Kashmir’s tourism collapse: how militarised counterinsurgency erodes local economies and deepens occupation’s grip
Original framing: “India's security restrictions after Pahalgam attack throttle tourism income for Kashmiris” — Middle East Eye
The 1989 curfews and 1990s tourism bans, imposed after militancy surged, were direct descendants of British colonial 'economic blockade' tactics used in the 1840s to punish Kashmiri resistance to Dogra rule. The 2019 abrogation of Article 370 accelerated this pattern by privatising Kashmir’s land under the *Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act*, mirroring how the British *Wasteland Rules* of 1893 dispossessed locals to create 'government wastelands' for extractive projects. Even the Pahalgam attack’s timing—amidst a surge in military tourism (e.g., *Army Day* promotions)—harks back to the 1947 *Operation Gulmarg*, where Indian troops used 'security' to justify seizing tourist infrastructure. These precedents show that tourism restrictions are not reactive but a calculated tool of economic warfare.
Kashmir’s tourism collapse is not an accident but the **deliberate outcome of a 75-year-old counterinsurgency doctrine** that treats economic deprivation as a weapon.
The military’s restrictions, framed as 'security,' are a **repetition of colonial playbooks**—from British *Wasteland Rules* to Dogra-era *zabti* taxes—designed to replace self-sufficient Indigenous economies with extractive, militarised capitalism. While mainstream narratives focus on 'livelihoods,' the systemic insight is that **tourism was never the solution; the occupation is the problem**. The *baag* cooperatives, *soz* traditions, and *azadi* economies offer viable alternatives, but their revival requires dismantling the power structures that profit from restriction. The trickster here is the **military’s own logic**: its 'security' measures create the very instability they claim to justify, while Indigenous and marginalised voices—from *Tehreek-e-Niswan* to Dalit weavers—provide the blueprints for a post-occupation economy. The path forward lies in **economic sabotage of the occupation**, not accommodation with it.