[Reader-list] Kashmir...

[junaid]

  I wonder how the mainstream Indian discourse on Kashmir has been internalized, so much that independence for Kashmir as a non-possibility is seen as natural and obvious. What is it that makes even the Indian Kashmir-sympathizers take anything-short-of-independence as axiomatic? Why can't anyone here make a reasonable, educated argument about why this should be the case? 

Do not speak of size, for Kashmir (valley) is definitely larger than many countries in the world. If you speak of its land-lockedness, then I can count you a number of European and Asian countries that are small and land-locked. If you speak of three Asian bullies—India, Pakistan and China—surrounding it, then I must say international treaties, bilateral non-aggression pacts, and Kashmir's neutrality will be Kashmir's best defense. Aren't so many small countries surviving, and actually doing well, with really no defense in place, but just goodwill and international norms? If you say, lack of economic self-reliance, then I will just point to the great natural and human resources in Kashmir. 

And if it is a unique case, then let it be a unique country in the world. Weak, Poor, and Defenceless. But a country whose people are the masters of their fate.  

If you are still stuck up on "anything-short-of..." argument then I must tell you Kashmiris really don’t give a damn. They fight for freedom, and they will surely learn how to handle it. Before British left Indian subcontinent, they used to make a similar argument. The Indian visionaries made the counter argument that you can't learn to love freedom and democracy unless you taste it. Although Indians have not come up to the expectations, and its elite--Brahmanical as well as corporate--have cozened and defrauded the lower castes and the poor, yet India is not doing that badly. Since Kashmir is not beset with so many contradictions like post-independence India, I guess it will outdo India in preserving freedom. 

Kashmir is too beautiful to stay occupied.