Kashmiris of the Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK) are being denied their right to live. Force, as well as legal weapons, are being employed to weaken the Kashmiri struggle for self-determination. Aaker Patel, Chair of the Board of Amnesty International, sees India’s actions in IIOJK as a “vicious crackdown.” Three years have passed since the unlawful abrogation of Articles 370 and 35-A. During these years, the Indian government, through the “Revised Media Policy” and the “2021 Film Policy” have suppressed the freedom of speech. The closure of the Kashmir Press Club has silenced the culture of debate. The situation in IIOJK speaks of the political isolation of the Kashmiri people. The people are being denied their right to speak for themselves. This suppression by India is a stark violation of democratic practices it proves a fascist approach. A sad part of Indian aggressive pursuits in IIOJK is that the country claims to be secular and one of the largest democracies, but neither political party nor civil society has questioned the BJP government’s extremist acts in IIOJK. This shows that the principles of democracy are not to secure the people, but rather, on the ground, it is the force, which defines the law. Internationally, India has violated the UN Security Council resolutions by denying the right of self-determination, but hardly any opposition India faces on the global front. It is a facet of global power politics that some countries are often criticised over human rights and, at times, face political isolation by economic sanctions. The Kashmiri people are protesting over the unjust practices in IIOJK. Recently, the Pasban-e-Hurriyat Jammu and Kashmir led a massive protest in Muzaffarabad. People chanted slogans against the Indian Foreign Minister Jaishankar’s speech at the 77th session of the UN General Assembly. Chairman Pasban-e-Hurriyat, Uzair Ahmed Ghazali said that India, before giving a lecture on peace, needs to look at the human rights abuses in IIOJK where “millions of citizens are being forced to migrate, and thousands have been injured by bullets, pellet guns.” Viewing Kashmir just as a cause from the prism of inter-state relations will not be correct. The reason being the sufferers are the Kashmiri people and their struggle should not be equated with extremism. A sad part of Indian aggressive pursuits in IIOJK is that the country claims to be secular and one of the largest democracies. Seeing the prevalent world trends, regionalism and trade cooperation are the tools of progress. Economic integration has led to prosperity and has contributed to peace. Regionalism in East Asia is an example of peaceful coexistence. ASEAN countries have economic ties with China despite the disputed islands of the South China Sea. This shows that with economic benefits, the fallout of political differences can be minimised (if not, completely resolved). The US-China trade cooperation is another example wherein the global players, despite competitive tendencies, have continued to strengthen the economic ties. The India-China bilateral trade also speaks of economic benefits, though both countries have a conflicting border dispute. A good part of economic integration is that it promotes the concept of growth and human security. In South Asia, the concept of human security and regional cooperation have failed to blossom. At the helm of regional politics is the India-Pakistan rivalry. The antagonism that prevails at the inter-state level has engulfed the entire region. SAARC’s inability to emerge as a potent organisation is due to inter-state disharmony. To have a secure region, the regional countries need to have a coherent policy with a focus on socio-economic development and human security. Placing the Kashmir dispute in the regional context, the situation requires a political solution. Like the Azad Jammu Kashmir, IIOJK can be made part of the regional connectivity endeavour. India needs to give up the coercive approach and look for economic dividends, amidst regional connectivity. Perhaps, India’s ties with the ASEAN region reflect the former’s geo-economic outlook. The same can be visualised for the SAARC region, but for that, the atrocities in IIOJK need to be stopped and peoples’ right to live and prosper should be the motto. The writer is Research Associate at Islamabad Policy Research Institute (IPRI)