Earlier quoted context omitted.
HK used to be more stable and is a highly visible global node that is well connected, exports cultural products, and is home to foreign offices for a lot of companies. It’s very easy to cover HK given that, say, the NYT has been there for the past few decades and has staffers who have directly observed changes throughout that time. My impression of Kashmir is that the situation hasn’t been positive for a very long ti…
Also, in Kashmir's case, the lines become blurry because on one hand you have excesses from the Indian state, and on the other hand you have a bloody armed insurgent movement which sometimes is just separatist and sometimes also coloured on religious lines. It is quite a controversial topic and when someone looking from outside can't even gauge the recent issue at hand correctly[1], you can't expect them to have the…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_guerrilla_movements https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_rebel_groups
kashmir has been fighting against both india and pakistan on many fronts ever since this issue began. the state of kashmir has been essentially fighting war of independence against foreign oppressive rule for the past 500 years.
so what 30 years ago pakistan convinced and managed to turn thousands of kashmiris as pawns in a proxy war with india. that doesnt mean kashmir is with pakistan, on the contrary, people in pakistan occupied kashmir protest against their oppression daily.
why do you think just because someone picked a gun that they have muddied the waters and only way out is to surrender because you cannot do an armed struggle?