In Gilgit-Baltistan, a robust protest emerges against the government’s contentious wheat price hike and subsidy removal.
Led by the Awami Action Committee, a united front demands a rollback, issuing a stern warning and threatening a shutdown strike.
Simultaneously, an electricity crisis compounds winter challenges with severe power cuts, affecting daily life and adding financial strain.
Residents voice frustration over preferential treatment in government offices, urging a shift in priorities.
This grassroots uprising signals a broader battle for autonomy and dignity.
As protests echo, the government faces a crucial juncture to address economic, service, and human rights concerns, fostering equitable development and social justice in the region.
In the heart of Gilgit-Baltistan, a wave of discontent is sweeping through the region as people rise against the government’s contentious decision to hike wheat prices and eliminate subsidies.
The protests, which have been ongoing for months, have become a symbol of unity, bringing together political, religious, and social groups in a powerful stand against perceived injustices.
The provincial government attempts to rationalize its actions by pointing to issues like smuggling and black-market activities resulting from artificially low wheat prices.
The people of Gilgit-Baltistan, in their collective voice, stand firm against perceived injustices, demanding fair treatment and a reversal of contentious decisions.
Despite federal pressure, they assert their decision is a strategic move to prioritize public interest.
However, this reasoning has only intensified public anger, with residents demanding the swift restoration of the wheat subsidy and their fundamental rights.
The leader of the Awami Action Committee, Ehsan Ali issues a stern warning to the government, stating, “We demand the 2022 rates and the reinstatement of subsidies.”
The threat of a shutdown strike looms large, emphasizing the seriousness of the public’s discontent.
In a bold challenge to authorities, protestors demand that those in positions of power relinquish their privileges if they expect citizens to bear the burden of increased wheat prices.
This call for accountability strikes at the heart of the issue, urging the government to address corruption and reduce expenses instead of imposing additional hardships on the populace.
The protests go beyond a simple objection to wheat prices; they represent a collective fight for autonomy and dignity.
A stronghold of resistance in the city of Skardu witnesses a united front under the All-Party Alliance’s call, as people from political, religious, social, and nationalist groups take to the streets.
Key speakers, including Ghulam Hussain Athar and Sheikh Ahmed Tarabi, condemn the government’s steadfast stance and emphasize the people’s determination to stand against what they perceive as injustice.
Accusing the government of using divisive tactics, the protestors reject threats and assert their resilience.
The provincial food minister faces sharp criticism, labelled a “puppet” orchestrating a smear campaign against those protesting the hike.
In Shigar, residents join the opposition, demanding an immediate rollback of the price increase and promising persistent protests until their voices are heard.
The Public Action Committee Gilgit Baltistan adds its voice to the chorus, declaring the government’s decisions as anti-people.
Dismissing the announced wheat allocation as deceptive, the committee vows not to let the government take money from the people’s mouths.
Residents point out the stark contrast between government offices, equipped with generators and heaters, and the unpaid bills for these facilities.
Speaking to the media, Ghulam Hussain Athar condemns the government’s approach and calls for a robust counterattack.
He dismisses the proposed wheat allocation as a feeble diversion, underscoring their unyielding commitment to a resolute stand against government excesses.
The people of Gilgit-Baltistan, in their collective voice, stand firm against perceived injustices, demanding fair treatment and a reversal of contentious decisions.
Amidst this unrest, the region faces additional challenges, notably an electricity crisis exacerbating the harsh winter conditions.
Gilgit city, in particular, experiences power cuts lasting a staggering 18 to 19 hours a day. A local resident, Sattar Farooq highlights the severe problems this creates for students, workers, and the media.
Schools are already grappling with disruptions since the pandemic, find it challenging to maintain regular classes.
The uncertainty of power availability adds stress to students during examinations, echoing the broader sentiment of frustration among the populace.
Aajikia’s impassioned insights serve as a clarion call for international attention to the precarious situation in PoK, offering a critical analysis of governance, human rights transgressions, and regional imbalances in this contested territory.
Internet service interruptions further impede businesses and media professionals, exacerbating the difficulties faced by the people.
Residents point out the stark contrast between government offices, equipped with generators and heaters, and the unpaid bills for these facilities.
Calls for an end to such preferential treatment ring out, urging the government to prioritize basic needs over unnecessary luxuries.
Despite frequent power cuts, residents are burdened with inflated electricity bills, intensifying financial strain on a region that significantly contributes to electricity generation.
This juxtaposition underscores the urgent need for the government to address the persistent electricity crisis, a critical issue that has long been overlooked in Gilgit-Baltistan.
In a separate but equally poignant narrative, human rights activist Arif Aajikia sheds light on the pressing challenges in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (PoK).
Aajikia passionately addresses the erosion of cultural, linguistic, and heritage elements, framing them within the broader context of human rights.
He draws attention to the developmental disparities between PoK and the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, emphasizing the tangible contrast visible on social media.
Despite supplying electricity to Punjab province, PoK faces prolonged load shedding and exorbitant electricity rates, revealing a paradoxical situation for the very producers of electricity.
Aajikia emphasizes the cultural erosion in PoK, comparing the preservation of Kashmiri identity in Srinagar to the dominance of Punjabi influence in Muzzafarabad.
He voices concerns about the absence of educational institutions, inadequate infrastructure, and a lack of employment opportunities in PoK, all of which contribute to widespread discontent manifesting in protests.
The interview also touches upon the matter of Article 370, with Aajikia asserting its status as an internal matter of India.
The government, in turn, must heed these voices and engage in a meaningful dialogue to address the underlying issues, fostering a path towards equitable development and social justice in the region.
He redirects attention to the unresolved issues in PoK and Gilgit Baltistan, both occupied by Pakistan, critically questioning Pakistan’s actions in 1947 and categorizing those involved as terrorists rather than Mujahids.
From a legal standpoint, Aajikia emphasizes that the sole unresolved issues pertain to the lands occupied by Pakistan and China.
Remarkably, he references Aksai Chin as an integral part of the state of Jammu and Kashmir, inherently belonging to India.
Aajikia’s impassioned insights serve as a clarion call for international attention to the precarious situation in PoK, offering a critical analysis of governance, human rights transgressions, and regional imbalances in this contested territory.
In conclusion, the multifaceted challenges faced by the people of Gilgit-Baltistan underscore the urgent need for the government to address grievances, ranging from economic policies to essential services and human rights.
Powered by a collective desire for autonomy and dignity with passion, protests signify a grassroots rebellion against perceived injustices.
The government, in turn, must heed these voices and engage in a meaningful dialogue to address the underlying issues, fostering a path towards equitable development and social justice in the region.
(Sunanda Garain is a Doctoral Fellow at Mahatma Gandhi Central University, Motihari, Bihar)
Comment