UN Resolutions on Kashmir – Timeline, Plebiscite & Present Status

The Unfulfilled Promise of Self-Determination

When British India was partitioned in August 1947, the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir stood at a crossroads of history. Culturally Kashmiri, geographically Himalayan, and spiritually rooted in Islam, the region was ruled by a Dogra monarch over a Muslim-majority population.

Partition forced hundreds of princely states to choose between India or Pakistan; yet Kashmir’s choice was left undecided. What followed would shape the next seven decades of South Asian history and lead to the creation of a file at the United Nations that remains open to this day.

If you missed the earlier blog articles about the history, it might be worth while going back and reading them to get a full perspective of the Kashmiri history, it will set the scene for this article.

In the autumn of 1947, violence erupted across the sub-continent. In Kashmir, decades of resentment against the Dogra monarchy reached boiling point. The Dogra rulers, Hindu by faith, had long governed a Muslim-majority population whose political aspirations and cultural values were distinct. As Partition unfolded, many Kashmiris saw in the newly created state of Pakistan a vision more closely aligned with their religious and social identity.

Amid mounting unrest, groups of Kashmiri men rose up against Dogra authority. As the Maharaja sought military assistance from India, Indian troops entered the territory, and the conflict rapidly escalated into open war.

Villages were burned, families displaced, and the valley was transformed into a battlefield. It was amid this chaos that the United Nations intervened, not as a distant observer, but as the custodian of a promise: that the people of Jammu and Kashmir would one day determine their own political destiny.

The United Nations Steps In

On 1 January 1948, India referred the dispute to the UN Security Council under Article 35 of the UN Charter, accusing Pakistan of aiding tribal incursions. Pakistan denied the charge and counter-claimed that India had violated the principles of partition. The Security Council moved swiftly. Its early resolutions between January and April 1948 mark the first formal international recognition of Kashmir as a disputed territory whose future was yet to be decided.

The UN’s involvement was not a sign of interference, but a recognition that the conflict threatened international peace. The Council called for restraint, investigation, ceasefire, withdrawal, and finally a plebiscite, a direct vote by the Kashmiri people themselves.

In theory, it was a simple and elegant formula; in practice, it would become one of the world’s longest-running unresolved commitments.

Resolution 38 (17 January 1948) — The Call for Restraint

The Security Council’s first pronouncement on the issue, Resolution 38, was modest but historic. It urged both India and Pakistan to avoid aggravating the situation through public statements or military moves.

At that moment, fighting raged near Srinagar, and thousands of civilians were displaced. The resolution did not assign blame; instead, it recognised that a humanitarian emergency required calm heads and international observation.

Resolution 38 laid the foundation for everything that followed. It introduced the principle that Kashmir’s peace was not merely a domestic matter for either government, it was a question of international responsibility.

Resolution 39 (20 January 1948) — Establishing the UN Commission

Just three days later, the Security Council passed Resolution 39, creating the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP).

The Commission’s mandate was to investigate the causes of conflict, mediate between the two new nations, and recommend steps toward peace. This was one of the earliest examples of UN conflict mediation after the organisation’s formation in 1945.

The UNCIP was to be composed of three members, later expanded to five, representing neutral countries. Its task was both diplomatic and moral: to ensure that the voices of ordinary Kashmiris were not lost amid competing national claims.

Resolution 47 (21 April 1948) — The Roadmap for Peace

Resolution 47 remains the cornerstone of the UN’s position on Kashmir. Passed after extensive debate, it outlined a three-stage roadmap:

The language was clear: the will of the Kashmiri people would decide their future. Both India and Pakistan accepted the resolution in principle, but disagreements over sequencing and interpretation stalled progress. India insisted that Pakistan withdraw first; Pakistan argued that simultaneous withdrawal was necessary for fairness.

The ceasefire eventually came into effect on 1 January 1949, but the demilitarisation steps were never completed. Pakistan, however, remained deeply distrustful of India’s intentions. Many in the Kashmiri community believed that Indian forces were tightening control over the region by silencing dissent, detaining political workers, and suppressing pro-plebiscite movements within the Indian-administered areas.

Reports of arbitrary arrests, enforced disappearances and the curbing of political expression began to circulate widely, feeding a lasting sense of mistrust that would define relations between the two countries for decades.

Still, Resolution 47 established a moral benchmark. It recognised self-determination not as a political gift, but as a fundamental right.

