Thematic analysis of the representation of Kashmir conflict in Dawn

Mukesh Devrari    

Abstract 

 

Indo-Pakistan relations are troubled primarily due to their conflict over the region of Jammu & Kashmir (J&K) since the partition of British India in 1947. The Kashmir conflict is considered one of the world’s most intractable and complicated bilateral disputes, where both countries are reluctant to change their historical positions. This study aims to find out how Kashmir conflict with India has been discussed, debated & represented in one of Pakistan’s most prominent English language newspaper Dawn. It uses thematic analysis approach and relies on paragraph-based coding in the NVivo software to examine the various aspects of representation of Kashmir conflict in the opinion pages of Dawn during India’s general elections in 2019. This study underlines that Dawn firmly aligns with the Pakistani ruling establishment’s stated position on Kashmir dispute and holds India responsible for all the troubles in the region.    

 

(Keywords: - Kashmir dispute, Indo-Pakistan conflict, thematic analysis, Dawn, media representation)

 

Background  

Pakistan was created in 1947 by dividing British India on the basis of religion (Ahmed, 2002; Bipan, Mridula, Aditya, Panikar, & Sucheta, 1989; Dhulipala, 2015; Dixit, 2002; G. Pandey, 2001). The process of drawing new political boundaries between two independent nation-states was accompanied by the world’s largest and prolonged forced displacement, migration and sectarian violence of the 20^th century. More than 14 million people were displaced and as many as one million killed (Hajari & Malhotra, 2015). 

In the immediate aftermath of the partition, India and Pakistan started fighting over the region of J&K (Marlow, 2019b; Mohan, 1992). The J&K no longer exists as one unit as it existed before 1947 as a princely state. At that time the total area of the state was 2,22,236 sq km. Now Pakistan and China together hold 55 per cent of J&K and the rest is controlled by India (Chellaney, 2019). Around 5180 sq km territory Pakistan ceded to China as part of a border agreement between the two countries in 1963 (Jacob, 2020, p. 19). 

 

The Muslim majority region of J&K is a key source of conflict between India and Pakistan. “Since 1947 the general domestic narrative in both countries has been hostile to the other – generations have been brought up to mistrust, dislike, hate their neighbour, mainly because of the repercussions over the unresolved dispute over J&K” (Schofield, 2015, p. 22). Pakistan considers the territorial status-quo unacceptable (Kasuri, 2015) and India rejects further partition of the country on the basis of religion. The need to resolve the Kashmir dispute is described as a core interest of Pakistan, which demands that all the principles which led to the partition of India in 1947 should be applied to J&K (Cohen, 2004; S. Ganguly, 2019) as it is also a Muslim majority region.

 

The popular discourse against India in Pakistan perpetuates a notion of victimhood. Pakistani citizens have been taught to believe that during the partition of India on communal lines in 1947, “India deprived Pakistan of territories that were rightfully its. So, there are “unfinished tasks of partition”. Secondly, at the deepest level, India has not accepted Partition. Third, the Hindu majority of civil society in India wants to diminish and dominate the Muslims” (Dixit, 2002, p. 7). 

This feeling is still persistent and causes conflicts in the region. Due to this, both nations are fighting over the region of J&K, which is roughly the size of the UK, and it remains the main cause of Indo-Pakistan conflict (R. Ganguly, 2001; Schofield, 2010, 2015; Wirsing, 2003), although ideological opposition to India goes beyond Kashmir conflict, which is a symptom, not necessarily cause of all bilateral disputes (Dixit, 2002; Fair, 2014; Haqqani, 2010). 

India and Pakistan both claim J&K in full. Cohen (1995) suggests that, if it remains unresolved, confrontation over Kashmir could escalate to nuclear war. However, Schofield (2015) argued that the prospects of whole state becoming either part of Pakistan or India is now an illusion. The perceptions of identity are also central to the conflict in Kashmir (Anant, 2009).

The data set of columns and editorials used for this research repeatedly mentions Pulwama suicide bombing and its aftermath, and BJP’s election promise to revoke the special status of J&K among other issues. On 14 February 2019, a suicide bomber rammed his explosive-laden car into the convoy of the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) in Pulwama district of J&K. More than 40 troops were killed in the suicide-bombing (Ashiq, 2019), for which the Pakistan-based terror organization Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) took responsibility (Safi & Farooq, 2019). Pulwama suicide bombing was the largest terror attack after the Mumbai carnage of 2008 in terms of the number of deaths. 

While India mourned its dead and photographs of fallen soldiers spread across the country on social media, the Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) government decided to retaliate (R. Roy & Shah, 2019) by targeting an alleged terrorist training camp in Balakot (S. Singh, 2019). The United States also gave tacit approval to India to retaliate (Miglani & Bukhari, 2019; S. Roy, 2019). 

On February 26, 2019, 12 Indian Air Force (IAF) Mirage-2000 jets bombed an alleged JeM terrorist training camp outside Balakot, a small town in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province of Pakistan, about 70 kilometres from the Line of Control and 40 kilometres north from Muzaffarabad, the capital of Pakistan-administered Kashmir (Haidar & Peri, 2019). The target was allegedly a Madrasah run by JeM (Rej, 2019) which had taken responsibility for the attack, though the suicide bomber was a local Kashmiri. 

 

Pakistan dismissed the India’s retaliation as propaganda and claimed that only trees were destroyed, nonetheless, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi was hailed as a strong leader for deciding to punish the Pulwama attackers. The next day Pakistan symbolically fired at four targets including the northern headquarters of Indian Army command and their supply depot by using F-16 aircraft. In the process, Pakistan also shot down a Soviet-era Mig21- Bison fighter aircraft of the IAF. Pakistan also captured its pilot who fell inside Pakistan controlled territory. In the confusion that followed, the IAF also shot down its own Mi-17 helicopter killing all 7 soldiers onboard (Ridler, 2019). 

