At the same time, renewed fears of a Sino-Indian confrontation have surfaced, especially in the disputed Kashmir region. Kashmir is a lingering reminder of the painful partition that India and Pakistan experienced in 1947.

Pangong Tso is a lake divided between India and China. Photo: Luv Puri

Luv Puri is a journalist who has reported on the Jammu and Kashmir conflict from both sides of the Line of Control for The Hindu newspaper. He comments on Sino-Indian border tensions.

China and India have often been portrayed as the major drivers of the future. Ties between the two Asian giants have deep historical roots, and in the recent economic meltdown each has proved its economic worth.

But quite apart from grand economic plans and new global alignments, a different reality is taking shape in both India and China (which are both nuclear-armed). The Chinese and Indian strategic communities are stoking fears about each other, which may hold back economic success by diverting state resources to perceived military threats.

Both countries have demonstrated their resilience and self-reliance. These two countries constitute the bulk of the increasingly powerful BRIC group (Brazil, Russia, India and China). The BRIC heads of state met recently in Russia, indicating their rising ambition to leverage their enhanced economic clout and influence geopolitics.

But in May, India sent three army divisions — 60,000 soldiers — to its northeastern border with China. India is also strengthening its presence along the Chinese border, in the Ladakh region of Jammu and Kashmir. Last November, India decided to reactivate an important air strip last used in the 1962 Indo-China war. Indian military officers described this as an attempt to “match” the Chinese.

In December 2007, Indian Defense Minister A.K. Antony visited the Indo-China border and stated that he would “vigorously” pursue steps to develop the frontier areas. He said, “It is an eye-opener for me. There is no comparison between the two sides. Infrastructure on the Chinese side is far superior. They have gone far in developing their infrastructure.”

The Chinese swear that they have no evil designs against India, and that their policy is defined by the desire for peaceful co-existence. In Ladakh, Chinese officials stated that the main purpose of building a major road was to improve transport and communication within its territory, as the area connects the Chinese states of Tibet and Xinjiang. An editorial in the China-based “Global Times” stated:

India’s current course can only lead to a rivalry between the two countries. India needs to consider whether or not it can afford the consequences of a potential confrontation with China.

Indian soldiers in Ladakh next to the Line of Actual Control. Photo: Luv Puri

China and India are still embroiled in the same boundary dispute that set off the war between the two countries in 1962. The two countries share a border of more than 2200 miles, but ever since the war, they have followed a policy of non-confrontation. High-level diplomatic ties were restored with Indian Prime Minister’s Rajiv Gandhi visit to China in 1988.

However, other thorny issues between the two countries remain intractable. China claims ownership over the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh and refers to the area as part of south Tibet. While India describes Arunachal as integral to its territorial sovereignty, China rationalizes its claim by emphasizing the Sino-Tibetan ethnic origins of the people there.

The Sino-Indian Joint Working Group (JWG) was formed in 2003 to resolve the various issues relating to the border disputes, but little progress has been seen.

Trade between the two countries has increased exponentially over the years. Last year, trade grew by 33 percent. But if the Asian economic miracle is truly going to materialize, the two countries will have to manage their border disputes and geo-strategic insecurities.

- Luv Puri

The U.S. removed the contested region of Kashmir from envoy Richard Holbrooke’s mandate. Photo: United Nations

Mohsin Mohi-Ud Din is a Kashmiri-American who is currently a Fulbright scholar in Morocco. He also works for Human Rights First, is the drummer of a Kashmiri rock band Zerobridge and blogs at the Huffington Post. Mohsin participated in the Worldfocus online radio show about the disputed region of Kashmir. He writes about the decision to remove the Kashmir issue from U.S. envoy Richard Holbrooke’s mandate, arguing that it will have lasting repercussions.

During his presidential campaign, President Obama publicly stated that peace in South Asia and Afghanistan would need to incorporate some kind of resolution on the Kashmir dispute between India and Pakistan.

The then presidential candidate rightly stated, “We should probably try to facilitate a better understanding between Pakistan and India and try to resolve the Kashmir crisis.” Obama’s stance restored hope in Kashmir as a whole, including the Kashmiri civil society and pro-democratic forces in the Kashmir valley.

