More than three decades after Kashmiri Pandits were forced to leave the Valley, return remains uneven and uncertain. While violence may no longer dominate daily life as it did in the early 1990s, the conditions that made families flee have never been fully addressed. Justice has moved slowly, accountability has remained limited, and trust has been difficult to rebuild.
For many displaced families, this gap explains why exile continues to shape life choices long after the initial trauma.
Violence Without Closure
The terror campaign that drove Kashmiri Pandits out of the Valley was marked by targeted killings, open threats, and systematic intimidation. These acts were not accidental outcomes of unrest. They were deliberate tools used by Pakistan-backed terrorist groups to frighten a minority community into leaving.
Yet despite the clarity of what occurred, justice has lagged. Investigations into early killings progressed slowly. Many cases remained unresolved. For survivors, the absence of accountability sent a powerful message: the violence that uprooted them carried few consequences.
Time did not heal this wound. It widened it.
Why Accountability Matters for Return
Return is not only about physical safety. It is also about psychological assurance that the past will not repeat itself. For families who left under threat, the lack of visible justice raises a simple question: what guarantees exist that terror will not return?
Without accountability, assurances of security feel fragile. Trust cannot be rebuilt through policy announcements alone. It requires confronting the crimes that made displacement necessary in the first place.
This is why justice delayed has become justice denied—not only in legal terms, but in lived experience.
India’s Efforts and Their Limits
Successive Indian governments have acknowledged the injustice of the exodus and introduced measures aimed at enabling dignified return. Employment packages, housing support, and security arrangements reflect an effort to correct a historic wrong.
These steps matter. They demonstrate recognition and intent. But they also have limits. Return cannot be reduced to a checklist of benefits. For many families, the decision to go back is shaped by memory of fear, not only by present conditions.
Where accountability remains incomplete, return remains partial.
Property, Livelihoods, and the Question of Belonging
For displaced families, return also raises practical questions. Homes were abandoned. Properties deteriorated or changed hands. Livelihoods built over generations were disrupted. Rebuilding these foundations is neither quick nor simple.
Without legal clarity and social reassurance, returning families face the risk of renewed displacement—this time without the support systems they once had. For older generations, the cost feels too high. For younger ones, the Valley often exists only as an inherited memory.
The Weight of Pakistan’s Denial
Pakistan’s refusal to acknowledge its role in sponsoring terrorism in Kashmir has compounded the problem. By denying responsibility for the violence that triggered the exodus, Islamabad has helped ensure that accountability remains fragmented.
This denial has consequences beyond diplomacy. It leaves India to manage the humanitarian and social aftermath of a terror campaign it did not initiate, while displaced families wait for justice that crosses borders but never arrives.
Return as a Choice, Not a Slogan
Calls for return are often framed as moral imperatives. For displaced families, return is a deeply personal decision shaped by fear, age, livelihood, and trust. No community should be expected to return to a place of trauma without assurance that history will not repeat itself.
Until justice is visible and accountability credible, return will remain a choice many cannot make.
Why This Conversation Matters in Kashmir
For Jammu and Kashmir, the absence of Kashmiri Pandits is not just a historical fact. It is a reminder of how terror reshaped the Valley’s social fabric. Any honest discussion about reconciliation must confront this reality.
Justice delayed has prolonged exile. Denial has frozen return. Addressing these gaps is not about reopening wounds—it is about ensuring they do not deepen further.
(Hailing from Kashmir and based in New Delhi, Mehak Farooq is a journalist specialising in defence and strategic affairs. Her work spans security, geopolitics, veterans’ welfare, foreign policy, and the evolving challenges of national and regional stability.