 

India claimed that it had shot down a Pakistani F-16 fighter aircraft and Pakistan insisted that it had shot down two Indian fighter jets (Safi & Zahra-Malik, 2019). Independent open-source intelligence analysis has failed to verify Indian claims at Balakot. Even the Indian claim to have shot down an F-16 (Lalwani & Tallo, 2019 ) was denied by the US sources (Marlow, 2019a; Seligman, 2019) as well. 

The issue of article 370 and 35 A was also intensely discussed in Dawn’s opinion pages (Kuchay, 2019) as BJP’s election manifesto promised revocation of both the articles. Article 370 and 35 A provided partial autonomy to the state of J&K to make its laws in all matters except finance, defence, foreign affairs and communications. The state had a separate constitution and a flag, and Indians from other states were not allowed to acquire property in the region. 

 

The Dawn described any attempts to revoke the special status of J&K as an attempt to forcibly integrate the state into India. Article 370 & 35A also allowed the legislative assembly of the state to define its permanent residents. It also prevented outsiders from permanently settling, buying land (Noorani, 2014), holding local government jobs or winning education scholarships. The articles also denied property rights to female residents of J&K if they married a person from outside the state (Santha, 2019).  

 

Although after its electoral victory, the ruling BJP removed both articles on 5 August 2019. It divided the state of J&K into two, the Union Territory of Ladakh and Union Territory of J&K. It also released a new political map of newly created Union Territories. Pakistan protested against the scrapping of article 370 & 35 A as an attempt to change the status quo (Gupta, 2019). In the backdrop of this adversarial relationship that has stretched into all ensuing decades after the political partition of India, this study examines the representation of Kashmir dispute with India in Dawn’s opinion pages during India’s general elections in 2019. 

 

The Dawn has been chosen for this study as English-language newspapers provide a glimpse into the concerns and world view of the ruling elite in both India and Pakistan. In Pakistan, The News and Dawn are the two largest circulating newspapers. The News ranks first in English newspapers and fifth nationally, with 120,000 papers in circulation. Dawn is second in the English-language category and sixth in the nation with a circulation of 109,000 (H. Shah, 2010). However, Dawn has a better online presence. As per Alexa records on June 20, 2019, Dawn has 4.36 million monthly unique visitors, 2.11 million daily and 56.8 million monthly page views. It has a global rank of 1058 as per the global internet traffic and engagement over the past 90 days. Traffic on Dawn’s website also highlights a unique trend. Only 43.24% of total traffic comes from Pakistan. 15.78% traffic comes from India and around 14 per cent traffic comes from the United States and the rest from other parts of the globe, whereas ‘The News’ stands at 1617 in global rankings and it attracts 71.4% of traffic from Pakistan, 5.9% from India and 4.6% from the United States.

 

These online trends are changing daily but offer a glimpse of Dawn’s wider reach globally, probably among the overseas Pakistanis settled in huge numbers in the UK, US and Middle East. Three of its online readers out of 20 come from India in comparison to one in 20 in the case of The News, which also reflects on the reach, credibility and influence of the news and analysis published in Dawn. It's wide following outside of the country is also visible in comment sections under most of the articles published on its website. 

Dawn is considered a moderate newspaper as it caters to the information needs of the external as well as the domestic audience, which makes it a useful object of study. It is also considered a liberal newspaper and is “known for its progressive content” (Fair & Hamza, 2016, p. 582). It has been targeted many times in the past for advocating its pro-civilian-rule orientation (Bearak, 2000). 

Dawn has faced intimidation, harassment of its journalists, a ban on hawkers distributing the newspaper in military cantonments in every city in the country, cable operators told to take its TV channel off air, and massive cuts in revenue as advertisers are warned not to promote their goods in Dawn. (Rashid, 2018, para. 11) 

But it can also be considered a powerful voice of the Pakistani elite as most of its contributors are public intellectuals, former high-ranking bureaucrats, foreign office officials and well-connected journalists.

Aims & Research Question 

 

1.     How Kashmir conflict is discussed & debated in the opinion pages of Dawn (Pakistani newspaper) during India’s general elections 2019?

 

Hypothesis 

1.     The perspective of the ruling (military and intelligence) regime is reflected in the media coverage about the Kashmir dispute with India.

2.     India is framed as a religious state, without any secular credentials, completely controlled and dominated by Hindutva forces to lay moral claim on Muslim majority region of J&K.

 

Methodology 

 

This study examines the representation of Kashmir conflict in Dawn during India’s general elections in 2019. The dates for general elections were announced on 10 March 2019. The result was announced on 23 May 2019. During this period of 74 days, a total of 106 columns and editorials were published in Dawn’s opinion pages carrying the word ‘India’, out of these only 23 articles discussed, debated or mentioned the Kashmir conflict with India. 

This study uses the thematic analysis approach to analyse the narratives on Kashmir conflict with India in Dawn. Thematic Analysis (TA) is a method for identifying, analysing, and reporting patterns within data. It involves searching across a data set to find repeated patterns of meaning. “The exact form and product of thematic analysis vary” (Braun & Clarke, 2006, p. 15), though effective use of TA should involve explaining, describing and summarizing not only key patterns in data but also interpreting important elements, features and traits (Braun & Clarke, 2016). 

TA has six phases as outlined by Braun and Clarke (2006): familiarisation of data, coding, generating initial themes, reviewing themes, defining and naming themes and writing up. The process of coding involves creating appropriate coding categories to identify the features of data that might be relevant to answering the research question (Braun, Clarke, Hayfield, & Terry, 2019). The last stage defined as writing up involves binding together analytic narrative and data extracts. It also involves contextualizing the findings with the existing literature on the subject (Braun & Clarke, 2006).

