India's Kashmir railway is an engineering feat - and an occupation project
On 5 June, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi inaugurated a new railway project in Indian-occupied Kashmir.
In scenes that have since been played on a loop and celebrated across India, Modi is seen gripping an Indian flag high above his head, and dramatically marching across a bridge like a standard-bearer of a conquering army.
To accomplish this railroad project, Indian engineers had to build the "world's highest bridge", 359 metres above the Chenab river bed in Jammu. Likewise, the Anji Khad Bridge, India's first cable-stayed railway bridge, towers 331 metres above the river gorge.
"This shows that our resolve is as big as the dream for India's development," Modi said after signalling the commencement of the rail line and the two new rail bridges over the Chenab and Anji Rivers, on 5 June.
He added that the network "ensures all-weather connectivity" and will "boost spiritual tourism and create livelihood opportunities".
The Vande Bharat (Praise India) train, which connects the northernmost part of Indian-occupied Kashmir to Katra in Jammu, has been marketed as "setting a new benchmark in comfort for the people of Jammu and Kashmir".
But as hinted by Modi, the train is not for Kashmiris.
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
Instead, it serves Indian interests: transporting Hindu pilgrims, flooding the region with Indian tourists, and crucially, creating a direct line for the transfer of troops and resources for the Indian military.
Militarised mobility
A new documentary by Channel 4, Is India quietly tightening its grip on Kashmir? - released in mid-June - found that the number of Indian troops in Jammu and Kashmir was on the rise.
It is estimated that up to 750,000 troops, or around half of India's total army, were now operating in the region.
India's ambition in Kashmir is so thinly veiled that the train itself was suffused in saffron orange, the colour of Hindu nationalism and the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
Usually, trains in India are blue, red or green.
In this, India borrows from the colonial textbook of using bridges and railways as means to exert influence over territory as well as to communicate power and imperial ambition.
India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi holding national flag during the inauguration of the Chenab Rail Bridge, on 6 June (Indian Press Information Bureau/AFP)
There are numerous examples of such efforts in history.
In its bid to transform Mexico into a modern state, the Spanish introduced European infrastructure, including roads and buildings.
But it was the British who pioneered the use of bridges and railways to consolidate trade and ensure the mobility of their troops.
Even the King Hussein or Allenby Bridge that connects Jordan to Israel, used today as an alternative route into the West Bank (via Israel), was initially constructed by the British during World War One as a crossing point for troops.
Constructed ties
Beyond the obvious imperialist ambitions of the Indian state to build a breathtaking connection to Kashmir, the sheer scale of the project itself is reason enough to understand why the connection between Kashmir and India has had to be literally constructed - it is not natural.
The sheer scale of the project is reason enough to understand why the connection between Kashmir and India has had to be literally constructed - it is not natural
Before the 1950s, the Kashmir Valley had no year-round connection to the Indian mainland to its south, as the bitter winters made the road up in the Himalayan mountains to Kashmir impassable.
As part of the historic Silk Road, Kashmir traces a longer and stronger history with the areas to its west, including cities in today's Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir, such as Muzaffarabad, Rawalpindi, and Lahore, as well as the Central Asian cities of Bukhara, Samarkand, Kabul and Kashgar.
And had it not been for the Boundary Commission suspiciously giving the Muslim-majority Punjab district of Gurdaspur (technically meant to be given to Pakistan) to India on 17 August 1947 - two days after Indian independence, no less - Delhi wouldn't have even had a road link to Kashmir in the summer.
It was only in 1956 that India blasted a tunnel through the Pir Panjal mountain to arrange access through the winter.
Even then, the priority was for the transportation of troops and tourists.
And as the years went by and Delhi looked to reinforce ties with Kashmir, by installing puppet regimes, promoting development and marketing tourism in the valley as a means to assimilate Kashmir with India, the people of Kashmir continued to be separated from their loved ones by an artificial border with Pakistan-administered Kashmir, called the Line of Control.
A general view of Chenab bridge, the world's highest rail arch bridge in Reasi, Jammu and Kashmir, on 6 July 2024 (Tauseef Mustafa/AFP)
That the bridge today is being flaunted as a means to connect India with Kashmir, for the development of Kashmir, while Kashmiris are divided from each other across the Line of Control, is a historic injustice.
It raises questions, too, about whether Indian or western scholars are even remotely interested in hearing who Kashmiris regard as "invaders" and "infiltrators" in their native land.