The UNCIP Resolutions (13 August 1948 and 5 January 1949) — The Promise of a Plebiscite

Working under Resolution 47, the UNCIP issued two further resolutions. The first, on 13 August 1948, reiterated the call for a ceasefire and laid down specific conditions for withdrawal. The second, on 5 January 1949, went further: it explicitly stated that “the question of the accession of the State of Jammu and Kashmir to India or Pakistan will be decided through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite.”

This was the moment when the principle of self-determination was not just implied but written into international record. Both governments agreed to these terms. The UNCIP even began preparing for administrative arrangements, mapping districts, assessing voting logistics, and appointing a future Plebiscite Administrator under UN authority.

However, mutual suspicion again blocked implementation. Pakistan hesitated to withdraw its forces without guarantees that India would follow; India, meanwhile, tightened its military presence citing security concerns. The window of opportunity slowly closed.

Resolution 80 (14 March 1950) — A Step Toward Simultaneous Demilitarisation

By 1950, the Security Council sought to revive the deadlock. Resolution 80 proposed that both countries simultaneously reduce their military presence to agreed minimum levels, thereby removing the sequencing dispute that had haunted Resolution 47. It also replaced the multi-member UNCIP with a single UN Representative to coordinate demilitarisation.

Pakistan accepted the idea; India objected, arguing that it implied parity between an “aggressor” and a “victim.” As negotiations faltered, Kashmir became increasingly integrated into India’s administrative framework, while Pakistan consolidated control over the areas west of the ceasefire line — now known as Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan.

Although Resolution 80 reaffirmed the principle of plebiscite, it also revealed the growing limits of UN influence amid Cold War geopolitics. The Commission’s moral authority was clear; its enforcement power was not.

Resolution 91 (30 March 1951) — The Constituent Assembly Cannot Decide Kashmir’s Fate

In 1951, India convened a Constituent Assembly in Srinagar to draft a constitution for Jammu and Kashmir. The move was seen internationally as a unilateral attempt to formalise accession. In response, the Security Council passed Resolution 91, declaring that any decision by such an assembly would not constitute the final disposition of the state.

The resolution reaffirmed that the future of Jammu and Kashmir must still be determined in accordance with the will of the people, under UN supervision. It also urged both countries to resume talks on demilitarisation and to create conditions conducive to the promised plebiscite.

For Kashmiris, Resolution 91 was a lifeline, a reassurance that the world had not forgotten its earlier commitments. Yet within India, domestic politics were moving in the opposite direction: toward consolidation, not consultation.

Resolution 122 (24 January 1957) — The Status Remains Disputed

Six years later, India’s Constituent Assembly formally adopted a constitution that declared Jammu and Kashmir to be an integral part of the Indian Union. Once again, the Security Council responded. Resolution 122 reaffirmed that any action by the Assembly “would not constitute a final disposition of the State” and that the earlier resolutions remained in force.

By this point, the ceasefire line had become a de facto border, later termed the Line of Control (LoC). The UN Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) was stationed to monitor violations. Though the UN continued to call for peaceful settlement, the political momentum had shifted toward bilateralism and regional militarisation.

Why the UN Resolutions Remain Unimplemented

Seventy-five years later, the plebiscite promised to Kashmiris remains unfulfilled. Historians and diplomats identify several reasons:

Article 370 and 35A — The Constitutional Shockwave

In August 2019, the Government of India revoked Article 370 and Article 35A of its constitution, which had granted Jammu and Kashmir special status and limited autonomy. The move split the state into two federally controlled territories — Jammu and Kashmir, and Ladakh. For many Kashmiris, this was not just an internal administrative reform but a profound breach of the spirit of the UN resolutions.

Resolution 91 (1951) and Resolution 122 (1957) explicitly stated that no unilateral action by India could alter the disputed status of the region. Yet the revocation proceeded without consultation with local representatives, under heavy military presence and communication lockdowns. The UN Secretary-General reiterated that the organisation’s position “remains governed by the UN Charter and relevant Security Council resolutions,” reaffirming that the dispute had not been resolved bilaterally or multilaterally.

For ordinary Kashmiris, the 2019 changes deepened a sense of historical déjà vu — a return to the era when decisions about their homeland were made without their consent. The story of unimplemented UN resolutions thus continued, not as a chapter of history but as a lived reality.

The UN After the Simla Agreement (1972)

The Simla Agreement, signed after the 1971 war, committed both India and Pakistan to resolve their differences “through bilateral negotiations.” India began interpreting this clause as superseding the UN framework, while Pakistan and the UN maintained that earlier resolutions still held force.