All articles for the research have been retrieved from the official website of Dawn. The ‘find’ tool of the MS Word software was used to check whether the article carried the word ‘India’ and refers to Kashmir conflict. Total of 23 selected articles referring to Kashmir dispute with India were selected in the data set for this study and coded in the NVivo software. This study carefully identifies narrative and lists suitable analytical categories by using a TA approach. 

After initial readings of the dataset, the 23 articles were coded in NVivo software under various subthemes. Each subtheme has been described in the node properties box of the NVivo software to bring the consistency and uniformity to the coding process. Each subtheme also represents a constituent of the broader theme on Kashmir dispute with India. 

Dawn publishes incisive articles on its opinion pages to articulate Pakistan’s national perspectives against India on Kashmir issue. They provide a starting point for discussion about the Kashmir dispute as positions taken by the authors are not personal opinions, but manifestations of more complex, socially shared and dominant ideological frameworks that embody institutional relationships and power (Van Dijk, 1989, p. 232). 

This study will identify and reveal the trends, patterns, orientation, traits, characteristics and nature of the representation Kashmir conflict with India in Dawn’s opinion pages. 

Literature Review

The plenty of literature has been published on various aspects of Kashmir dispute in international journals by scholars, but it has not been examined by keeping media at the centre of the dominant discourse. The opinion on J&K and its association with India has been described differently by different authors.    

Historically, India has repeatedly been credited with a distinguished record which combines the anti-colonial roots of its political system, and sets it favourably against its geographical neighbours, such as Pakistan, which are beset with problematic and violent transfers of political power, or China with its Communist one-party state. (Kaul, 2018, p. 127) 

Though India’s approach to deal with militancy and separatism in J&K has been criticized by many scholars (Bhat, 2019; Bhatt, 2003; Geelani, 2014; Kaul, 2018; Mathur, 2014; Rakisits, 2020; Schofield, 2015). Zia (2019) describes “India’s control over Kashmir valley as a de facto military occupation (p.73)”, while Osuri (2017) describes India’s control as “imperialism and colonization’. Many other scholars describe violence in Kashmir as an armed conflict with religious militants (Behera, 2016; Fair, 2018) who are waging jihad to create a theocratic state (Tavares, 2008, p. 276).

Ray (2004) conducted the framing analysis of coverage of Kashmir issue in US print media during 1989 to 2003 and highlighted the change in the narrative over a period. His study reveals that The New York Times, The Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times at first described Kashmir conflict as a violent separatist movement, later it was described as a violent conflict between India and Pakistan. Initially, Kashmiris were identified as armed militants fighting for secession and India was represented as country suppressing rebellion through violence, later the frames shifted to argue that India is using military force to fight Pakistani troops and non-Kashmiri Islamic militants in Kashmir valley. 

Analysis of Pakistan’s largest Urdu and English language newspapers conducted by Rais (2016) highlighted that the Kashmir dispute, democracy in India, electoral processes, the rise of the BJP (the ruling right-wing political party in India), India’s regional ambitions and search for dominance were widely reported in the press, and the Pakistani press published all competing perspectives on most of the issues. However, there was a strong tendency to blame India for all disputes and conflicts.

Saffee (2016) in the content analysis of Times of India and Dawn, claimed, “Indian mindset is more communally charged and views Pakistan with a specific security lens. Whereas, Pakistani print media reflected a conciliatory policy, which was rejected by India. Recently, it has begun to counter Indian propaganda in the print media” (p.92), while Rawan and ur Rahman (2020) argue that Pakistan views Kashmir more of religious than territorial dispute and media in both the countries also support the ruling establishment’s narrative and pursue war journalism rather than peace journalism. 

Also, there is some evidence that Pakistani media provides more coverage to India. A content analysis of The Hindu and Dawn in the ‘The Hoot’ website suggested that Dawn gave far more coverage to India during the period of 1 May to 31 May 2016. During this period more than half of the coverage in Dawn was about issues other than defence and foreign policy (A. Pandey, 2016). Zaheer (2017) also highlighted that Urdu newspapers in Pakistan give far more coverage to Kashmir conflict, but the war journalism and war frames dominated the coverage on Kashmir conflict in four Pakistani newspapers including Dawn and The News. 

A study of four Indian newspapers The Tribune, The Hindu, The Telegraph, and The Times of India also highlighted that all four newspapers pinned all responsibility on Pakistan for conflicts between both the nations (G. P. Singh, 2015). Other studies claim that rather than having a stance of their own, the media reflect the wider trends in their countries’ bilateral relationships; analysis of Dawn’s coverage of trade relations certainly reflected this trend (Saleem, Jabeen, Omer, & Hanan, 2014). 

Commuri (2009) suggests that when the political elite in Pakistan identified more with religious and cultural identity than with secular conception, that has increased the prospects of confrontation rather than cooperation. Pakistan’s desire to differentiate itself by "relinquishing its obvious historical links to United India” (Tripathi, 2018, p. 99) and by drawing on its political leaders’ ideologies to interpret its national self (Das, 2010, p. 146) has helped to predispose it towards conflict, especially in the region of J&K (S. Ganguly, 2002). The violent conflict emerging after 1990 was not a historical discontinuity, rather it was an extension of the collision over the Kashmir dispute in 1948 (Swami, 2006).  

Results

‘India is reluctant to resolve the Kashmir dispute’ has been identified as the dominant narrative in this study. The total of 63 paragraphs from 23 articles have been coded under this theme. Its 11 subthemes are 1) India wants to change the demography of J&K, 2) India is deepening its control over J&K, 3) India indulges in human rights violations in J&K, 4) India has illegal control over J&K, 5) Pakistani PM wants peace and Indian PM wants war, 6) J&K and Palestinian conflict are similar issues, 7) Militancy in J&K is a legitimate struggle, 8) India wants to maintain the territorial status quo in the region, 9) India has a hawkish approach to Pakistan, 10) J&K is a disputed territory & 11) Kashmiris are fighting for separation. 

