(A key G20 meeting, scheduled to be held in Srinagar from 22 May onwards, has ignited a debate about the choice of venue, given the political sensitivities surrounding Kashmir. While this piece argues in favour of the choice of venue, the arguments against it can be found here.)
India is hosting a meeting of the G20 working group on tourism on 22-24 May in Srinagar. This is part of the process of convening G20 meetings on different issues and subjects in different parts of the country. The Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh are parts of India and it is, therefore, entirely appropriate, as a general proposition, to hold G20 meetings in these Union Territories.
At the same time, the union territory of Jammu and Kashmir has been subjected to decades of terrorism emanating from Pakistan. Hence, the security situation in the union territory has to be taken into account while organising such meetings. It is apparent that the government is confident that it can ensure security for G20 officials and hence, there should be no reluctance in organising such meetings in the Kashmir valley.
Predictably, Pakistan strongly objected to India hosting the G20 tourism working group meeting in Srinagar.