As a result, the Security Council’s role receded, though it never formally withdrew its mandate. The UNMOGIP still operates today from bases in Rawalpindi and Srinagar, observing ceasefire violations and reporting to the Secretary-General. Its continued presence is, in itself, acknowledgment that the dispute remains on the UN agenda.

Even after decades of diplomatic fatigue, periodic references in UN General Assembly sessions, Human Rights Council debates, and independent reports keep the issue alive in international consciousness. The UN Charter’s Article 1 speaks of promoting “respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples” — a promise that resonates strongly with Kashmiri history.

Legal Standing: Are the Resolutions Still Valid?

International law scholars confirm that Security Council resolutions on Chapter VI disputes remain valid until explicitly superseded or implemented. Since no subsequent resolution has annulled them, the Kashmir resolutions continue to exist in legal force.

Moreover, both India and Pakistan were original parties to these resolutions; their acceptance is recorded in UN archives. While political interpretations differ, the legal record is unambiguous: the UN has never recognised Kashmir as an undisputed part of either nation.

For historians, this means the dispute cannot simply be “expired” by time. For the Kashmiri community, it represents an ongoing international recognition of their right to decide their own destiny.

The Human Dimension — Beyond Borders and Treaties

Behind every resolution number lies a story of human endurance. In villages along the Neelum Valley, elders still recall the winter of 1948 when ceasefire announcements crackled over radios. Families divided by the Line of Control continue to live with passports that cannot cross the mountains of their ancestry.

While diplomats argued over wording in New York and Geneva, ordinary Kashmiris rebuilt homes, reopened schools, and buried generations under unending uncertainty. The UN resolutions were meant to protect these very people — to prevent them from becoming collateral in an unfinished process.

The promises written in 1948 were not abstract ideals; they were lifelines extended to a population emerging from colonialism into chaos. The fact that those promises remain unfulfilled is not just a political failure — it is a humanitarian one.

Modern Violations and International Response

Since the revocation of Article 370, international attention has again turned toward the region. The UN Human Rights Office has released multiple reports documenting restrictions on expression, arbitrary detentions, and the need for independent investigation. Numerous countries have reiterated that the final status of Jammu and Kashmir should be settled in accordance with UN resolutions and the aspirations of its people.

At the same time, the ceasefire agreement of 2021 between India and Pakistan showed that diplomacy is still possible. For many observers, it was a reminder that despite decades of frustration, the original logic of Resolution 47 — peace before politics — remains the only sustainable path.

Rediscovering Our Heritage — Why These Dates Matter

For young Kashmiris growing up in diaspora communities across Britain, Europe, and North America, the UN resolutions can feel distant — relics of another age. Yet they are crucial to understanding who we are and why our homeland’s story unfolded the way it did.

Every clause, every date, every diplomatic cable is part of the heritage we inherit. These resolutions capture a time when the world recognised Kashmir’s distinct identity and pledged to safeguard it through democratic means. Remembering them is not about reviving old grievances; it is about preserving historical truth against the erosion of silence and misinformation.

The Kashmir Welfare Foundation’s Rediscover Kashmiri Heritage project seeks to document this collective memory — drawing from archives, interviews with elders, and community records — to ensure that future generations understand the legal and moral foundations of their history.

The Unfulfilled Promise of Self-Determination

The UN resolutions on Kashmir stand today as both a beacon and a warning. They remind us that international law once recognised the Kashmiri people’s right to decide their future, yet also demonstrate how that promise can fade amid political expediency.

From Resolution 38’s cautious appeal for restraint to Resolution 122’s reaffirmation of dispute, the record is clear: the world once promised a voice to a people caught between nations. That voice has yet to be heard.

As global attention shifts and generations pass, the moral weight of those resolutions does not diminish. They remain etched in the archives of the United Nations and in the conscience of all who believe that justice delayed is never justice denied.

Preserving History, Protecting Humanity

At Kashmir Welfare Foundation, we believe that understanding history is the first step toward protecting identity. Through our Rediscover Kashmiri Heritage series, we document the stories, treaties, and human experiences that shaped our homeland — not to inflame division, but to inspire knowledge, unity, and compassion.

📜 Learn more about our work in preserving Kashmir’s cultural and humanitarian heritage or support our educational projects today.
➡️ Donate Now