Mostly the texts in Dawn argue that J&K is an occupied territory, that India is indulging in human rights violations, people are fighting for freedom, India is an aggressor and Kashmiri Muslims are victims, militancy is indigenous and represents legitimate struggle, the United Nations should intervene, a plebiscite should be immediately conducted, and that the international community should condemn India and support the separatist movement. These narratives are repeated throughout the opinion pages of Dawn. 

A word frequency chart has also been created by using all the coded paragraphs under this theme in the NVivo simply as an illustrative tool to tease out recurring or dominant ideas. It captured the following words such as occupied, torture, struggle, freedom, dispute, war, resolution, international, police and article 370 among others. 

The narrative on J&K in the opinion pages of Dawn aligns with Pakistan’s long-standing foreign policy position, that J&K belongs to Pakistan as the unfinished business of partition. The entire narrative is highly critical of India for its approach to Kashmir dispute. It also questions the legitimacy of the circumstances which led to the merger of J&K with India and vigorously rejects the territorial status quo. 

 

Many of the articles coded under this theme argue that India avoids any bilateral dialogue with Pakistan and rejects peace efforts and prioritizes the issue of cross-border terrorism in all negotiations. It was a unanimous perspective in the coded texts that Kashmir is a disputed territory, that Indian-administered Kashmir is “occupied territory” and that Indian control over Kashmir is illegal whereas Pakistan-administered Kashmir is a legitimate part of Pakistani territory. 

The coded texts further insist that J&K is an unfinished business of partition and Pakistan has a rightful claim on it as India indulges in human rights violations of Kashmiri Muslims. It argues that the international community must intervene to take note of custodial deaths, extra-judicial killings, torture and excessive use of force and pellet guns on protestors. The issue of human rights violations was repeatedly raised in all articles referring to Kashmir and its association with India, building a narrative linking India with human rights violations to lay a moral claim over the territory. 

 

Unrest in Kashmir is represented in terms of Hindu atrocities on Muslims. India is represented as a fundamentalist Hindu state and Kashmiris as Muslim and victims of the Hindu state. The political ideology of the current ruling political party in India is used to substantiate the argument; as the BJP is a right-wing political outfit and opposes the idea of secular India (S. Ganguly, 2003; Harriss, 2015; Hasan, 2010; Jaffrelot, 2009). 

 

A highly critical editorial written about the Indian cricket team’s effort to collect funds for the families of the CRPF personnel who were killed in the Pulwama suicide bombing, describes the CRPF personnel as Indian-occupying troops, 

To claim that this was merely a “fundraising drive and in memory of” the Indian-occupying troops killed in Pulwama, as Indian skipper Virat Kohli and the ICC have stated, is a rather clumsy smokescreen, and extremely irresponsible given the silly season of war-mongering hysteria in India against Pakistan at this time. But no matter the extent of national fervour, a cricket field is not a battlefield. – Editorial, Cricket or combat? - 13 March 2019, Dawn 

 

This editorial also suggested that the Indian cricket team’s fundraising effort for the martyred CRPF personnel was tantamount to the politicization of the game of cricket. It reflected the jingoistic and ultranationalist approach of Dawn towards India. 

 

The narrative in Dawn’s opinion pages represents Kashmir as a Muslim majority province and describes it in opposition to India in terms of religion. It also suggests that India is a Hindu state and minorities are second-class citizens in it. The coded texts refer to the J&K as occupied territory, Indian security forces as occupying forces and counter-terrorism operations as state terrorism. They refer to Indian-administered Kashmir as “Indian occupied Kashmir”, while Pakistan administered Kashmir is referred as “Azad (free) Kashmir”. 

 

The texts in Dawn stake a claim on J&K based on religion while ignoring the region’s considerable minority population of Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs and Jains among others. They mostly frame the unrest in Kashmir valley as Muslim aspirations to join the Muslim majority Pakistan. 

The Dawn creates a frame of victimhood. Muslims are represented as victims, while their religion and distinct culture rooted in Islam is depicted as threatened by the majority Hindu community. India is represented as the embodiment of Hindu majority and as victimizing innocent Muslims. It also fits into a two-nation theory that Hindus and Muslims represent separate nations and cannot remain in one country (Majid, Hamid, & Habib, 2014; Mehrotra, 1981).    

 

The texts also describe the government’s action against Kashmiri separatists as irresponsible tactics to garner votes in the general elections. After the BJP government came to power it decided to curtail the activities of prominent separatists and their grouping known as Hurriyat leaders (Ashiq & Singh, 2017) which was criticized in Dawn. The texts also argue that separatists are true representatives of the Kashmiris while showing disdain for unionists who regularly contest elections. 

 

Few of the articles specifically highlighted the ban against Hurriyat leaders, the umbrella organisation of parties fighting for creating an independent state or its merger with Pakistan (Jaleel, 2015). One of the editorials described the actions against separatist leaders an extension of Modi’s tactics to “intimidate and scare off opponents”. 

 

The narrative in some of the articles in Dawn represented PM Modi as fascist and compared India to Second World War Germany. Some columnists also compared Prime Minister Modi with Adolf Hitler. One of the articles specifically compared Kashmir with Sudetenland. 

 

Occupied Jammu and Kashmir is to Modi what Sudetenland was to the elected German chancellor Adolf Hitler – Scrap of paper, F.S. Aijazuddin, 18 April 2019, Dawn

 

The Pakistani PM’s repeated rhetoric to invite India to discuss the future of J&K was described as akin to PM Chamberlain’s efforts to reach peace with Germany, in another article. The author claims that as Hitler perceived the British PM’s peace overtures as a sign of weakness, PM Modi also sees Pakistan’s calls for dialogue as a weakness. This frame demonizes India and creates a hero versus villain, aggressor versus victim binary where India represents the tyrant and Pakistan a peace-loving Islamic nation fighting for human rights and justice for Muslims.   

