus.

A deeper concern lies in the strategic shift of terror from the Kashmir Valley to Jammu—a trend that suggests militants are probing new fronts in response to tighter security elsewhere. This change in the conflict's geography has been gradual but deliberate. As ORF’s Sushant Sareen aptly observed, “Terrorism in Kashmir is an instrument of Pakistan’s policy, but it is also a reflection of India’s inability to adapt to the changing security environment.” This shift demands not just redeployment, but recalibration—acknowledging that geographic containment alone cannot neutralize ideological and operational threats.

Meanwhile, the broader regional dynamics also exert pressure. Pakistan’s deep state, faced with diplomatic isolation and internal instability, increasingly leans on symbolic strikes to assert relevance in Kashmir. This is occurring alongside the resurgence of hardline elements in Bangladesh, global unrest such as the Gaza crisis, and the emboldening of soft separatist voices during local elections in the Valley. General Asim Munir’s rhetoric in Pakistan, combined with the reactivation of jihadist launchpads across the LOC, further exposes the fault lines. These are not disconnected events; they form a pattern of strategic signalling, amplified by social media ecosystems that allow disinformation and propaganda to reach local audiences almost instantly.

1. Raja Mohan, one of India’s foremost strategic thinkers, argues: “Kashmir is not a territorial dispute; it is a reflection of the evolving strategic competition between India and Pakistan, with global implications.” That strategic competition now extends into digital and ideological domains, making narrative control and psychological resilience as critical as boots on the ground.

There are lessons to be drawn from international contexts. The layered security model combines military readiness, intelligence fusion, civilian vigilance, and digital surveillance, creating an agile yet resilient system. The war against cartels isn’t won through force alone, but through a blend of economic rehabilitation, state-building, and targeted policing. These models underline the need for India to develop a flexible doctrine that incorporates not only military capacity but also economic levers, societal engagement, and institutional depth.

In the words of security strategist Stephen Cohen, “The problem with South Asia is not too much history, but too little strategy.” Jammu & Kashmir now requires not reaction, but reinvention. The idea is not to over-securitize the region but to evolve the tools of statehood—to be smart, alert, and adaptable.

A strong state is not a hard state, it is a capable one. As India charts its course in a turbulent region, Jammu & Kashmir must no longer be a laboratory of short-term fixes but a model of strategic foresight, democratic accountability, and national resolve.

Disclaimer: This paper is the author's individual scholastic contribution and does not necessarily reflect the organization's viewpoint.

Mehraj Bhat is a Researcher and a podcaster in International Relations.