77TH LIBERATION DAY OF GILGIT-BALTISTAN - A SYNOPTIC VIEW

By Syed Shams Uddin On November 1, the people of Gilgit-Baltistan will solemnly commemorate the 77th anniversary of their liberation from the oppressive rule of the Maharaja of Kashmir, a historic step toward self-determination and regional autonomy. This monumental victory was fully aligned with the will of the people, resonating with the aspirations of the Subcontinent’s Muslims under the leadership of Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah to create a nation for Muslims. For the people of Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan was not simply a political choice but a shared destiny—a vision of unity with a broader Muslim identity and purpose. Their accession transcended mere politics; it was a deliberate commitment to a unified Muslim homeland inspired by the same ideals that gave birth to Pakistan. This pivotal moment ended nearly a century of oppression, as Gilgit-Baltistan broke free from subjugation to stand as part of an independent and sovereign Pakistan. Following their courageous struggle, the people proudly raised Pakistan’s flag, a symbol of their hard-won freedom and commitment to the new Muslim state. Yet, their journey toward full integration has remained fraught, thwarted by India's persistent hegemonic tactics. When India escalated the matter to the United Nations, Gilgit-Baltistan was unfairly entangled in the broader Kashmir dispute, obstructing the region’s rightful recognition as an essential part of Pakistan. Today, the people of Gilgit-Baltistan continue to wait for the fulfillment of their long-deferred dream—a dream that has been unjustly withheld for far too long. Covering an expansive 72,496 square kilometers, Gilgit-Baltistan occupies a pivotal geographic location at the nexus of major world powers. The region borders China’s Xinjiang Autonomous Region to the north, Afghanistan’s Wakhan Corridor to the west, Indian-administered Kashmir to the east, and Pakistan’s Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province to the south, with Tajikistan lying only a short distance away across the Wakhan Belt. Administratively, Gilgit-Baltistan is divided into ten districts: Gilgit, Skardu, Diamir, Ghanche, Ghizar, Hunza, Nagar, Astore, Kharmang, and Shigar. Historically, Islam spread across this area in the 13th century, while the Dogra regime seized control in the late 19th century. In 1873, the British, under a lease with Dogra Maharaja Hari Singh, established the Gilgit Agency, which included the current districts of Ghizar, Astore, and parts of Diamir, while the rest remained under local rulers. With the end of British rule, the Gilgit Agency was handed back to the Maharaja on August 1, 1947. However, when the Maharaja announced his decision to accede to India, it was a choice starkly opposed by the people of both Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan. Determined to resist, the people of Gilgit-Baltistan launched a courageous armed struggle, declaring their independence on November 1, 1947. The formation of a provisional government, lasting two weeks, was aimed at consolidating the liberated territories while fostering conditions for future victories with the backing of Pakistan to liberate all of Kashmir. With the primary goal of uniting with Pakistan, the region’s subsequent accession has since been proudly celebrated each year, with traditional zeal and joy, honoring a legacy of courage and unity. Reflecting on history, up until the mid-19th century, the region of Gilgit-Baltistan remained largely autonomous. However, following the infamous Treaty of Amritsar, through which the British sold Kashmir to Gulab Singh, the Dogra Maharaja began his incursions into the area. By the close of the 19th century, despite resistance, destruction, and repeated setbacks, the Dogras managed to conquer significant portions of the region, which was then fragmented into various chieftaincies. While the region fell under Dogra rule, the statelets of Hunza and Nagar retained their independence until the late 19th century. Facing the rising threat of Russian expansion from the north, the British deemed it essential to consolidate their control over the area. This led to a joint Dogra-British invasion of Nagar, while Hunza eventually made peace, bringing the entire region under British influence. To formalize control, the British established a Political Agency in Gilgit in the final quarter of the 19th century, although it was temporarily dissolved. Following the subjugation of Hunza and Nagar, the British divided the area into distinct administrative units. Hunza and Nagar retained autonomy in their internal affairs, while the British assumed direct administration over the four districts of Punyal, Ishkoman, Gupis, and Yasin. Local rulers were appointed at the government’s discretion, with the exception of Punyal, where a hereditary ruler held authority. All these districts operated under the reestablished Political Agency in Gilgit, with a British Assistant Political Agent overseeing local administration and reporting to the British Resident, who, in turn, was accountable to the Viceroy of India. The Kashmir Darbar had minimal influence in Gilgit-Baltistan’s administration, aside from appointing an officer in Gilgit who held limited authority and required British Political Agent approval for major decisions. Thus, even when portions of the region were under the nominal rule of the Maharaja, Gilgit-Baltistan