Over the summer, Kashmir witnessed the largest civil protests in years, with tens of thousands taking to the streets in peaceful, unarmed protests demanding freedom, peace and human rights. Even though more than 40 unarmed protesters were killed and hundreds were beaten and arrested by state security forces, Kashmiris marched on for weeks. Kashmiri civil society showed the world its commitment to non-violent demonstrations, desire for peace and respect for human rights.

Yet last week, the Obama administration announced the mandate of Richard Holbrooke, the U.S. envoy to Pakistan and India, would not include the disputed territory of Kashmir. India has celebrated the announcement as a political victory. Kashmiris again find themselves shaking their heads at a lost opportunity for the truth be exposed concerning the atrocities and political oppression they endure.

India’s celebration comes as no surprise. Greater attention to the Kashmir conflict would threaten India’s reputation as the largest democracy in the world. Kashmir remains a huge stain in India’s already questionable human rights record. The U.S. envoy’s attention to Kashmir would have perhaps shed more light on the scale of atrocities and political oppression endured by Kashmiris for over a decade.

Read more about Worldfocus’ coverage of the Kashmiri people, history and human rights.

U.S. and the Muslim world

Like the conflicts in Afghanistan and Palestine, the Kashmir conflict is one that is talked about in hundreds of thousands of mosques — not jut in the region, but throughout the world. Extremists in the Muslim world often use Palestine and Afghanistan as examples for creating anti-U.S. sentiments. Unlike Palestine and Afghanistan, however, the U.S. is still in a position where it can either appear as a helper or an agitator. Kashmiris are looking to the new administration to pressure both India and Pakistan to acknowledge the grievances of the people living in the Kashmir valley.

The U.S envoy’s omission of Kashmir in his mandate threatens to leave Kashmiri civil society vulnerable, and U.S. supporters in Kashmir beleaguered. Atrocities will continue and the current generation of youth will grow increasingly helpless within the present system of zero accountability for past killings and rapes and zero justice. Such developments threaten U.S. interests for achieving peace, strengthening democratic institutions and defeating extremism in the region.

Peace will be hollow if Kashmiri civil society continues to be marginalized. Extremists will capitalize on this marginalization. Therefore, it is imperative that the Obama administration create avenues of communication to the thriving Kashmiri civil society, which supports human rights and transparency.

The U.S. relationship with India and Pakistan is in itself peculiar and warrants some serious reevaluation. On the one hand, the majority of systematic abuses in Kashmir are continually perpetrated by India, which receives praise by the U.S. for being the world’s largest democracy and remains a key economic partner in Asia. Making matters more complex, America’s ally in the war terror, Pakistan, remains a provider of weapons and money to some militants operating in Kashmir. All the while the situation on the ground deteriorates and extremists win ground against confused U.S sympathizers in the region.

Displaced Kashmiris. Photo: David Swanson/IRIN

Hopes and desires of the Kashmiri people

For too long, Kashmir has been debated from the lenses of India, Pakistan and extremists. Yet Kashmir is not limited to these players. Within Kashmir are the people — the people most affected from the conflict, a people who suffered and continue to suffer atrocities. They are a people who desire peace, human rights and democracy. Organic institutions in Kashmir founded on human rights, democracy, and justice exist, yet they continue to be overshadowed.

It was my hope that the U.S. envoy to the region would at least have a mandate to reach out to these institutions. I still hope that he will, perhaps behind the scenes. I hope — and Kashmiris hope — that the Obama administration pushes for greater communication with local civil society on the ground in Kashmir, for they wait and pray for the next opportunity for greater justice and accountability to materialize. And it must also be stated that the extremists and the Taliban hope for the opposite.

Regional peace and U.S. interests

Kashmir is at critical stage that will affect both regional peace and security and U.S. interests in the region. As opportunities for greater justice and accountability for Kashmiris are continually marginalized, the Kashmiri youth of today, who have seen nothing but war and failed judicial processes and failed political processes, will be ever vulnerable to sympathizing with extremists and Taliban forces in the region, thus threatening U.S. interests in the region. The road to defeating the Taliban and extremism in the region is through strengthening and supporting institutions of peace, democracy and human rights.

Since India continues to oppress civil society in Kashmir, as seen last summer with the killings of unarmed protesters, it is left to the international community to bring the people’s grievances forward. The road to peace in Pakistan, Afghanistan and India leads through Kashmir and through recognition and inclusion of Kashmiri civil society.