Empty promises
Beyond the spectacle, other dimensions of the project lay bare the absurdities of this Indian project.
Throughout the project's construction, Kashmiri farmers lamented about the impact it would have on their farms and homes.
In some cases, farmland was razed and families were displaced to make way for the railway line.
India's attack on Pakistan is a declaration of Israel-style expansionism Read More »
Of course, the train will be used by Kashmiris - in the same way the much-mythologised Indian independence leader Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi travelled in British trains, even as he waged a famous critique over their rapid expansion across India.
In his book Hind Swaraj, Gandhi wrote, "The English could not have such a hold on India as they have. Railways accentuate the evil nature of man: Bad men fulfil their evil designs with greater rapidity."
But even as the rail project has opened, regular travel is not about to become seamless either.
Passengers from Srinagar will be required to disembark in Jammu for additional security checks before heading to Delhi. This itself negates the promise of seamless connectivity.
That the Indian state and its sycophantic media would tout how the railway would improve connectivity in a region that endures some of the world's longest internet shutdowns - and where journalists cannot report freely without receiving a knock on the door from Indian intelligence - is as ludicrous as believing that Delhi - overseeing a country with more inequality today than under the British Colonial Raj - is on the cusp of becoming a world power.
Myth of progress
At its core, the railway project is not just an engineering marvel - it is an act of empire-making. And empire-making is a fundamental part of this story.
"Designed to overcome the region's challenging geography, it connects remote areas to the national rail network and marks a new chapter in mobility, trade and tourism for Jammu and Kashmir," the Indian government said.
The inability of Indian media and scholars to see this engineering feat as anything but proof of Delhi's costly and unnatural grip on Kashmir makes for a stunning study of mass delusion
"Built to endure tremors, strong winds and shifting geology, the Anji Khad Bridge is more than an engineering feat," it added.
Its purportedly unbreakable quality is further enhanced by the notion that it's also bombproof.
One might think that a multi-billion-dollar railway, specifically constructed to overcome nature's objections - landslides, fragile ecology, and extreme weather - would be deemed proof of incongruity with the geography.
But here, it is seen as a Titanesque symbol of India's rise and Modi's legacy.
That Indian media and scholars are unable to see the engineering feat in Kashmir as anything but proof of how costly and unnatural Delhi's determination to wrestle control over Kashmir, not to mention its imperial and colonial genealogies, makes for a stunning study of mass delusion.
We might call it Indian nationalism.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Middle East Eye
11 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
Indian Prime Minister calls for de-escalation in phone call with Iran's president
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has urged calm and dialogue during a phone conversation with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, according to a statement from India's foreign ministry. Modi was briefed on the latest developments in the Iran-Israel conflict during the call, the ministry said on Sunday. He 'emphasised the need for immediate de-escalation, dialogue and diplomacy as the way forward' and reaffirmed India's backing for 'early restoration of regional peace, security and stability,' the statement added.
Middle East Eye
14 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
US strikes Iran: Israelis hail attack and hope it will end the war
Israelis awoke on Sunday to the dramatic news that the United States had launched air strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities, marking Washington's entry into the war Israel began against Iran just over a week ago. But celebrations were short-lived. By 7:30am, air raid sirens wailed across the country as Iran fired a wave of missiles. As Israelis waited in bomb shelters, the missiles struck Tel Aviv and Haifa, wounding several and causing significant damage. Despite the attacks, many Israelis expressed support for US President Donald Trump's decision to heed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's call to join the fight. "The US has bombs we don't have. That's what should have happened," said Stav, a Tel Aviv resident. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Another local, Tal, told Middle East Eye he hoped the strikes would "end the war more quickly and reduce the missile fire", adding he wished they would "eliminate Iran's nuclear programme and ballistic missiles". Many in the Israeli media were also satisfied by the attack. Senior journalist Ben Caspit, who is considered one of Netanyahu's harshest critics, wrote on X: "History. We waited for it for 15 years. We will wait for the damage assessment and the Iranian response. Thank you, President Trump." 'Iran can't escalate their response too much' - Tal, Tel Aviv resident Yaron Avraham, the political correspondent for Channel 12, Israel's leading news channel, did not wait for the attack's assessment to heap praise on Netanyahu. "A tremendous success for Netanyahu, who is currently writing a legacy in the field that he first warned about, even when everyone ridiculed him and few believed," he wrote on his X account. According to Avraham, Netanyahu's success was expressed in the initiative to attack Iran first and the recruitment of Trump to join the attack, which gave "a decisive blow to the three significant nuclear facilities, first and foremost, Fordow". Tal also praised the collaboration between Trump and Netanyahu. "They put on a good show. If it will destroy Iran's nuclear programme, then you can say that they did a good job," he told MEE. Stav said that Trump and Netanyahu "did a great job. Bibi [Netanyahu] restored Israel's honour with the war in Iran after what happened in Gaza". 