Civilizatio

The following audio file was automatically generated by AI. It has been created for illustrative purposes using text-to-speech technology. While the content reflects the original interview transcript, the voices are synthetic and do not represent the actual speakers.

Civilizatio Team

This interview was conducted on May 4th, 2025.

Hasan:

Welcome to Civilizatio, today we will talk about Kashmir issue. Can you briefly introduce yourself for us?

Romessa:

Yeah, my name is Romessa Sagheer, and I am a final year International Relations student at Hacettepe University. I am from Pakistan, but for the last four years I have been in Türkiye. I am really interested in International Relations, and geopolitics is my favorite part of it. And apart from that, I had been organizing debate tournaments in my high school as well as in Turkey. Last year we organized an inter-university debate tournament in Hacettepe and we competed with different universities in Turkey. That was great, and I think that is where my passion for public speaking comes from.

Hasan:

That is great. Now let’s talk about Kashmir. How is Kashmir issue told in your schools? Is it closely related to Pakistani national pride? Is it an essential issue for Pakistani people?

Romessa:

Well, yes, since we were at a young age in our schools, as young as like first grade, we were taught about the Kashmir issue as India being wrongfully occupying that land and looking back at the history from the 1947, that area was technically supposed to be Pakistani. Because the division between Pakistan and India were made on the basis of religion. So, you know, like where was Muslim majority went to Pakistan, and where was the Hindu majority went to India. So, Kashmir was basically a region with a Muslim majority area and technically, that was supposed to come under Pakistan. But there was a minor problem that it was a princely state – it was being ruled by a Prince at that time. So, the Prince was Hindu – he was Maharaja Hari Singh – and he denied joining to Pakistan and it was a very geo strategically important place. So that is where the dispute originated from, and that is how we were taught that it is basically and lawfully it’s our area.

Sky:

Well, I mean, you also already mentioned it, but I want to ask specifically to you that how do you personally understand the Kashmir conflict itself? I mean, what does it mean to you as a Pakistani?

Romessa:

To me it is a very complicated and a very sensitive topic, and it is very close to me as a heart because we see that how the Indian atrocities are being happened over here. It is not. I am talking not about India generalizing but saying about the government, actually the BJP, when it came to power. On 5th August 2019, it stripped off the legal status of Kashmir as well, you know, making that Muslims living over there, they cannot buy a legal land over there, where is technically it is their land for ages. So, I think that what is happening is unlawful over there and the international community should take action because as I said, it is a complicated and a sensitive topic, but lawfully and legally that area still belongs to us, if you go back to the 1947 partition.

Sky:

Do you personally know anyone who were affected in this conflict?

Romessa:

Well, actually not personally, but I had friends when I was in school who were from Kashmir. Actually, you know, it was weird that they sometimes could not go because we were from the capital city and we were living over there. But most of them preferred not going over there because, you know, again, it was dangerous, and you never know. It is like the internet is regulated over there, there are less education opportunities because of the Indian takeover over there… But yeah… I mean, I do not personally know someone, but yeah, there were my friends who did not actually prefer to go back because they were living in the capital.

Hasan:

What do you think is the cause of the conflict? Do you think it is Indian aggression or British behavior—like, just drawing lines that don’t make much sense?

Romessa

Well, I think that personally when you look back to 75 years ago, when you want to plan, we want to put the blame on the British because they did not draw the borders effectively, and still, to this day, no matter where, we still have our border issues because they just left in a rush and they could not like define the borders. And they, according to the Third June Plan -in 3 June 1947, before the partition- they stated that they’re going to define the borders clearly and they’re going to help us in set up the countries. But they left in a rush, and they did not, you know, define or create the borders clearly. So, we have border disputes in every part except for China. But if you look at the question, yeah, I would definitely say that they could not define this area properly. They could not partition it properly and they left it on us. And as you know, there were new countries, and everybody was scared about securing their own power. So, they started fighting with each other on that. So, I think that British had an entire hand on it, but we can say that later on Indian aggression in that area increased because they wanted to take control of the Kashmir. So, as I said mentioned that since this government -new government- of India came to power in 2014, they have a more aggressive stance towards Kashmir unlike the previous government.

Sky:

Could you also explain that how do you see the role of the other countries in this Kashmir conflict besides the UK and India?

