Abrogation of Article 370 of Kashmir: A Comparative Analysis of English Newspaper Editorials

Abstract

Abstract

On the 5^th of August 2019, the Indian government challenged the semi-autonomous status of disputed region of Jammu & Kashmir through the abolishment of decades-old laws. Abrogation of Article 370 not only triggered controversial reactions throughout the world but it also presented contradicting depiction of the incident. The current study is aimed at exploring the power of words reflecting differences in ideological perspectives of three different countries regarding one of the most crucial issues surrounding Kashmir. The researchers have examined the frames adopted in newspaper editorials of three countries, this is to say, the editorials of Dawn from Pakistan, Times of India from India and The New York Times from United States of America. While portraying the incident, all the articles mirrored ideological perspectives of their respective countries. Pakistani media acknowledged the issue of Kashmir as a grave injustice to the Kashmiri people and portrayed India as an inhumane actor in order to express its rage. On the other hand, the editorials of Times of India regarded the incident of abrogation of Article 370 in the best interest of the people of Kashmir and Indian government as well. Where Indian and Pakistani editorials proved to be predictable, the editorials of USA demonstrated an unbiased attitude by criticizing and scolding India for initiating a one-sided barbaric action of abrogation of article 370 that resulted in the oppression of Kashmiris. This study revealed that media manipulates reality for political and economic gains and prevents the crucial issues from getting resolved.

        Keywords: Discourse, Kashmir, Ideology, Framing, Article 370