 

All articles coded under this theme strongly reject the territorial status quo and any suggestions regarding converting the line of control into an international border.  Few even compared the Indo-Pakistan conflict with the Israel-Palestine conflict.      

What India desires is that Pakistan accept India’s rule in India-occupied Kashmir, much as Israel’s Arab neighbours are being asked to accept the ‘reality’ of Israel’s occupation of Jerusalem, the Golan and most of the West Bank. But, unlike Israel’s neighbours, Pakistan has not been militarily defeated by India. Even if Pakistan were to set aside its strategic stakes in Kashmir (territory, affiliated people, water, China access), it will continue to be drawn into supporting the resilient 70-year struggle of the Kashmiri people for self-determination and freedom (azadi) from India. – Peace is difficult, Munir Akram, 14 April 2019, Dawn 

There is one more interesting element to note, that the texts did not associate any negative connotations with the Pulwama suicide bombing. In fact, words like “Pulwama episode”, “Pulwama crisis” or just “Pulwama” were used to refer to the terror attack and its aftermath. 

One of the articles also claims that India is under tremendous pressure to discuss political future of J&K with Pakistan as the present position has become untenable given Islamic terrorists and their activities are widely supported by the local population. 

The fact is that no matter how much India tries to blame Pakistan for the situation in IHK (Indian Held Kashmir), discontent in the region is at alarming levels and the movement against India is a largely indigenous one. The reason for this is not hard to fathom; India has treated Kashmir like a colony, using brutal military force against its civilian population. – Editorial, IHK poll delay, 15 March 2019, Dawn

Attempts by India to raise the issue of open support to Islamic terror organizations in Pakistan are described as an Indian ploy to embarrass Pakistan rather than India’s efforts to protect itself from terrorist attacks. In one editorial, which highlighted India’s efforts to ban Masood Azhar, chief of Jaish-e-Mohmmad, through the UN Security Council, Dawn argued that India was trying to project unrest, protest and militancy in Kashmir as a terrorist insurgency. 

The texts in Dawn frequently raise the spectre of nuclear conflict: that it would be suicide for India to escalate the conflict due to Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, and the international community would not allow it.  

The Indian airstrikes at Balakot on Feb 26 and Pakistan’s retaliation the next day brought India and Pakistan to the brink of nuclear war like never before. It is the first time in history that two nuclear-armed states carried out airstrikes against each other in a situation so volatile that it could have conceivably got out of hand and led to a nuclear apocalypse. – Nuclear apocalypse, Rabel Z. Akhund, 17 March 2019, Dawn  

Some of the articles in Dawn described the arrest of prominent separatists and counter-insurgency operations by security forces as state terrorism and portrayed the fight against terrorism as a war against Muslims in J&K. The coded texts also alleged that the cover of counterterrorism was being used by India to suppress the legitimate rights of Kashmiris, while India attempting to link Kashmir with global terrorism.

One of the articles also argues that at a global level the war against terrorism is essentially a war against Islamic terrorism, with acts of violence by Muslims referred to as terror acts, while similar violence by non-Muslims is not labelled as terror acts. In many of the articles, the writers imagine future escalations and argue that Kashmir may face war if Hindu fundamentalists persist with their aggressive plans to integrate J&K to India.

Another article argues that the use of violence must not be compromised if people are fighting for self-determination. It refers to India’s opposition to the use of violence as a method for resolving conflicts and dismisses it as a ploy to delegitimize unrest in Kashmir. Basically, through this narrative, India is described as an occupying force in J&K, and armed militants represented as freedom fighters. The article dismisses the view that all violence should be rejected irrespective of its purported objectives.

As per this narrative, India is not facing any terrorism and Kashmiri Muslims have legitimate reasons to fight for self-determination. It consistently uses words like occupied territory, state terrorism, Hindu terrorists, Hindu fundamentalists, Hindu religious supremacy to describe and define the nature and character of the Indian state, particularly in relation to Kashmir. It implicitly suggests that Kashmiri militants active under the banner of various banned Pakistan based Islamic terror organizations are freedom fighters.  

Notably, there is no concern for or expression of sympathy with the victims of the Pulwama attack, and questions about how militants in Kashmir get sophisticated weapons and military-grade training to launch their attacks are avoided. India’s reactions to the Pulwama suicide bombing are routinely described as warmongering, fascism, Hindu fundamentalism, ultra-nationalism and dismissal of gestures of peace. 

The overall narrative about Kashmir is one of Indian brutality and ultra-nationalism. 

When the Indian military machine has no qualms about killing, raping and humiliating Kashmiris, it is understandable that the local people will drape their fallen in the Pakistani flag. However, the Indian establishment refuses to soften its tone and shun the path of violence. – Editorial, IHK poll delay, 15 March 2019, Dawn 

In this respect, Dawn’s opinion page narrative appears to closely follow the stated position of the Pakistani state on the Kashmir conflict, which can be summarized in four points. First, the State of J&K is a disputed territory. Second, UN Security Council resolutions remain operative and cannot be unilaterally disregarded by either party. Third, India must talk to Pakistan over the future status of J&K and conduct a plebiscite. Fourth, the plebiscite should offer the people of J&K the choice of permanent accession to either Pakistan or India (Hussain, 2007; Shah, 1995).  

To explain the cultural closeness with Pakistan, one of the authors claims that 

Kashmiri Muslims have traditionally been deeply religious and conservative — perhaps far more than Muslims in any other part of the subcontinent. For reasons of its own, the government of India decided to strike terror in Kashmir by launching prosecutions against separatist leaders. – Custodial deaths, 30 March 2019, A.G Noorani, Dawn 

The narrative in Dawn also suggests that militancy cannot be ended in Kashmir by launching anti-terror operations, as it represents the people’s voice.  A few of the articles claim that India wants to change the demography of J&K. Even the resettlement of Kashmiri pandits in the valley, who were forced to leave their homes by Islamic militants in the 1990s (Evans, 2002; Pandita, 2013), was described as an attempt to change demography. 

