How international media covered India's abolishing of Article 370
India criticised over repealing of constitutional provisions granting special status to IoK
PHOTO: AFP
The Indian government on Monday stripped occupied Kashmir of the constitutional provisions granting special status to the valley after abolishing Articles 370 and 35A.
The August 5 development came hours after occupying forces initiated a security crackdown in the occupied valley.
With the repeal, the state had been bifurcated into two union territories – Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh.
The rising of tensions between the nuclear-armed arch-rivals, once again, brought the tenuous regional peace across South Asia into question. Various local and international media outlets reported on the matter.
Leading American daily The New York Times reported on the matter under a headline that: “India revokes Kashmir’s special status, raising fears of unrest”.
The New York Times
PHOTO: SCREENGRAB
The Times stated that the Hindu nationalist government “unilaterally wiped out” the autonomy of the restive Kashmir region. It also mentioned that international human rights groups condemned India’s decision.
In addition, the Times also wrote that some analysts claimed that the 'timing' of the decision is suspicious because Modi’s government was being criticised over a weakening economy with unemployment rising.
BBC
While some international media outlets such as The Times and BBC showed a rather impartial perspective, most platforms including The Guardian, Al Jazeera, The Independent, CNN and Washington Post condemned the constitutional change.
The Guardian
The Guardian reported that India’s decision is the “most radical change any government has suggested for Kashmir’s status since the region was granted autonomy”.
It also quoted the Foreign Office (FO) stating it would “exercise all possible options to counter the illegal steps [taken by India]” and mentioned that Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi stated that this issue would be raised with Pakistan’s allies including the United States.
Al Jazeera
Al Jazeera presented a different narrative and quoted former minister Mufti calling August 5 the “darkest day” for Indian democracy.
The platform also shed light on the fury of Pakistani and Indian activists, criticising the relegating of Kashmir into a union territory.
The Independent
The Independent, too, presented a similar narrative and stated that while the BJP claimed that they had managed to solve the long-disputed Kashmir issue, they had only paved way for worse things.
CNN
CNN referred to India’s move to revoke Article 370 as a “long-held decision”.
“Pakistan, which also claims Kashmir, described the move as illegal. It is not clear what happens next, though legal challenges are expected,” it read.
The paper also quoted a human rights activist and author stating the government's move is "part of an agenda in order to establish their idea of a Hindu nationalist nation."
Washington Post
The Washington Post also condemned the revoking of Article 370, labelling it a 'disturbing turn'. It also implied India turning into an authoritarian state, choosing territory over people, by saying that India is 'only interested in its expansion and power'.
The article also called this move by India a part of a 'settler-colonial project'.
The August 5 development came hours after occupying forces initiated a security crackdown in the occupied valley.
With the repeal, the state had been bifurcated into two union territories – Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh.
The rising of tensions between the nuclear-armed arch-rivals, once again, brought the tenuous regional peace across South Asia into question. Various local and international media outlets reported on the matter.
Leading American daily The New York Times reported on the matter under a headline that: “India revokes Kashmir’s special status, raising fears of unrest”.
The New York Times
PHOTO: SCREENGRAB
The Times stated that the Hindu nationalist government “unilaterally wiped out” the autonomy of the restive Kashmir region. It also mentioned that international human rights groups condemned India’s decision.
In addition, the Times also wrote that some analysts claimed that the 'timing' of the decision is suspicious because Modi’s government was being criticised over a weakening economy with unemployment rising.
BBC
While some international media outlets such as The Times and BBC showed a rather impartial perspective, most platforms including The Guardian, Al Jazeera, The Independent, CNN and Washington Post condemned the constitutional change.
The Guardian
The Guardian reported that India’s decision is the “most radical change any government has suggested for Kashmir’s status since the region was granted autonomy”.
It also quoted the Foreign Office (FO) stating it would “exercise all possible options to counter the illegal steps [taken by India]” and mentioned that Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi stated that this issue would be raised with Pakistan’s allies including the United States.
Al Jazeera
Al Jazeera presented a different narrative and quoted former minister Mufti calling August 5 the “darkest day” for Indian democracy.
The platform also shed light on the fury of Pakistani and Indian activists, criticising the relegating of Kashmir into a union territory.
The Independent
The Independent, too, presented a similar narrative and stated that while the BJP claimed that they had managed to solve the long-disputed Kashmir issue, they had only paved way for worse things.
CNN
CNN referred to India’s move to revoke Article 370 as a “long-held decision”.
“Pakistan, which also claims Kashmir, described the move as illegal. It is not clear what happens next, though legal challenges are expected,” it read.
The paper also quoted a human rights activist and author stating the government's move is "part of an agenda in order to establish their idea of a Hindu nationalist nation."
Washington Post
The Washington Post also condemned the revoking of Article 370, labelling it a 'disturbing turn'. It also implied India turning into an authoritarian state, choosing territory over people, by saying that India is 'only interested in its expansion and power'.
The article also called this move by India a part of a 'settler-colonial project'.