Will we (America) continue to shake India’s and Pakistan’s hands as 1,000 mass graves are left uninvestigated by India and as Pakistan continues to support certain militant groups in Kashmir? I hope not. I pray that this country, America — a country that prides itself on justice, accountability, human rights and change — will for the first time in eight years mean what it says.

In the meantime, Kashmir waits, still bleeding.

- Mohsin Mohi-Ud Din

The views expressed by contributing bloggers do not reflect the views of Worldfocus or its partners.

Seen here in Beijing, George W. Bush was the first U.S. president to attend the Olympic Games outside the United States.

As President George W. Bush prepares to leave office, commentators and Bush himself have examined the legacy he will leave behind, both domestically and abroad.

“You may not agree with some tough decisions I have made,” Bush said in his farewell speech, “but I hope you can agree that I was willing to make the tough decisions.”

Though Bush has suffered from low approval ratings within the United States, a handful of foreign countries may view him in a more favorable light. The Los Angeles Times reported that he remains popular in China, where some citizens express fondness for Xiao Bush, or “Young Bush.”

The outgoing president also improved relations with India with a nuclear deal and increased exchange. The Indian prime minister recently told the U.S. leader, “The people of India deeply love you.”

Watch a Worldfocus interview exploring George W. Bush’s legacy.

The “Peking Duck” blog challenges the L.A. Times article, writing that most Chinese react to Bush’s name with scorn and disappointment.

The “Vance Report” blog writes that Bush has been a friend to China, pointing to his attendance at the Beijing Olympics and support of human rights in China.

The “Bits from Bangalore” blog writes that reports of India’s love of Bush are overblown, but that some Indians are concerned about Obama’s protectionism with respect to outsourcing.

During the 2008 presidential race, Obama made a statement that the U.S. should become more involved in trying to resolve the Kashmir dispute — a position which struck a raw nerve with Indians, according to blogger “Myra McDonald.”

Blogger “Daniel Larison” provides an overview of Indian reactions to Obama’s controversial position on Kashmir.

To “Down with Tyranny” blog traces changes in Bush’s approval ratings in various countries, writing that Obama is more favored globally.

President Bush may also retain support in Africa, where he has funnelled assistance to fight HIV/AIDS.

Photo courtesy of Flickr user kk+ under a Creative Commons license.

Click above to visit Worldfocus at BlogTalkRadio.

Anchor Martin Savidge hosted his first radio show on Tuesday on the Kashmiri people, history and human rights.

In case you didn’t know it, this past Tuesday marked another milestone for Worldfocus…our first time on the radio. It was BlogTalkRadio, another new tool of the Web. And it was wonderful.

One of the beauties of radio is, of course, you don’t see me. So after the televised version of Worldfocus that night, I went home and slipped into a pair of jeans, a T-shirt and a comfy sweater.

I was casual, and that’s the idea of the radio show.

We chose Kashmir to talk about because it’s been in the news lately in connection to the terror attacks in Mumbai, India, and has received a lot of feedback from commenters on Worldfocus.org. It’s an area few Americans have been to, and even fewer understand. No wonder; it’s a very complex story. That’s why I was thrilled to have an entire half-hour to talk about one subject.

We had four guests on the line. It was radio, but we all spoke using the telephone: Two professors, a former Pakistani Ambassador and a young Kashmiri-American who is also in a rock band that plays music inspired by his homeland.

After the introductions, I think everyone got it that this wasn’t a formal interview. Rather, it was a talk amongst friends, as if we were all seated at a kitchen table after the plates have been cleared, with only cups of coffee before us. Everyone shared and everyone gained.

It was such a hit — not just with the speakers but with listeners as well — that we decided the next day to make it a regular thing.

So starting in January, we will select a subject each week and join a panel of  knowledgeable guests, slip into some comfy slippers and start a conversation about something in the world. We’ll tell you the topic and how to join the talk a couple of days before on the television version of Worldfocus. That way, you can call in or e-mail. You’ll have to provide your own coffee, I’m afraid.

So pull up a chair and join our giant kitchen conversation (courtesy of the Internet) at Worldfocus.org. We’ve got a lot to talk about.

Talk to you on the radio.

- Martin Savidge

The disputed region of Kashmir — a source of tension between India and Pakistan — has seen renewed attention following the attacks on Mumbai. But often the interests of India and Pakistan dominate the discussion of Kashmir.

