There are three parties: India, Pakistan and the people in Jammu and Kashmir. All the three have fallen into a groove from where it is difficult for them to get out ... They are nowhere near the solution. Nor does it look that they are even attempting it.

New Delhi is most to blame because it has missed the largest number of opportunities. It could have won in a plebiscite up to 1952 when the Kashmiris were still alienated in Pakistan ... It was also possible when Sheikh Abdullah was at. the peak of his popularity for his consistent stand on the limited accession to India. But he was jailed.

Again, there was a chance in 1977 when the Sheikh swept the polls in a free and fair election ... The then Prime Minister, Morarji Desai, refused to go back to the instrument of accession.

Had there been a democratic environment in Kashmir in the last few decades ... the state would not have experienced the militancy ... from 1989. Till then elections were generally bogus and New Delhi would decide who ruled the state. Islamabad, across the border, had always egged on the Kashmiris to rise and defy. The infiltration in 1965, engineered by Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, too, had failed to build up insurgency. But the rigged election in 1987 did what Pakistan's urging could not do. The youth was exasperated. They lost faith in the ballot box and depended on bullets, which Islamabad supplied readily and liberally.

New Delhi has, of late, been indulging in wishful thinking. There were statements such as "the sky is the limit," and "talks with the militants will be held without prior conditions," and more .. But not even . one was followed up. Otherwise, New Delhi would have found what it was willing to give had fallen short of the expectations of the Kashmiris.

Home Minister L.K. Advani has, no doubt, picked up the thread ... The ground has to be prepared before the talks ...

The most important aspect is the government's stand. How far is it willing to go? The ruling National Democratic Alliance has only kept aside Article 370, which guarantees a special status to the state. But the BJP, the dominant partner, favours abolition of the provision.

What about the parties in opposition? They too have to be brought into the picture if the laws outside the three subjects are to be abrogated. Pakistan's culpability is that it has not normalised relations with India because of Kashmir ... At present, Pakistan's dependence is on the articulation of religion. It has come to a point when the fundamentalists dictate terms.

Islamabad has also taken contradictory stands. On the one hand, it says that Kashmir must integrate with Pakistan ... On the other hand, it blesses all those who talk about 'azadi' ... How can Pakistan be serious about 'azadi' when it wants Kashmir to be part of itself?

... The people of J&K (have) got more divided than ever before into three regions: Kashmir, Jammu and Ladakh. Religious identities have rubbed off the old, secular Kashmiriat. The Kashmiri pandits are more or less out of the Valley. The recent carnage near Anantnag has put a question mark over the stay of Sikhs ...

... How does one re-knit the society when the supporters of Kashmiriat are weak and confused? The Hurriyat leadership is itself divided, some are fundamentalist and some still cling on to the Kashmiriat or its pale copy ...

... Only recently did three regions behave differently in the Lok Sabha elections. Because of the Hurriyat, there was, by and large, a boycott of elections in Kashmir, the Valley, while participation in Jammu and Ladakh was enthusiastic. Even on the future status of the state, Jammu and Ladakh are not in favour of 'azadi'; they want to stay within the Indian Union.

Such being the scenario, it is no use going over the same exercise again and again. New formulations are necessary. They will need to be discussed in New Delhi, Islamabad and Srinagar. This requires peace. It may be called a cease-fire. What it boils down to is that all guns, open or secret, direct or indirect, must stop firing. The security forces and the militants coming or getting help from across the border must end their activity. The LoC should be honoured and the armed forces on both sides must stop firing.

Let there be a six-month peace. During this period; there should be talks on Kashmir and other problems between India and Pakistan and between New Delhi and Srinagar ... (Source: The Indian Express, 25 April, 2000)