Romessa:

Well, there has been many wars so many times on this land and we have fought major wars in the past with India for this. Well, I think that international community, due to the two countries having strong military capabilities, they are afraid of escalating it into a full scale war, we can even see it right now, what happened like 2 weeks ago again in Kashmir and Pahalgam So I think that the international community just brings us to the United Nations and it says that, you know, we are going to solve this and it just brings us to the table, to dialogue and stop the war but they just make us stop the war – they stop the escalations. They do not provide a full-time solution or a long-term solution to Kashmir. They have never done that. There are some countries who take the side of Pakistan, we know that and there are some countries which are taking the side of India, whereas a lot of countries are neutral. But again, at the end, they bring us before to the UN Security Council and they pass a resolution to stop the fight. But they cannot find a solution for Kashmir.

Hasan:

What do you think about the international media’s responses and portraying of the events? Do you think there are missed points or manipulations that are going on?

Romessa:

About the recent events or generally?

Hasan:

Generally.

Romessa:

Well, the international media has already always been portrayed neutrally from both of the sides as far as what I saw on the international media outlets for like Al Jazeera, TRT World, BBC, CNN, ABC News etc. They are always portraying neutral sides – They are portraying the Pakistani side, and they are portraying the Indian side. We see the world leaders and the journalists as well, they are always telling them to stop the escalations and just like come to a dialogue because nobody wants a full-scale war between two countries as they have nuclear capabilities and if both of them are fighting, it is awful for this entire region of East of Asia as well. Not just South Asia, but also it will affect East Asia, Middle East, and so, Central Asia. So, I think that the media gives neutral aspects on that. Generally speaking, India to this date has like, since this government took over actually – I want to point out that BJP, the Modi’s government – They are unable to provide a proof even about the incident happened like 2 weeks ago – aka The Pahalgam attack in Kashmir. Is this a false flag operation? I mean, even on the international media I see so many international journalists as well saying that. We have denied because we did not do that – Pakistani Government has denied that because they didn’t do any attack – but at the same time, we see Indian people pointing at us, like the Indian government is constantly pinpointing us. without any proof or evidence. So, Pakistan demanded an investigation. It apologized and said condolences because humanity is important. It does not matter If you are Hindu, Christian or Muslim. The lives are lives, and I think that all governments should think like that. I mean they just accused us and accused us without providing any evidence. If they have given evidence, it’s ok, I mean that’s how you can put a blame on someone. So, until now, India, most of the times, whenever the terror attack is carried out in its country, it blames Pakistan without any evidence, whereas Pakistan says that “we should come to a table and negotiate or discuss or do an investigation”. So, I think that is a little biased part in this.

Sky:

Do you think international institutions such as United Nations are still relevant in managing Kashmir conflict? Why or why not?

Romessa:

Well, personally I think they were relevant back 50-60 years ago, but now they are not that really relevant because they really haven’t done anything as well as we saw as a nation. Even Indian people as well, because a lot of them just want to end Kashmir problem to end and see it go to where it rightfully belongs. Actually, I had a lot of Indian friends, who actually think that this area should go to rightfully to whom it belongs, but sometimes we see aggressive governments coming in power and we see that the Indian government is a very Hindu nationalist government right now. So that’s where the problem comes from. I think the United Nations is not that relevant anymore in this case. Because, in the past, they just brought us to the table and said “negotiate”, that is it! “Stop the war”, nothing else! So, there is not a thorough international organization intervention. Nobody comes and says or stops or provides solutions, there is nothing. They just come and say “just stop the war and finish it”.

Hasan:

You talked about Modi and his escalation of the conflict to a certain point. So, do you think the revocation of Article 370 by India in 2019 has fueled this conflict and brought it to where it is today?

Romessa:

Well, because of that, we already knew that Kashmir is a sensitive place like the past 75 years, we see the problems are happening over there. But revoking of the Article 370 in 2019 was like a turning point. It’s actually stripping Kashmir of its legal autonomous status. It is actually because 75 years ago, as I mentioned before there was a rule that which areas belong to Muslims majority would go to Pakistan and Hindu majority would go to India. So, Kashmir was in a very complicated position, but it had Muslim majority, but its ruler was Indian. It is still a geopolitically and geo strategically very important region. So now, what they’re doing is trying to lower the Muslim population — and they’re apparently doing it legally, I mean they say that it is, they can take their claim over Kashmir and the Kashmir can become a part of India. That’s what the article is supposed to do.

Hasan:

How do you see the current state of human rights in Kashmir? Because a lot of Indian soldiers are going there with the revoking of the article. Do you think the situation is getting worse for humans, in general?