'Iran can't escalate' Support for the US attack cut across political lines in Israel, with both right- and left-leaning figures praising the move. Tomer Persico, an academic who is considered in Israel to be a left-leaning Zionist, wrote this morning on his X account that "the subjugation of Iran is a significant basis for the establishment of a Middle East of regional alliances and not of terrorist proxies". "From here, we must move towards a regional agreement that includes normalisation with Saudi Arabia and a move towards the final condition for a new Middle East: the establishment of a Palestinian state," Persico added. Iranians say their hopes of peace have been buried by US bombs Read More » Despite public support, life in Israel remains far from normal. The Home Front Command has restricted activity across the country, allowing only essential workers to report to their jobs. In Tel Aviv, streets remain noticeably emptier than usual for a Sunday, as many residents stay near shelters for a second consecutive week. Stav, one of many Israelis unable to work due to the war, said this is "what we have to go through. There's no other choice". "I hope it will end as soon as possible, and we can live with Iran in peace," Stav said of the possibility that the war would escalate now. Tal is less worried about a potential escalation in the war. "Iran can't escalate their response too much," he told MEE. "Iran will want to make some kind of agreement. I don't know how long it will take, but it's worth it,."
Middle East Eye
14 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
US lawmakers divided on Iran strikes largely along party lines
US lawmakers have had a mixed reaction to the country's strikes on Iran, with responses largely split down party lines. President Donald Trump said the US had targeted three nuclear sites in Iran late on Saturday, as Washington directly joined Israel's days-long assault on the Islamic Republic. The threat of war between the US and Iran has been on the cards for decades and the attack was the fulfillment of a long-standing wish for some, while others dreaded the spectre of the US entering another Middle East war. Left-wing Senator Bernie Sanders was giving a speech at a rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, when he learned of the attack on Iran, which he denounced as "unconstitutional". As he read out the statement from Trump on the attack, the crowd started booing and chanting "no more war" to which Sanders responded "I agree". New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters "All of you know that the only entity that can take this country to war is the US Congress. The president does not have the right," he said. Other Democrats, particularly on the progressive wing, also condemned the attacks. Democratic California Congressman Ro Khanna condemned the attack taking place "without any authorisation of Congress" and said on X that Congress needed to urgently support his "War Powers Resolution to prevent America from being dragged into another endless Middle East war". Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez called for Trump to be impeached over the assault. "The President's disastrous decision to bomb Iran without authorisation is a grave violation of the Constitution and Congressional War Powers," she said on X. "He has impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations. It is absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment." US strikes on Iran: How the world reacted Read More » Other more centrist Democrats also criticised the attacks, albeit often while also condemning Iran. Hakeem Jeffries, leader of the House Democratic Caucus, said the authority to launch a war should rest with Congress, but also said Iran was an "enemy" of the US who could "never be permitted to become a nuclear-capable power". US Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer, a longtime opponent of Iran, said a vote needed to be called in Congress on the war. A number of Democrats, primarily staunch Israel supporters, threw their weight behind the attacks. "As I've long maintained, this was the correct move by [Trump]," wrote Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman. "Iran is the world's leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities. I'm grateful for and salute the finest military in the world." Republicans rejoice Republicans largely threw their support behind the attacks. "This was the right call. The regime deserves it. Well done, President @realDonaldTrump," wrote South Carolina Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, a longtime supporter of attacking Iran. "To my fellow citizens: We have the best Air Force in the world. It makes me so proud. Fly, Fight, Win." Rick Crawford, an Arkansas Republican and chair of the House Intelligence Committee, also supported the attack, saying he regretted "that Iran has brought the world to this point". There were, however, a handful of Republicans who criticised the attack. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a far-right congresswoman associated with Trump's Make America Great Again (MAGA) faction, has been staunchly opposed to US involvement in a war on Iran. In a post on X she wrote: "Let us all join together and pray for peace."