In the last few years, the BJP government has attempted to change the demographics of the occupied territory using targeting measures such as through the setting up of Israeli-style settlements or townships for Kashmiri Pandits or via the establishment of Sainik colonies to permanently settle Indian soldiers displacing local Kashmiri residents. Repealing Articles 35-A and 370 is, however, a more serious and insidious attempt to destroy the culture and identity of the Kashmiri people - A new strategy, 20 April 2019, Sikander Shah, Dawn

The texts claim that India wants to create Israeli-style settlements and make Kashmiri Muslims foreigners in their land. They also suggest that Modi escalated tensions by conducting Balakot strikes not to avenge the Pulwama suicide bombing by JeM militant but to divert attention from the deteriorating situation in Kashmir valley, and argue that Modi’s re-election is not good for Kashmiris and Muslims in general in India.  

Overall, India is blamed for all troubles in J&K in the coded texts under this theme. The issue of cross border terrorism and rising militancy is dismissed as India’s indigenous problem. The overall narrative builds a case for Pakistan to stake a claim in the territory of J&K and its majority Muslim population.

Conclusion 

The opinion pages of Dawn primarily view Kashmir conflict with India through the ruling regime’s perspective and narratives about India are also shaped by it and other ongoing developments in the region throughout the sampled data. Thematic coding shows that the general elections in India mostly gained attention in the opinion pages of Dawn only with reference to conflicts over the Kashmir issue. 

The narrative in Dawn is in complete symmetry with Pakistan’s official position on Kashmir conflict. It emphasizes that the territorial status quo in J&K is unacceptable, and the Kashmir dispute should be resolved as it is an unfinished agenda of partition of British India in 1947. It demands plebiscite in J&K to offer choice to Kashmiris to become part of Pakistan or remain in India. The third option of complete independence conspicuously remains missing in the narrative. 

The narrative in Dawn also claims that the J&K is being targeted by the Hindu nationalist government in India because it is a Muslim majority region. It alleges that Muslims are being treated as unequal citizens in India due to the rising influence of Hindu nationalists and tries to connect the rising Hindu nationalism with the rising unrest in Kashmir. This creates a view that in a Hindu majority state Muslims cannot live as equal citizens.  

This representation has several effects. First, it reiterates and reinforces the validity of the two-nation theory in Pakistan. Second, it suggests that demand for partition of India on religious lines in 1947 was a human rights struggle (Jalal, 1994) rather than a communal demand by Islamists in northern India (Dhulipala, 2015). Thirdly, it builds an argument emphasizing that Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the ruling BJP’s policies are guided by a deep-rooted ideological hatred for Muslims internally as well as externally, that is, the Indian government led by BJP targets Muslim minorities inside the country and is hostile to Pakistan as it is an Islamic nation. And fourth, India is not a secular state, but a Hindu state, so it does not have any legitimate right over the state of J&K as it is Muslim majority territory.    

It would be fair to conclude that even during India’s general elections Dawn’s opinion pages were essentially focused on over the status of Kashmir region, while emphatically arguing that India refuses to negotiate the Kashmir conflict with Pakistan and prioritizes discussion on terrorism rejecting the demand for the plebiscite and any third-party mediation. 

Dawn also intensely argued that bilateral relations could not be normalized without resolving J&K dispute and India is reluctant to resolve it through negotiations with Pakistan. Contrary to the popular perception Dawn displayed rigid and nationalist tendencies against India on Kashmir dispute and perfectly aligned its narrative with the officially stated Pakistani position on the issue.    

References 

Ahmed, I. (2002). The 1947 Partition of India: A Paradigm for Pathological Politics in India and Pakistan. Asian Ethnicity, 3(1), 9-28. doi:10.1080/14631360120095847

Anant, A. (2009). Identity and Conflict: Perspectives from the Kashmir Valley. Strategic Analysis, 33(5), 760-773. doi:10.1080/09700160903064554

Ashiq, P. (2019, 14 February ). 37 CRPF men killed in J&K suicide attack. The Hindu. Retrieved from https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/ied-blast-in-kashmirs-pulwama-many-crpf-jawans-killed/article26268289.ece

Ashiq, P., & Singh, V. (2017, 24 July). NIA arrests 7 J&K separatist leaders for ‘creating unrest’. The Hindu. Retrieved from https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/seven-kashmir-separatists-arrested/article19342611.ece

Behera, N. C. (2016). The Kashmir Conflict: Multiple Fault Lines. Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs, 3(1), 41-63. doi:10.1177/2347797015626045

Bhat, S. A. (2019). The Kashmir conflict and human rights. Race & Class, 61(1), 77-86. doi:10.1177/0306396819850988

Bhatt, S. (2003). State Terrorism vs. Jihad in Kashmir. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 33(2), 215-224. doi:10.1080/00472330380000131

Bipan, C., Mridula, M., Aditya, M., Panikar, K., & Sucheta, M. (1989). India's Struggle for Independence 1857-1947. In: Penguin Books.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2016). (Mis)conceptualising themes, thematic analysis, and other problems with Fugard and Potts’ (2015) sample-size tool for thematic analysis. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 19(6), 739-743. doi:10.1080/13645579.2016.1195588

Braun, V., Clarke, V., Hayfield, N., & Terry, G. (2019). Thematic Analysis. In P. Liamputtong (Ed.), Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences (pp. 843-860). Singapore: Springer Singapore.