Romessa:

Well, I think it is, and I am sad to say that human rights organization or human rights watchdogs are saying something, but they do not do anything. I mean, they can send some people over there. But unfortunately, I do not see anybody doing that. Kashmir is the most heavily militarized zone in the region, and there has been constant Indian soldiers engaging in brutality, attacking the people over there and limiting the Internet – you know, cutting off the Internet– and cutting off the entrances to that region. So, I think that is something which they are doing to legally reduce the Muslim population over there. I think human rights are a very rising problem there. As you see, you are stripping the humans of their basic human necessities – the internet is a common necessity. They are not allowed to tweet, or they are not allowed to say something about what is happening right now in the disputed territory. So, I think this is a very big human rights problem, and nobody from the human rights organizations, even the UNHRC saying anything about it.

Sky:

You briefly mentioned, but I also want to specifically ask you that how did the recent April 2025 Pahalgam attack, which targeted tourists, affected your opinion and the public opinion in Pakistan?

Romessa:

Well, the public has a very diverse opinion on this because Pahalgam attack happened recently, like two weeks ago; and after that happened, they say apparently a Muslim gunman attacked the Hindu tourists over there. It is the worst attack in 25 years. Again, the point is that this problem needs to be solved, or else things like this will keep happening — and now, it’s happened again. Because there are minorities living in every country – we have minorities in our country as well. As I believe that everybody is equal, I do not care. It really does not matter what your religion, it is about humanity like I said. This is going to be a trigger. You know, what happens if a Hindu guy attacks Muslims in Pakistan during an event? That can also happen – we can see that because it is a religious war right now going on. So, I think that this should end, and a solution should come out, that is my opinion on that, and that is what the public thinks. Also, public thinks that India is accusing Pakistan falsely. If they think that really that they were Pakistan terrorists, they should start an open investigation and Pakistan would welcome to doing the investigation and sending their resources to India to help it because we do not want extremism in any country. The Pakistani public, they do not want extremism, and as I talk to some, even in France, they also do not want extremism, but I think this government is instilling extremism – we have already seen that how extremists they are, the Modi government. One of Modi’s followers attacked like three or four months ago to a very famous Muslim actor in Bollywood. He attacked him because he was Muslim. So, I think that this is extremism, and a solution to it should come.

Sky:

Considering all of these, are you worried that the current situation could escalate into a military conflict between India and Pakistan? Why or why not? What do you think?

Romessa:

I think, personally, there is a bad situation going on. I mean a solution to it, or de-escalation should come as ASAP, but my personal opinion, I do not think that a full-scale war can happen because I think Pakistan does not want a military war and it cannot afford one at this point, or maybe it can, we never know. But I think India is all at the same position, they do not want to war actually, because at the past wars we have seen we saw that war did never provide a solution, just only worsened the things and damaged us economically, nothing else had happened and after a week everybody stopped fighting. So, I think wars are not a solution. So, we have seen the diplomatic war going on between us. So, what is happening is we are attacking diplomatically, India cut off our trade and we cut off our trade supply with them, then we closed our airspace to them which is costing them billions of dollars more because they have to take longer routes. So, I think that there is a war going on and, we have a very good soft power. Apart from government, our cultures are very similar. Our film industries are very strong in each other – i.e., our industry, movies and actors are very famous over there and Bollywood is very famous everywhere. So, what they did is that, two days ago, they banned our actors’ Instagram accounts in India, and our movies… they cannot access them anymore. They had huge fan groups there following them. So, I think this is a diplomatic war going on. It will not escalate into a full-scale war. It is just a war of threats and diplomacy, and after I think a month, it will go back to normal because no side can go there.

Hasan:

What do you think about the possibility of a nuclear war? Because the nuclear doctrine of India states that strictly, they will not ever use the nuclear weapons first; but in Pakistani nuclear doctrine, they say that they can use nuclear weapons first if there is a conventional military threat by India or another immediate threat. What do you think about that?

Romessa:

Well, I think that we have this doctrine, and they wrote that back in the day to protect their sovereignty because we were always under a very complex position because of Indian threats. I mean, I do not think that a nuclear war can happen because you know how expensive and how damaging it can be. As I said before, when the talk is about the nuclear war then the international community will jump in and take it seriously because the effects of nuclear wars can be felt as far as like far east Asia. So, I think that a nuclear war cannot happen. Yes our country, when it did test in 1998, they said that it will use nuclear weapons first, to protect itself, but yet it does not. Again, I think that using a nuclear weapon is a very extreme and the last step, it is just there to threaten each other to make yourself secure. Like in our situation right now, they say that we have nuclear weapons to deter. So, I do not think it will be used ever. But yeah, in order to protect their sovereignty and in order to make India feel a little bit more threatened, they passed on this doctrine. That is what I think.

Hasan:

Okay, so I will jump up to another topic. First of all, would you say that there is a political instability going on in Pakistan right now? And do you think it affects Pakistan’s stance on the conflict, given the current situation in the country?

