Substantive negotiations between India and Pakistan over the Kashmir dispute have yet to begin ...

Violent acts will take place during a peace process or in the absence of one ... If peace making appears to be making headway, irreconcilable will seek to stop positive momentum. Serious efforts at peace making, however, offer the promise of an end to violence. In contrast, the absence of a peace process invites never-ending sorrow.

In South Asia, unlike the Midale East, the "political track" to conflict resolution has been almost entirely absent. Substantive dialogue between India and Pakistan or between Indian officials and disaffected Kashmiris has rarely occurred. In the absence of purposeful dialogue between aggrieved parties, counter-insurgency operations can have only limited effect.

In India, this conclusion is not broadly accepted and has not yet translated into changes in government policy. As a result, the Government of India relies heavily on a one-track policy based on counter- insurgency operations.

New Delhi's Kashmir policy therefore places a heavy burden on Indian security forces and a heavier burden on Kashmiris. A reconsideration of India's one- track Kashmir policy might therefore be wise. It would also be very difficult to do, given India's domestic politics as well as Pakistan's ... policy toward Kashmir.

Successive governments in Pakistan have publicly maintained that their support for insurgency is limited to moral, political and diplomatic initiatives. But it is widely accepted that Pakistan's military and political leaders have been deeply involved in providing material support to militants in Kashmir ... By supporting the "Kalashnikov culture" ... Pakistan is also playing a very heavy price.

The gun culture and the sectarian violence within Pakistan are growing. The rule of law is endangered. Critical social indicators are trending downward. Meanwhile, militant groups involved in the Kashmir and Afghan struggles educate and train new cadres within Pakistan ...

Pakistan's Kashmir policy might also benefit from a fundamental re-evaluation. Who is benefiting from Pakistan's Kashmir policy? How has a decade of support for the struggle in Kashmir helped Kashmiris or helped Pakistanis? Is Pakistan better off now, after a decade of support for insurgency, than before?

.. Pakistan's wellbeing must be won in Pakistan, not in Afghanistan or in Kashmir

Pakistan, like India, has at present a one-track strategy for Kashmir. ... Pakistan's strategy revolves around support for insurgency. Diplomatic efforts by both countries are designed to place the other in a negative light, not to resolve basic issues. Of course, these one track strategies are mutually reinforcing. They combine to create misery for Kashmiris and for villagers on both sides of Kashmir's Line of Control - the dividing line over which India and Pakistan fought so intensely this summer.

One-track strategies succeed only in negative ways They succeed in allowing ... governments to avoid hard political choices, and they succeed in imposing pain and suffering. The impact of these complementary, one-track strategies differs, however: India appears able to absorb the challenges of counter-insurgency. It is less clear whether Pakistan can continue to absorb the domestic challenges of support for insurgency.

Does this mean that India or Pakistan should give up its claims over Kashmir? No. It means that India and Pakistan should settle their differences in an honourable way, and in a way that involves centrally those who have suffered so much as a result of this dispute. South Asia needs a peace process ... seriousness of purpose.

In the fall of 1998, India and Pakistan finally agreed on a structure for substantive bilateral discussions on Kashmir, peace and security, and on a variety of other topics. Since then, both countries have been on a roller-coaster ride, including nuclear weapon tests, an extraordinary summit meeting in Lahore and the undeclared war this summer along the northern reaches of the Line of Control.

After this undeclared war, trust is in short supply in South Asia ... The Prime Minister Vajpayee has said that (he) is willing to resume substantive dialogue, but that Pakistan's support for militancy across the Line of Control must subside. This is a reasonable position. The new Chief Executive of Pakistan, General Musharraf, has stated his willingness to resume substantive dialogue with India.

Bilateral dialogue is likely to resume before too long. Whether these talks are serious or proforma will depend, in large part, on whether Pakistan and India re-evaluate their separate but interlocking Kashmir policies. If these talks remain rooted in mutually reinforcing one-track strategies, we will continue to witness a dialogue of the deaf. Meanwhile, nuclear capabilities on both sides are growing, along with political alienation in Kashmir and centrifugal forces within Pakistan. (Source: The Hindu, 10 November, 1999)