Chellaney, B. (2019, 29 September). China, India, Pakistan: who’s really pulling the strings in Jammu and Kashmir? South China Morning Post. Retrieved from https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3030799/china-india-pakistan-whos-really-pulling-strings-jammu-and

Cohen, S. P. (1995). Kashmir: The Roads Ahead. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/articles/kashmir-the-roads-ahead/

Cohen, S. P. (2004). India, Pakistan and Kashmir. In India as an emerging power (pp. 36-63): Routledge.

Commuri, G. (2009). The relevance of national identity narratives in shaping foreign policy: The case of India–Pakistan relations. Journal of South Asian Development, 4(2), 161-202. 

Das, R. (2010). State, Identity and Representations of Nuclear (In) Securities in India and Pakistan. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 45(2), 146-169. 

Dhulipala, V. (2015). Creating a new Medina: Cambridge University Press.

Dixit, J. N. (2002). India-Pakistan in war & peace. New Delhi: Books Today.

Evans, A. (2002). A departure from history: Kashmiri Pandits, 1990-2001. Contemporary South Asia, 11(1), 19-37. doi:10.1080/0958493022000000341

Fair, C. (2014). Fighting to the end: The Pakistan army's way of war: Oxford University Press.

Fair, C. (2018). In Their Own Words: Understanding Lashkar-e-Tayyaba: Oxford University Press.

Ganguly, R. (2001). India, Pakistan and the Kashmir insurgency: causes, dynamics and prospects for resolution. Asian Studies Review, 25(3), 309-334. doi:10.1080/10357820108713312

Ganguly, S. (2002). Conflict unending: India-Pakistan tensions since 1947: Columbia University Press.

Ganguly, S. (2003). The crisis of Indian secularism. Journal of Democracy, 14(4), 11-25. 

Ganguly, S. (2019). The origins of war in South Asia: Indo-Pakistani conflicts since 1947: Routledge.

Geelani, G. (2014). Kashmir: the forgotten conflict. Race & Class, 56(2), 29-40. doi:10.1177/0306396814542914

Gupta, S. (2019, 9 August). Pakistani army calls Articles 370, 35-A a sham after India scrapped special status. Hindustan Times. Retrieved from https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/pak-s-army-termed-art-370-35a-as-sham/story-fXUXUmmY6KzM8beqMwgCgI.html

Haidar, S., & Peri, D. (2019, 26 February ). India bombs Jaish camp in Pakistan’s Balakot. The Hindu. Retrieved from https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/air-strikes-hit-balakot-in-pakistan-initial-assessment-100-hit-sources/article26373318.ece

Hajari, N., & Malhotra, S. (2015). Midnight's Furies: SciELO Brasil.

Haqqani, H. (2010). Pakistan: Between mosque and military: Carnegie Endowment.

Harriss, J. (2015). Hindu Nationalism in Action: The Bharatiya Janata Party and Indian Politics. South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies, 38(4), 712-718. doi:10.1080/00856401.2015.1089826

Hasan, Z. (2010). Not quite secular political practice. In Comparative Secularisms in a Global Age (pp. 197-214): Springer.

Hussain, S. R. (2007). Pakistan's Changing Outlook on Kashmir. South Asian Survey, 14(2), 195-205. doi:10.1177/097152310701400202

Jacob, H. (2020). Toward a Kashmir Endgame? How India and Pakistan Could Negotiate a Lasting Solution. Retrieved from https://www.usip.org/publications/2020/08/toward-kashmir-endgame-how-india-and-pakistan-could-negotiate-lasting-solution

Jaffrelot, C. (2009). Hindu nationalism: A reader: Princeton University Press.

Jalal, A. (1994). The sole spokesman: Jinnah, the Muslim League and the demand for Pakistan (Vol. 31): Cambridge University Press.

Jaleel, M. (2015, 21 August). Hurriyat: Its History, Role and Relevance. The Indian Express. Retrieved from https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/hurriyat-its-history-role-and-relevance/

Kasuri, K. M. (2015). Neither a Hawk Nor a Dove: An Insider's Account of Pakistan's Foreign Policy: Penguin UK.

Kaul, N. (2018). India's Obsession with Kashmir: Democracy, Gender, (Anti-)Nationalism. Feminist Review, 119(1), 126-143. doi:10.1057/s41305-018-0123-x

Kuchay, B. (2019, 9 April ). India: The main takeaways from BJP's manifesto. Aljazeera Retrieved from https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/04/india-main-takeaways-bjp-manifesto-190408121132327.html

Lalwani, S., & Tallo, E. (2019 17 April ). Did India shoot down a Pakistani F-16 in February? This just became a big deal. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/04/17/did-india-shoot-down-pakistani-f-back-february-this-just-became-big-deal/?noredirect=on

Majid, A., Hamid, A., & Habib, Z. (2014). Genesis of the Two Nations Theory and the Quaid-e-Azam. Pakistan Vision, 15(1), 180. 

Marlow, I. (2019a, 5 April). India Never Actually Shot Down Pakistani F-16 in Kashmir Clash, New Report Says. Time. Retrieved from https://time.com/5564980/india-never-shot-pakistani-plane-kashmir/

Marlow, I. (2019b). Why India and Pakistan Keep On Clashing. Retrieved from bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-05/why-india-and-pakistan-keep-on-clashing-quicktake-jyxucquh

Mathur, S. (2014). Memory and hope: new perspectives on the Kashmir conflict – an introduction. Race & Class, 56(2), 4-12. doi:10.1177/0306396814542906

Mehrotra, O. (1981). Pakistan and the Islamic World. Strategic Analysis, 5(1-2), 32-39. 