Romessa:

Yeah, we have political instability, we had it for a very long time. But again, if you want to know a little bit about our history, we have always been – the military has always been – had the upper hand in the ruling position and we had many dictatorships. Even one of our dictators’ father used to work in the Pakistani embassy in Ankara – he studied in Turkey as well. He was one of the very famous military dictators, then he became a Prime Minister. He was very inspired by the Ataturk’s principles, so he tried to implicate them as well in his country. But you know, he was a very liberal form of dictator than we had an extreme form of dictator earlier than that. So, that is how our country was running. But at the same time, we had a Prime Ministerial form of government as well – so we had Prime Ministers at the same time. So, I think that there is a political instability right now because there was a very popular leader. I think everybody knows Imran Khan, he was a cricketer and then he turned into a politician. He was sacked on 9th May 2022, via a vote of no confidence, and most of the public supports him. Public found it very unjust things happened to them like as a democracy has openly been murdered in their country. So, that is what led to instability, and then rising protests for his release because he was in jail without any solid proof. Then, we see that military taking over the things again, slowly. We had elections in February last year, and everybody claimed it had to be a rigged election because nobody wanted the party who had won being in power. Most of the people again, despite Imran Khan being in jail, a lot of people voted for him. Even though his party was banned his symbol was banned they made different symbols, so everybody voted for him but we see another people coming to power. That is how our political instability started. But again, now we see that the military has taken control again. And it had limited the Internet and limited the X – the Twitter. I think that is how slowly they regained stability. There was an instability, but I can say for the past four months, we see again a little bit stability back because nobody from Imran Khan’s party has been protesting for like last six months. So, we can see a little bit stable environment.

Hasan:

So, the Pakistani military is inherently strong in the political field and interferes sometimes, do you think military involvement fuels more conflict? Because civil governments tend to be more reluctant to take action. Do you think this has affected the Indo-Pakistani wars before or is affecting the current situation as the conflict escalates?

Romessa:

Well, I think dynamics have changed. As I said earlier back in the day, there was a military government and there had been big wars actually. But right now, nobody wants to war, nobody can afford it – there is actually a diplomatic war as I said. Currently, we have a democratic government, but the military is very strong and powerful. I do not think that this military is ready to fight a war. Yeah, they start testing some missiles, but again, they do that just to show themselves as powerful, like “ we are powerful, we do not care, if you want to attack us you can attack us” but I think this government, or this military, is not interested in doing a war.

Sky:

Do you believe there is still room for a peaceful, long-term resolution of the Kashmir conflict?

Romessa

Well, I think that is a very complicated question to answer. If you ask me as a normal public person who supports democracy and I am a little bit on the leftist part of the country, I think yes. I had so many Indian friends, which I met along the way until here who were like leftist and who had different opinion, but we still have the thinking that lets come to the table and evenly divide this place and end this conflict because we want peace in long-term. But if you take a look at extremists, to more right leaning persons in Pakistan and India they don’t have this opinion. So, everybody has a very strong opinion on that, but I think a long-term solution will be best to keep democracy, values of peace, and avoid spending too much budget on military, because half of the Pakistan military budget is on defense due to the threats from India. So, if we lower the threat by finding a solution to Kashmir, that budget can be used in other useful things which are important. So, I think that peaceful negotiations are important because wars never take you any place.

Hasan:

Before finishing up, I had a few questions about India as well because since we also did an interview with an Indian guest. He talked about Modi as being a very good leader, and they are taking their pride back. And he said the closing of the mosques and opening up temples is reclaiming their rights at some point. What do you think about that? What do you think about Modi’s reforms in India?

Romessa:

Pakistan’s constitution is Islamic and India’s secular. But, if you are a secular country, you are not supposed to enforce a religion because secular means that politics and religion are not involved. But we see Modi is bringing religion into everything. Everybody has their opinion as I mentioned but I think this is not humanitarian. This is like you are putting religion in the middle of everything. Those mosques were there for centuries but now, Modi just abolishing them and making Hindu temples over there. I think this is not justified. So, I think that maybe he is taking back his national pride but what does he specifically mean by national pride is in Hinduism? Because that is what BJP is doing. India is diverse, so, what about the Buddhist living over there? What about the Muslims living over there? What about the Christians living over there? He does not spare any religion. He is just thinking about Hindu nationalism, whereas he is conflicting with his own constitution. So, I think that it is an illogical thing that he is taking [their] national pride. I mean, if he is taking his national pride and he is taking it on the behalf of Hindus, what about other communities living in India? He is not representing them.

