After the 1947-48 invasion of Kashmir by the Pakistan-backed jihadists and the ensuing military action by India, and the consequent take over of parts of Kashmir by Pakistan and India respectively, there seems to have followed a period of relative calm in the Indian-held Kashmir, which lasted for over four dacades. Am I right?
Or, have there also been periods of protests and separatist struggle in the Indian-held Kashmir during the period from 1948 to 1988, just like those that the state has witnessed since 1989?
However, in 1989, unrest began in Kashmir and the resulting military operations by the Indian government to quell the trouble, a cycle which has by and large persisted in the state ever since, with a varying degree of intensity. Is it not the case?
Now my question is, why is it that the Kashmiris (and their Pakistani backers) started their protests and separatist struggle after having remained passive for such a long time?
To buy the version of the Government of India, if it is Pakistan's mischief, then why is it that Pakistan has waited so long for making this kind of "mischief"?
What prompted this change in the approach of the Kashmiri militants / separatists and what prompted this change of their Pakistani supporters?
Or, is it some action(s) and / or shift in the policies of the Indian government post mid-to-late 1980s that led things to come to such a pass toward the end of that dacade?