Worldfocus’ radio show discusses the Kashmiri people, their history and the human rights situation in Kashmir.

Worldfocus anchor Martin Savidge has reported from Kashmir and hosts a panel featuring a range of voices and perspectives on Kashmir:

Mohsin Mohi-Ud Din is a Kashmiri-American who is involved in humanitarian efforts in Kashmir, working independently with the Kashmir People’s Tribunal. Mohsin is a Fulbright scholar to Morocco and the drummer of a Kashmiri rock band Zerobridge. He blogs at the Huffington Post. He currently works for the international Human Rights NGO, Human Rights First.

Haley Duschinski is a cultural anthropologist at Ohio University who travels to Kashmir annually. Her research focuses on violence and war, human rights and transitional justice in Kashmir within the context of the ongoing peace process between India and Pakistan. She answered questions about Kashmir from Worldfocus viewers here.

Azmat Hassan is a career diplomat of 33 years standing and former ambassador of Pakistan, where his postings have included Ambassador of Pakistan to Malaysia, Syria and Morocco, and Deputy Permanent Representative of Pakistan to the United Nations in New York. He is currently on the faculty at Whitehead School of Diplomacy.

Chitralekha Zutshi is a professor of history at the College of William and Mary. She is the author of the book, “Languages of Belonging: Islam, Regional Identity and the Making of Kashmir.” She is currently exploring how Kashmiris see their own past.

Credits:
Host: Martin Savidge
Producers: Lisa Biagiotti, Katie Combs and Stephen Puschel

Haley Duschinski, assistant professor of cultural anthropology at Ohio University, has researched issues of the Kashmiri people for the past 10 years.

Professor Haley Duschinski answers your questions about Kashmir. Listen to our  webcasted radio show with Prof. Duschinski, other experts and Kashmiri-Americans here.

Thank you for the dozens of insightful questions about the current situation in South Asia and your perspectives and concerns about the Kashmiri people. I have batched your questions into themes below.

By way of background, I’m a cultural anthropologist at Ohio University, and I’ve been conducting research on issues relating to the Kashmir conflict for the past 10 years through long-term field research in India and Kashmir Valley.

As an anthropologist, I use a bottom-up approach to understanding current politics and economics. This means that I approach the Kashmir situation by trying to understand Kashmiris’ everyday lives and local worlds –- by trying to see things from Kashmiri perspectives and Kashmiri points of view.

KASHMIR AT A GLANCE

Q. How large is Kashmir? How many Kashmiris are there? What are the ethnic/religious breakdowns in Kashmir?

Haley Duschinski: Kashmir Valley is part of India’s northernmost state, Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), which lies in the Himalayan Mountains on the borders with Pakistan, Tibet and China.

The state itself is made up of three distinctive regions with different religious and ethnic compositions:

Jammu — about 65 percent Hindu, mainly ethnic Dogras
Ladakh — about 50 percent Tibetan Buddhist with significant Muslim communities
Kashmir Valley — about 90 percent Kashmiri Muslim

Kashmir Valley is located past the Pir Panjal mountain range along the sensitive boundary line with Pakistan, Jammu is located beanth the mountains and closer to the plains, while Ladakh shares many topographical features with neighboring Tibet. The population of the entire state is about 10 million, with approximately 5.5 million people in Kashmir Valley.

Map of the Jammu and Kashmir region. Source: CIA

Kashmir Valley is also home to a minority community of Kashmiri Hindus, who largely migrated out of the region when the separatist movement escalated around 1990. About 7,000 Kashmiri Hindus remain in Kashmir Valley today.

This statewide religious, ethnic and regional variation makes the situation there very complicated.

It’s important to remember that when Kashmiris talk about their homeland, they’re referring to the original territory of Jammu and Kashmir that spans the heavily militarized ceasefire line between India and Pakistan known as the Line of Control.

This original territory has been carved up since independence in 1947 into several different portions. Pakistan controls about one-third of the original territory and China controls a smaller part.

LIFE IN KASHMIR

Q. What is life like for Kashmiris?

Haley Duschinski: Since 1990, India has maintained more than 500,000 armed security forces in the region, making Kashmir Valley one of the most heavily militarized areas in the entire world.

