Infrastructure Divide: AJK More Developed than IIOJK

While the Modi-led Indian government boasts about infrastructure development, a stark contrast emerges when comparing Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK) with Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK).

The Modi government’s claims of infrastructural progress in Jammu and Kashmir have been called into question. Saifullah Mir, a National Conference assembly member, has openly criticized these assertions, arguing that the facilities and overall development in Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) far exceed those in Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK). His statement sheds light on the ground realities that challenge the grand promises made by Indian authorities.

Speaking during the question hour in the IIOJK Assembly, Mir brought attention to the glaring developmental differences on either side of the Line of Control (LoC). He specifically highlighted the Keran region, noting that the facilities available in AJK’s Keran area are significantly superior to those in the Keran area of Kupwara district, situated in IIOJK. His remarks underscored the disparity in infrastructure, essential services, and overall quality of life between the two regions.

The comparison drew a strong response from BJP legislator RS Pathania, who demanded that Mir’s statement be removed from the official assembly records. This reaction underscores the sensitivity of the issue and the Indian government’s reluctance to acknowledge the developmental shortcomings in IIOJK.

Despite repeated assertions of progress, the reality on the ground tells a different story. Roads, healthcare facilities, educational institutions, and basic utilities in IIOJK continue to lag behind, while AJK has witnessed substantial improvements in these sectors. Reports suggest that AJK has better road connectivity, more efficient public services, and a higher standard of living compared to the neglected areas of IIOJK.

The disparity raises critical questions about the effectiveness of Indian policies in the occupied region. While the government promotes narratives of development and integration, local voices like Saifullah Mir expose the truth of stagnation and neglect. The Indian administration’s infrastructure claims seem hollow when contrasted with the visible advancements on the AJK side of the border.

This debate once again brings global attention to the Kashmir issue. The contrasting levels of development in AJK and IIOJK highlight the governance differences, with AJK benefiting from more consistent infrastructural progress, while IIOJK continues to struggle under the weight of political and administrative challenges.