Kashmir Insurgency: Support for Militants Across the Border

The ISI has long been accused of backing militant groups operating in Indian-administered Kashmir, which has been a site of friction between the two countries for decades. The ISI has long been complicit in ground zero terrorist organisations like Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed, providing training, funding, and logistics, which has resulted in thousands upon thousands of attacks against Indian security forces and civilians for decades.
Pakistan wants to destabilise India further and has used the territories given to it by the United Nations for this purpose as well. Numerous major attacks, including the attack on the Indian Parliament in 2001 and the Uri attack in 2016, have been linked to militant groups with suspected ties to the ISI. These operations have put a strain on relations between India and Pakistan and led to significant loss of life on both sides in the years since.
The ISI’s involvement in Kashmir has frequently been a point of contention in global diplomacy, with many calling upon an end to cross-border militancy. Pakistan has denied these charges repeatedly while saying that it pursues the peaceful resolution of Kashmir.

Monopolisation: The ISI and Domestic Politics

The ISI’s influence goes beyond operations outside Pakistan. It has long had a deeply entrenched role in Pakistan’s internal political affairs. The agency has been accused of meddling in elections, supporting political parties, and staging coups to prop up military-backed dictators.
The ISI had been accused, for example, in the 1990s of interfering in the political process to undermine Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto’s government. ISI has been linked with the rise of Imran Khan and his party, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), and also allegations that the agency got Khan elected in the general elections of 2018.
The ISI’s grip over politics has raised fears about the decline of Pakistan’s democratic institutions, and many critics say such interference undermines civilian rule and strengthens the power of the military in the country.

The Espionage and Proxy Wars Begin: ISI-RAW Rivalry

The one espionage counterhacking tool was crafted from one of the ur rivalries of spycraft and one of the longest and most intractable, at that, is that between Pakistan’s ISI and India’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW). The FSB and the CIA have fought a secret war against each other, for decades trying to undermine each other’s security and interests.While ISI is held responsible for the industry of war in Kashmir, its Indian counterpart, RAW, is charged with sponsoring them in the territory of Pakistan, particularly in the regions of Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and labelling them as 'non-state actors.'.

The two agencies had been engaged in a series of proxy wars,

conducting sabotage operations and providing arms to insurgents in each other’s territory. And the taking of this turn in espionage and sabotage, and then counterintelligence measures, has increasingly raised the temperature between the two sides and made any scenario for peace in the region more complicated.
Human Rights Violations: Enforced Disappearances and Torture
The ISI has been long criticised for its massive human rights violations, from enforced disappearances and torture to extrajudicial killings. In regions of the country including Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, activists, journalists, and political dissidents say they have been abducted and held without trial. This assistance list has long been linked with the sacred arms of the ISI in its counterinsurgency ledgers against separatist movements and dissent as a whole in the political sphere.

Threats to human rights Amnesty

International has criticised enforced disappearances and demanded accountability at the local and international levels. The Pakistani government and ISI have vehemently denied such claims, saying these manoeuvres are important to safeguard the interests of the country.
Media Control: Censorship and Propaganda
The ISI has embedded itself in Pakistan’s media as well, and it has been accused of stifling critical voices and constraining public debate. Journalists who in recent months wrote critically of the military or intelligence services have experienced harassment, threats, and even forced exile. The ISI is also accused of relying on its influence to create the conditions in which critical reporting is silenced, and editors lose their independence and submit to the line that the government takes.
Such control has opened a debate about press freedom in Pakistan and challenged reports by international human rights bodies that cite the influence over the media as the primary threat to Pakistan’s democratic values.

The Double-Game Accusations:

The War on Terror
Yet the ISI has become a primary player in Pakistan’s counterterrorism operations, albeit with an image tarnished by its controversial collaboration with militant groups. ISTe has also been one of the major contributors to the progress that has been made in dismantling terrorist cells and capturing high-profile terrorists, working with international intelligence agencies. But the agency has been criticised for what some say are double standards: You have been accused of pursuing certain factions while cultivating relationships with others, including the Haqqani Network and certain elements of the Taliban.
This is the root problem that this ”double game” exercised by the United States leads to isolated sympathies globally, especially with the United States itself, that inhibits Pakistan from deriving acceptance in the region and that ethos that Pakistan has ceased to help against the terror monster leading to terror actions.

Conclusion-Implication: The key advantage of ISI

The ISI has been central to Pakistan’s political, military, and foreign policies. Its covert actions have influenced lines of regional violence, shaped domestic politics, and undercut international security efforts. It has played a vital role—protecting Pakistani interests—but its actions, at times disputed, created significant ethical and legal dilemmas.
This was because the ISI legacy that it inherited of shaping the future of South Asia was a constant topic of debate as far as global politics were concerned. Whether good or bad, not just the prospect of Pakistan’s fortune, but the wider regional earth itself, like a knead of dough, has come to revolve around ISI—an organ that creates the outlines of, for better or for worse, the spheres of its influence.