Opinion | Counterterrorism to Community Building : Changing Army’s Role in Jammu and Kashmir

While counterterrorism remains a core responsibility, the Army has increasingly stepped into the space of community building, development support, and outreach. This evolution reflects a combination of improved security conditions, changes in strategic thinking, and the understanding that lasting peace cannot be achieved through military action alone.

For decades, the Indian Army’s image in Jammu and Kashmir was primarily shaped by its counterterrorism operations. Its presence was seen largely through the lens of security checkpoints, cordon-and-search operations, and gunfights in remote villages and urban pockets. The focus was to restore order, eliminate armed threats, and maintain control over a region that was witnessing a prolonged cycle of violence.

Over the past few years, however, a noticeable shift has been taking place. While counterterrorism remains a core responsibility, the Army has increasingly stepped into the space of community building, development support, and outreach. This evolution reflects a combination of improved security conditions, changes in strategic thinking, and the understanding that lasting peace cannot be achieved through military action alone.

The turning point came as militant activity in many areas began to decline and the Army found opportunities to engage more directly with local communities outside the context of conflict. This included organising sports tournaments, cultural events, and youth interaction programmes under various civic action initiatives. Schools in remote areas received support in the form of infrastructure assistance, computer labs, and study materials. The focus has been on providing opportunities that can counter the narratives of alienation and hopelessness that militants often exploit.

In rural pockets, the Army’s role has expanded to basic development work. In certain border villages, units have assisted in repairing roads, improving water supply, and even setting up skill training centres. Medical camps in far flung areas, where government facilities are scarce, have become a regular feature. These interventions may seem small in the national context, but in communities that have long felt disconnected from state services, they carry a significant emotional and symbolic weight.

The Army’s outreach has also included initiatives aimed at youth engagement. Adventure activities such as trekking expeditions, football and cricket leagues, and vocational training courses have been used to channel the energy of young people towards constructive avenues. Officers often speak of the need to “win hearts and minds” alongside ensuring physical security. The results are visible in the participation levels — in many villages, events organised by the Army now see hundreds of young boys and girls turning up, not only to play or learn but also to interact freely with soldiers they once viewed only as combatants.

This shift has not been without challenges. Skepticism persists in some quarters, shaped by decades of mistrust and political tensions. Critics argue that development work is the domain of civilian agencies and that the Army’s involvement blurs the lines between security forces and governance. However, in areas where geography, remoteness, and years of conflict have kept state services away, the Army’s efforts often fill a vacuum rather than replace an existing structure.

The change in approach also reflects a larger strategic understanding. Counterterrorism operations may suppress threats, but they do not address the underlying socio-economic and psychological factors that allow militancy to find recruits. By investing in community relations, the Army is seeking to build a social environment that is less vulnerable to radicalisation. It is a form of long-term security — one where stability is sustained not just by the absence of violence, but by the presence of trust and opportunity.

In border areas, this community building role takes on an additional dimension. Residents of these regions live under the constant risk of cross-border firing and infiltration attempts. The Army’s proximity means it is often the first responder in times of natural disaster or cross-border flare-ups. Relief distribution during harsh winters, evacuation assistance during floods, and supply of essentials during road blockages have all helped strengthen the perception of the Army as a protector in more ways than one.

This transformation from a purely counterterrorism role to one that includes community building is not a complete departure from the Army’s traditional mandate. Rather, it is an expansion of it, rooted in the belief that peace in Jammu and Kashmir cannot be imposed; it must be nurtured. Security remains the foundation, but on that foundation, bridges of trust, cooperation, and mutual respect are being built.

For the people of Jammu and Kashmir, especially the younger generation, these changes offer a different image of the soldier. Not only as someone who stands guard in the mountains or conducts patrols in the streets, but as someone who can coach a football team, help a school build a science lab, or bring a doctor to a village clinic.

The path ahead will test the durability of this approach. Political complexities, shifting security situations, and socio-economic challenges will continue to shape the Army’s engagement in the region. Yet, the ongoing shift signals a recognition that in places scarred by conflict, building peace is as much about relationships as it is about rifles. In the long run, it is these human connections that could prove to be the most effective shield against the return of violence.

Author can be reached on syedjahanzeeb2@gmail.com