Miglani, S., & Bukhari, F. (2019, 16 February ). U.S. backs India's right to defend itself after Kashmir attack. Reuters. Retrieved from reuters.com/article/us-india-kashmir/u-s-backs-indias-right-to-defend-itself-after-kashmir-attack-idUSKCN1Q505M

Mohan, A. (1992). The historical roots of the Kashmir conflict. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 15(4), 283-308. doi:10.1080/10576109208435908

Osuri, G. (2017). Imperialism, colonialism and sovereignty in the (post)colony: India and Kashmir. Third World Quarterly, 38(11), 2428-2443. doi:10.1080/01436597.2017.1354695

Pandey, A. (2016, 22 June). How Pakistan’s Dawn covers India. The Hoot. Retrieved from http://asu.thehoot.org/research/media-monitoring/how-pakistans-dawn-covers-india-9442

Pandey, G. (2001). Remembering partition: Violence, nationalism and history in India (Vol. 7): Cambridge University Press.

Pandita, R. (2013). Our moon has blood clots: The exodus of the Kashmiri pandits: Random House India.

Rais, R. B. (2016). The Media and Foreign Policy Discourses in Pakistan. In P. Singh (Ed.), The role of media in promoting regional understanding in south asia (pp. 31-43). New Delhi: Pentagon Press.

Rakisits, C. (2020). Diplomacy in South Asia: a four-step grand plan for Kashmir. Australian Journal of International Affairs, 1-9. doi:10.1080/10357718.2020.1787334

Rawan, B., & ur Rahman, S. I. (2020). Comparative Frame Analysis of Coverage of Kashmir Conflict in Indian and Pakistani Newspapers from War/Peace Journalism Perspective. sjesr, 3(2), 338-345. 

Ray, D. (2004). Frames in the US print media coverage of the Kashmir conflict. (Master’s thesis, University of South Florida). Retrieved from https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2215&context=etd 

Rej, A. (2019). S(c)helling in Kashmir: Bargaining under the Nuclear Shadow. The Washington Quarterly, 42(2), 163-186. doi:10.1080/0163660X.2019.1627157

Ridler, F. (2019, 4 October). 'It was a big mistake': India admits it accidentally shot down one of its own helicopters, killing six people, in battle with Pakistan fighter jets. Daily Mail. Retrieved from https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7537199/India-admits-friendly-fire-downed-helicopter-Kashmir-clash.html

Roy, R., & Shah, S. (2019, 26 February). India Bombs Pakistan in Response to Kashmir Terrorist Attack. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/articles/pakistan-says-indian-jets-dropped-bombs-but-caused-no-damage-11551158468

Roy, S. (2019, February 24). Pulwama attack: India looking at something very strong, says Donald Trump. The Indian Express. Retrieved from https://indianexpress.com/article/world/pulwama-attack-donald-trump-india-looking-at-something-very-strong-5598334/

Saffee, A. (2016). Media and Foreign Policy Discourses: A Case of India-Pakistan Relations. Strategic Studies, 36(1), 92-113. 

Safi, M., & Farooq, A. (2019, 15 February). Dozens of Indian paramilitaries killed in Kashmir car bombing. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/14/indian-paramilitaries-killed-in-suicide-car-bombing-in-kashmir

Safi, M., & Zahra-Malik, M. (2019, 27 February ). Pakistan says it has shot down Indian jets after Kashmir cross-border attack. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/27/pakistan-india-jets-shot-down-airstrikes-kashmir

Saleem, N., Jabeen, S., Omer, S., & Hanan, M. A. (2014). Indo-Pakistan Trade Relations: A Critical Discourse Analysis of Daily Dawn. South Asian Studies (1026-678X), 29(1). 

Santha, C. (2019). “One Nation, One Constitution, One Flag” hails in Indian after the country scraps articles 370 and 35A. Journal of the Gujarat Research Society, 21(5), 151-156. 

Schofield, V. (2010). Kashmir in conflict: India, Pakistan and the unending war: Bloomsbury Publishing.

Schofield, V. (2015). Why Kashmir is still important. Asian Affairs, 46(1), 18-31. doi:10.1080/03068374.2014.994961

Seligman, L. (2019, 4 April ). Did India Shoot Down a Pakistani Jet? U.S. Count Says No. Foreign Policy Retrieved from https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/04/04/did-india-shoot-down-a-pakistani-jet-u-s-count-says-no/

Shah, M. A. (1995). The Kashmir problem: A view from four provinces of Pakistan. Contemporary South Asia, 4(1), 103-112. 

Singh, G. P. (2015). Media Images of Pakistan’s Hostility toward India: A Study of Four Newspapers during 2001–2002. Jadavpur Journal of International Relations, 19(2), 106-136. 

Singh, S. (2019). Five of six designated targets were hit in Balakot airstrike: IAF review. The Indian Express. Retrieved from https://indianexpress.com/article/india/five-of-six-targets-balakot-airstrike-iaf-review-pulwama-terror-attack-5693297/

Swami, P. (2006). India, Pakistan and the Secret Jihad: The Covert War in Kashmir, 1947-2004: Routledge.

Tavares, R. (2008). Resolving the Kashmir Conflict: Pakistan, India, Kashmiris and Religious Militants. Asian Journal of Political Science, 16(3), 276-302. doi:10.1080/02185370802504316

Tripathi, D. (2018). Manufacturing enemy: The presentation of India in Pakistani textbooks. In Cultural and Educational Exchanges between Rival Societies (pp. 99-114): Springer.

Van Dijk, T. A. (1989). Race, riots and the press: An analysis of editorials in the British press about the 1985 disorders. Gazette (Leiden, Netherlands), 43(3), 229-253. 

Wirsing, R. (2003). Kashmir in the Shadow of War: Regional Rivalries in a Nuclear Age (Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe). 

Zaheer, L. (2017). Editorial Coverage of Kashmir Conflict in Pakistani Media. Pakistan Vision, 18(1). 

Zia, A. (2019). Blinding Kashmiris: The Right to Maim and the Indian Military Occupation in Kashmir. Interventions, 21(6), 773-786.