For a country that has relentlessly challenged India on Kashmir, Pakistan today has no credible political alternative to offer, except what it thinks to be a future with the gun.This stark new reality may not have come so clearly to the fore had it not been for the bluster from Islamabad that followed India’s decision to withdraw Article 370 from J&K. Pakistan has let no opportunity go by to come across as a self-appointed champion of the ‘Kashmir cause’.The truth is, from political devolution to human rights, it is guilty of doing far more and worse than what it accuses India of doing.Pakistan bifurcated the part of J&K on its side of the Line of Control (LoC) in 1949 itself, through the Karachi Agreement, into what it calls ‘Azad Jammu & Kashmir’ (AJK) and the Northern Areas, renamed Gilgit-Baltistan in 2009. Gilgit-Baltistan occupies 85% of Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (POK).As part of the erstwhile Kashmir princely state, it should have remained part of POK. But it was separated and brought under direct control of the federal government in Islamabad. A joint secretary in the 1953-created Ministry of Kashmir and Northern Affairs managed the affairs of Gilgit-Baltistan.Even as the area remained disputed, Pakistan unilaterally ceded 5,180 sq km of Gilgit-Baltistan territory to China under a 1963 Sino-Pakistani boundary agreement. None of these decisions, including the bifurcation in 1949, involved the local population of Gilgit-Baltistan.In 1974, Pakistan abolished what was called ‘state subject rule’ in the Northern Areas, thereby allowing Pakistanis to reside, purchase and own properties in the region.While these developments took place, tempers arose in AJK, as locals considered the Northern Areas as part of Kashmir state. At some point in the 1990s, a court in AJK even ruled that the Northern Areas was part of Kashmir. But the federal government in Islamabad appealed to the Supreme Court and had the order overturned.It wasn’t until 1994 that some fundamental rights came into place under Section 19A of the Northern Areas Legal Framework Order. In 2009, Pakistan passed an empowerment and selfgovernance order for Gilgit-Baltistan under pressure, which still didn’t fully recognise the legal rights of residents there.Another show of power being devolved to the Gilgit-Baltistan assembly was made through an order in May last year. This, too, came with a rider that the Pakistani PM could overrule or veto any law passed by the Gilgit-Baltistan assembly. Islamabad’s desire for control over this area has only grown since much of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) runs through this area. In strategic terms, it’s the CPEC’s nerve centre. Which is why China reacted so sharply to India’s new steps in J&K.In POK’s case, the Pakistani ruling elite was extremely careful not to let any rights flow into the hands of Kashmiris. Until 1961, AJK was governed directly from Islamabad, with considerable authority vested in the chief plebiscite officer, later called chief adviser to the Pakistan government.He was essentially a joint secretary-level officer appointed by Islamabad. Pakistan then sought to introduce a half-baked presidential system in AJK through the Basic Democracies Act in 1961, where the president would be elected indirectly by an electoral college. This also did not work. In 1974, the Pakistani national assembly passed a legislation to adopt a parliamentary system there.But the real power has rested with a 13-member apex AJK Council chaired by the Pakistani PM. This has had six Pakistan government nominees, who were usually federal ministers. With the PM included, the majority in the council is with Islamabad.In fact, it wasn’t until last year that the AJK assembly managed to amend the 1974 order to ensure that AJK residents were granted the same fundamental rights enjoyed by Pakistani citizens.The most telling feature in POK is the clause in the AJK Constitution that “no person or political party is permitted to propagate against, or take part in activities prejudicial or detrimental to, the ideology of the State’s accession to Pakistan”.The 1970 AJK election ordinance states that anyone found propagating against the ideology of Pakistan, or ‘defames’ the judiciary or the armed forces of Pakistan, would be disqualified. Needless to say, this has been liberally used to quell dissent.Clearly, all that Pakistan has tried to do over the last 70 years is control Kashmir as an asset, suppress the Kashmiri voice, and sell off or cede Kashmiri territory without consent to allies like China.Yet, the cause has been kept alive as a political project that fuels the Pakistani Army, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), whose officials, even after retirement, train terrorist groups to attack India. Over the years, Kashmir has become the military’s show in Pakistan.What the latest Indian actions have done is given Pakistani politicians a chance to play out the old act of giving cover fire to Rawalpindi yet again. With or without Article 370, GoI remains politically accountable in J&K.New Delhi believes it took a step necessary to improve governance, and is willing to take the political risk associated with executing this responsibility. Pakistan, on the other hand, sacrificed the ‘Kashmir cause’ at the altar of terrorism long ago. This has blunted its credibility and killed any hope it may have ever offered to Kashmir, both as a State and as a benefactor.