was, in practice, treated as a separate administrative entity under the direct oversight of the British Viceroy in India. This situation persisted until 1935, when the British assumed full control over the entire region, officially severing its administrative ties with Kashmir. In 1947, just before the partition of India, the British handed the area back to the Kashmir Darbar. According to the partition plan, rulers of princely states were given the option to accede to either India or Pakistan or to remain independent. However, when the Maharaja of Kashmir chose to join India—against the overwhelming wishes of the State’s Muslim-majority population—the people of Gilgit-Baltistan rose in armed rebellion against this decision. The people established an interim government led by a President, successfully expelled Indian forces from 41,000 square miles of territory without any external assistance from Pakistan or elsewhere, and invited Pakistan to assume administrative control. However, with the shift to a non-local command, the region lost approximately 13,000 square miles to India, leaving the remaining 28,000 square miles that now constitute Gilgit-Baltistan. In 1952, the tribal valleys of Darel and Tangir formally joined Pakistan and were provisionally attached to Gilgit-Baltistan (then the Gilgit Political Agency) for administrative purposes. Following Pakistan’s independence, Gilgit-Baltistan’s administrative structure has undergone frequent transformations. Initially, mirroring the British model, a Political Agent was appointed to oversee the region. After the ceasefire, administrative authority was transferred to a Joint Secretary of the Ministry of Kashmir Affairs, headquartered in Rawalpindi, who assumed the title of “Resident” for Gilgit-Baltistan and was granted full executive, legislative, and judicial powers similar to those of a provincial government. In the 1960s, this administrative seat was moved to Gilgit, but the governance structure remained unchanged. In the 1970s, under an elected government, initial reforms were introduced. The State, Rajwara, and Jagirdari systems, as well as the Frontier Crimes Regulations (FCR), were abolished. The region was renamed the “Northern Areas,” and the titles of “Resident” and “Political Agent” were changed to “Resident Commissioner” and “Deputy Commissioner,” respectively. Judicial reforms were introduced to create a partial separation between the judiciary and executive functions, offering residents improved access to justice. For the first time, residents gained the right to elect representatives to an “Advisory Council,” though, as the name suggests, this body had no real authority over administration and functioned solely in an advisory capacity. By the late 1970s, with the imposition of Martial Law in Pakistan, Azad Kashmir was excluded, but Gilgit-Baltistan was designated as Martial Law Zone “E.” Administrative control reverted to Rawalpindi, and the Secretary of the Ministry of Kashmir Affairs and Northern Areas assumed powers akin to a provincial government. Although the Resident Commissioner’s title was changed to “Commissioner,” this adjustment did not result in substantial governance changes. The administrative setup, concentrated in the hands of a single bureaucrat unaccountable to the people, naturally led to widespread resentment among the people of Gilgit-Baltistan. Historically, Gilgit-Baltistan’s governance has seen a varied progression. Initially governed by Political Agents from 1873 to 1950, the region was then overseen by a Resident Commissioner from 1950 to 1986. This role transitioned to an Administrator from 1986 to 1992, followed by a Chief Commissioner from 1992 to 1994, and eventually a Chief Secretary from 1994 onward. Today, the region has adopted a governance structure resembling that of a province. Despite the difficult landscape and dispersed communities, Gilgit-Baltistan has remained determined to establish a governance system that reflects the aspirations of its people. A major breakthrough came with the Gilgit-Baltistan (Empowerment and Self-Governance) Order of 2009, which effectively elevated the region to a de facto administrative province. This landmark reform devolved legislative and executive powers to a newly formed Gilgit-Baltistan Assembly and established the Gilgit-Baltistan Council, addressing long-standing demands for self-governance. However, the 2009 order fell short of full autonomy, leading to further reform in the form of the Gilgit-Baltistan Governance Order of 2018. This order adjusted the balance of power by granting more authority to the Assembly, reflecting the principles of Pakistan’s 18th Constitutional Amendment, and reducing the Council’s role to an advisory function. These changes marked an essential shift toward stronger local governance, empowering the region with greater control over its affairs. Gilgit-Baltistan’s transformation from oppressive rule to a progressive administrative structure underscores its historic pursuit of self-governance, autonomy, and acknowledgment of its strategic importance. Though considerable strides have been made, the region still contends with challenges in effective administration, addressing socio-political needs, and navigating its complex geopolitical position. As it seeks a more distinct and empowered role within Pakistan’s federation, the journey of the past 77 years stands as a powerful testament to the resilience and ambitions of its people for true representative governance.