Abstract

Why does the Kashmir conflict continue to persist even 60 years since its origin? The article raises this question with specific reference to Indian strategy. Most of India’s ethno-national conflicts have been solved within the framework of the Constitution of 1947 and within the boundary of the Indian state. Why is Kashmir different? The article calls for fresh thinking in the light of the theory of ‘principled negotiation’, and applies it to the complex politics of Kashmir where militancy, extra-territorial loyalties and democratic politics are entangled, and ensconced within deeply divided ethnic identities. The article explains why the conventional Indian model of coping, based on the negotiated accommodation of sub-national movements through a strategic combination of force, power-sharing and federalisation, has only been partially successful in Kashmir, and offers some radical steps towards a more satisfactory solution.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call