Author(s) :

Aditi Senthil Kumar.

Volume/Issue :

Abstract :

Stemming from the broader India-Pakistan conflict, the Kashmir dispute is often described as the oldest unresolved international conflict in the world today. This protracted territorial dispute profoundly highlights the limitations of international peacekeeping structures and the enforcement of war laws, particularly concerning the Fourth Geneva Convention. While the conflict traces back to the 1947 Partition, its persistence has entrenched militarization, human rights abuses, and recurring interstate clashes, most recently exemplified by India’s 2025 Operation Sindoor. International frameworks such as the Fourth Geneva Convention guarantee protections for civilians, yet in Kashmir these rights are routinely violated with little accountability. Adopting a case study analysis, this research assesses the intersection of peacekeeping frameworks, sovereignty claims, and human rights discourses using academic scholarship, UN documents, legal texts, and human rights reports. Focusing on three themes, the enforcement gap in the laws of war, the role of sovereignty and bilateralism in restricting oversight, and the structural limits of peacekeeping mandates, findings show that India’s rejection of third-party involvement, Pakistan’s internationalization strategy, and the persistence of laws such as the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) and the Public Safety Act (PSA) perpetuate impunity. The Kashmir case demonstrates how, in sovereignty-driven conflicts, peacekeeping collapses into symbolism, underscoring the urgent need to reconceptualize it as a legal framework accountable to international humanitarian law.