Hasan:

One more random question: What do you think about US’ and China’s relations with Pakistan. We know China has issues with India. So, does that directly create an alliance between Pakistan and China against India? Also United States had interest in the region, what do you think about their position?

Romessa:

Well, our relations with the US have been very complicated all the time. Sometimes it was very good back in the Cold War and sometimes it deteriorated because of some military dictators not complying with that. But with China, we had a very stable relation all this time. Actually, we have a very long history with China during the 1950s when they were under the rule of Mao Zedong, there was like frequent famines and we used to help them, and that’s how we and China started our close relationship. Before China we feel more secure because we don’t have any border dispute with them and China is always supporting us in no matter what and even they built half of our economy. The CPAC, the China Pakistan Economic Corridor literally built the entire road system all the way from northern China. It enters from Pakistan to that border from China and goes all the way towards the South to access the seaport. So, I think our relation with China is has been always very good. It’s not about recent times. Even in the past when China was nothing like you know, we have seen how China has established themselves in the past 30 years. China used to be nothing 50 years ago. There used to be famine and people used to die of hunger, and there were actually some houses. But our relationship with China has always been good. We had good relations with China because back in the 60s, our economy was the fastest economy in the world. But unfortunately, due to some problems due to religious extremism, it deteriorated. But China has always been there and has always been openly supporting Pakistan. And China has a border dispute with India as well. So that’s why China and India’s relations are complicated. Our relation with US is very complicated, but in terms of defense, we have many agreements with them and I think that we are very important for the United States because of Afghanistan, because how it was the US’s  longest war was there and they had to stay close with Pakistan in order to stay in Afghanistan in order to prevent them falling into communism and then later on fighting against terrorism post 9/11. Pakistan has been very important for the United States. So, they always tried to, maintain relations with us. Our relations has been on the terms of cooperation and agreements. We have many defense and military agreements with them. But recently there has been problems. The US didn’t like the fact that we got the seat back, even Obama administration and Biden administration didn’t like it. But Trump, back when he was in power, he wanted to establish good relations with Pakistan. And also, just two weeks ago, he said that this war is not going to achieve anything. So, I think India and Pakistan should find a solution. So, I think that our relations with US is based on cooperations. But with China, it’s a very historical friendship.

Sky:

When you mentioned China, some questions popped into my mind, and I want to clarify that the Kashmir border is still disputed. You know, India has claims, China has claims, and Pakistan has claims at this point. What do you think about this situation? Especially about the Kashmir-Aksai region in China, when you go through the China-Pakistan relations.

Romessa:

Well, with China, we don’t have that border problem even that Kashmir, that area is disputed, but they have more issues with India. They don’t have that problem with us because we have already come to a consensus, and we don’t have a certain border dispute with them. China has some claims, but again it doesn’t go that aggressive. Actually, nothing happens over there because again it’s just a disputed territory. But with India there is a high level of tension between China and India, and they are always fighting, and even Chinese soldiers are occasionally attacking the Indian soldiers, and we are always seeing escalations in that region which go unreported. So, I think with Pakistan they have come to a dialogue and it’s a disputed territory. But with India, it’s still openly they’re against each other because China has to look economically as well and we have many economic cooperations with them. So, because of those economic cooperations and the CPAC and all the programs that they’re having, they tend to ignore and avoid talking about it more.

10.05.2025

Hasan:

We conducted this interview at 4^th of May 2025 but since the last week has been so eventful we wanted to ask you to tell us how is the situation between Pakistan and India right now? What happened since our interview last week?

Romessa:

Since our interview took place, a series of escalations have occurred, with particularly serious developments on Wednesday and earlier today. India launched attacks on military bases, and today marked a significant turning point as Indian forces reached the capital. In response, the Pakistani army ordered a retaliatory operation, leading to a prolonged night of missile exchanges. Pakistan successfully destroyed the Indian military bases from which missiles were being launched into Pakistani territory, violating its sovereignty. Additionally, Pakistan captured an Indian pilot. Major Indian bases such as Pathankot and Rajasthan were destroyed by the Pakistani army, and the Pakistani Air Force managed to hack into India’s power grid system, disrupting its electricity supply. Following this intense escalation and the threat of further conflict, an official announcement of a ceasefire was made just a few minutes ago. The ceasefire, effective immediately, was mediated by Rubio and U.S. authorities, with President Donald Trump making the official announcement.

Hasan:

Thank you very much for your answers.

Romessa:

Thank you so much for having me.

———————————————————————————————

We hope you enjoy our interviews! If you’d like to share your thoughts or participate in a discussion about a topic you believe deserves more attention, feel free to reach out to us through the link below.