Why January 5 Still Matters

Kashmiris around the world are marking Right to Self Determination Day today, and the meaning of that phrase feels sharper in winter. When people stand outside in the bitter cold, they are not doing it for a photo or a slogan. They are there because the question of Kashmir has been left unresolved for so long that even an ordinary date carries the weight of unfinished business. From community centres in Europe and North America to gatherings in the Gulf, the message is consistent. Kashmiris say their future should be decided by Kashmiris, not imposed by force, and not managed as a permanent security problem. They want the world to listen and act with urgency.

The scenes in Muzaffarabad capture that mood. A torchlight rally at night at Azadi Chowk, in the capital of Azad Kashmir, was more than a local event. It was a signal that people still see themselves as guardians of a pledge made on the global stage. Torchlight cuts through darkness, but it also signals watchfulness.

You do not carry a flame unless you believe something important could be lost if everyone goes home and turns off the lights. In the cold and the night, the crowd made a simple point: we are still here, and we have not forgotten

January 5 matters because it ties this struggle to an international commitment, not only to anger, grief, or regional rivalry. On January 5, 1949, the United Nations Commission on Pakistan and India passed a resolution recognising the right of the people of Jammu and Kashmir to decide their future through a plebiscite. The logic is plain. Ask the people who live there what they want, then respect the answer. Kashmiris commemorate this day each year because it is one of the clearest acknowledgements, on record, that their consent, not mere control, is supposed to matter.

Decades later, many Kashmiris argue that the promise remains unfulfilled. They describe continued restrictions, a heavy security presence, political detentions, limits on speech, and repeated disruptions to ordinary life in Indian controlled Kashmir. They see a pattern of control that leaves little room for genuine political choice. Whether one calls it occupation or administration, the result, in their view, is a population that has not been allowed to express its will in the way the resolution promised. When people cannot choose, they can only endure, and when they can only endure, politics becomes something done to them, not something they can shape.

This is why January 5 functions as a renewal of commitment. People who have watched the issue fall in and out of headlines understand how fast the world moves on. They have seen other crises draw urgent attention while Kashmir is treated as a stubborn dispute that powerful states would rather not touch. So they return each year to the same date and the same demand, not because they expect an instant breakthrough, but because silence would be taken as acceptance.

In that sense, the cold itself becomes part of the message. Endurance is a form of resistance, and memory is a form of politics

There is also a broader point that outsiders should not dismiss. Self-determination is not merely a slogan meant to embarrass one country and flatter another. It is a principle tied to human dignity and political legitimacy. If the international community treats that principle as optional, it sends a message far beyond South Asia. It tells smaller peoples that rights exist only when large states allow them. That is a dangerous lesson. It weakens faith in international law, and it teaches cynicism in places where the world can least afford it. It also encourages states to believe that delay, not dialogue, is the safest strategy.

India often argues that sovereignty and security concerns must come first, and it is fair to acknowledge that states do have security responsibilities. But security cannot be a permanent excuse for denying political rights. A durable peace cannot be built on checkpoints and fear alone. It can only be built when people believe their voice counts, and when grievances are addressed through politics rather than force. Even those who do not share the Kashmiri position should recognise a basic point: suppressing debate only deepens resentment, and resentment is a poor foundation for stability.

The international community has its own uncomfortable role here. Global powers balance their statements with trade, strategy, and partnerships. They call for restraint, then move on. Kashmiris mark January 5 to remind diplomats, media, and institutions that ignoring an unresolved commitment is not neutrality; it is a choice. The purpose of this day is to insist that the world cannot ignore responsibility forever. A promised plebiscite does not expire because it is inconvenient. Until there is a credible path that respects Kashmiri political agency, protests will continue, and the world will remain complicit through inaction.