If we did it

Just a few months ago, the Pakistani pop group Junoon held a concert in Kashmir, a historic first for a music event of this type. Who would have guessed there is so much latent passion for freedom among Kashmiri youth. Of course, the youth seen cheering here are almost certainly distinct from the youth attacking CRPF posts.

So far the media has responded to the Kashmir fiasco with hysteria, recycled paranoia, utter lies and criminal propaganda. Not a single secular intellectual has pointed his finger at the biggest villain in this drama - Mehbooba Mufti. By all indications Mufti and her party precipitated the crisis in the first place. She can not claim to want a peaceful resolution and then annihilate the state Government by pulling out support.

The PDP issue shows that dialog as a tool for conflict resolution breaks down miserably under certain circumstances. Before the conflict Kashmir was deemed to be a mix of pro-India and pro-Pak people and everything in between. Now it looks like it is a mix of a small number of undecided and a large number of pro-freedom. There is a reason the hardliner separatists did not want to participate in the elections. They didn't want to legitimize the "occupation". This is where Mufti dealt a body blow to the whole constitutional approach. She ate her cake and now holding it too and the rest of Kashmir is eating out of her hands.

So, the big question is should we let the inevitable happen and liberate Kashmir? At least three intellectuals have opined we should. S. Aiyar, Vir Singhvi and of course Suzanna Roy.

It does not look like the major political parties can make that call, unless it really escalates into an ugly imbroglio (say around 50,000 casualties etc.). While the protests do appear massive, primarily due to media overreach, we sense a phoniness here. Although the hardline separatist leader Geelani has proudly proclaimed himself to be a Pakistani and expressed his wish to join Pakistan, the other parties are much less enthused. Everyone appears to be hedging their bets. Omar Abdullah has threatened to resign but has not yet lent support to freedom, nor have the Conference leaders. While all the stakeholders have hardened their stands, no one appears to want to make the first call for a full scale rebellion.

Yet, the developments in Pakistan appear to be intimately linked to the Kashmir crisis. Now that Mushy is safely out the door, they are finally looking at a South Asian style competitive democracy. The Kashmir fever runs pretty high Pakistan plus they want to give us back our dues for liberating Bangladesh.

The most likely scenario thus is a joint effort by Pakistani democratic establishment and some separatist factions in Kashmir. In this way the "moderate" separatists (whatever that means) can avoid the risk of being seen as responsible for violence. There is a big opportunity here for Pakistan as well. Once Mushy is gone, they will require another bargaining chip against increasing US involvement. Russia will be more than willing to provide this support.

India needs to plan for this contingency. It would be good to put some ground rules in place. First of all, we get to keep Jammu and possibly Ladakh. Secondly, no more aid of any form to Kashmir, trade will be contingent on continuance of Yatra. India will not meddle in the inevitable Kashmiri civil war between pro-Pakistanis and pro-freedom people (or between any number of assorted power grabbers) nor should we deploy our army if any"tribal" invasion of Kashmir happens. It is highly desirable to have the population exchange on India's terms. Also - no infiltration.

Unfortunately, the most likely Indian response will be too muck it all up. They will react too late and end up giving massive aid to Kashmir. We will also end up losing Amarnath. Otherwise you will never hear the end of it from our bleeding heart liberals (who want to give away Kashmir in the first place).