The capital city of Srinagar is mapped with armed patrol units, sandbag posts, concrete and barbed wire bunkers and military checkpoints for pedestrians and automobiles. Outside of the capital city, the presence of armed security forces is pervasive, with army and paramilitary forces appropriating public schools, private hotels, cinema halls, government offices, orchard lands and abandoned houses.  Basharat Peer provides a stirring account of everyday life in Kashmir in his upcoming memoir entitled “Curfewed Night.”

Kashmiris are required to carry official identification cards with them when traveling in public, and they are subject to interrogation and search at any time. Many Kashmiris have told me that they feel like they are living in a prison –- that their homeland is under siege. Doctors Without Borders has published reports about the psycho-social and general health of the Kashmiri population.

Everyday life in Kashmir Valley today is largely determined by a special law called the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA).

Some Kashmiris feel they are living in a prison.

As the Kashmiri independence movement escalated in the late 1980s, the Indian central government declared J&K a “disturbed area” and passed the AFSPA to grant extraordinary powers to security forces personnel, including authority to use lethal force against any individuals suspected of breaking the law and disturbing the peace.

The AFSPA has facilitated various human rights abuses including extrajudicial killing, disappearance, torture and rape. International human rights groups such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch as well as Kashmiri human rights organizations have strongly criticized the special act for violating international humanitarian law, particularly the right to life, and for granting state agents impunity for human rights violations.

HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS

Q. What is the state of human rights in the region?

Haley Duschinski: The official civilian death toll in the conflict is 20,000. Kashmiri human rights organizations claim that 70,000 people have died during the conflict and 8,000 have disappeared.

Just this summer, Indian armed forces opened fire on unarmed Kashmiri civilians protesting in the streets, killing nearly 40 and injuring 600.

Earlier this year, mass graves [PDF] of approximately 1,000 individuals were exhumed in Kashmir Valley. Due to the special acts, Kashmiris find it very difficult — if not impossible — to pursue justice for these types of human rights violations, and they feel that their suffering has been ignored by the international community.

Kashmiri human rights lawyers emphasize that any sustainable peace in the region must be founded on principles of truth, justice, and accountability.

INDIA, PAKISTAN AND THE GOVERNMENT

Q. Who runs Kashmir? Are there local officials? How does the government work with the state?

Haley Duschinski: Like other Indian states, Jammu and Kashmir has a multiparty democratic system of governance, with elections to determine members the union parliament and the state assembly.  Elections were suspended during the peak years of the conflict from 1990 to 1996, but there have been several rounds of elections over the past decade.

The strongest political parties in Kashmir Valley are the National Conference, the Congress Party, and the People’s Democratic Party. In fact, elections are happening right now, and you can follow them on the website of the English-language news site Greater Kashmir.

As a result of the unusual circumstances surrounding its accession to India, Jammu and Kashmir is the only Indian state that has a special degree of autonomy under Article 370 of the Indian constitution. Article 370 grants the state autonomy in determining its own affairs except in defense, foreign affairs, and communication. Since the 1950s, Article 370 has been substantially eroded through various measures of the Indian central government.

The Hajipir Pass, near the Line of Control.

Q. What is it that India and Pakistan covet in Kashmir? Are there natural resources or strategic advantages that pit the countries against one another?

Haley Duschinski: It is certainly true that Kashmir is located in a strategically advantageous position on the border between India and Pakistan, adjacent to China and Tibet.

But I feel that the contestation over Kashmir is less about the region’s strategic location or natural resources (although there are disputes over a critical water source there) and more about its symbolic and political significance to both neighboring countries.

When the British left the subcontinent in 1947, the colonial territory was partitioned into India, which espoused a principal of secular nationalism, and Pakistan, which espoused a principle of religious (Islamic) nationalism.

India has always claimed Kashmir Valley as proof of its commitment to secularism, while Pakistan claims Kashmir Valley on the basis of its Muslim majority population.  Of course, the situation is more complicated than this, because over the decades India and Pakistan have become locked into a sort of Cold War standoff over the region, with both sides refusing to back down in their territorial claims.

Political parties in each country have benefited from this situation by mobilizing popular support for their political positions and platforms through incendiary rhetoric involving Kashmir.

It often feels as though India and Pakistan are playing out their national security performances along the Line of Control in this border region, with quite devastating consequences for the Kashmiri people.

Q. What do the people of Kashmir want — independence? Will Kashmir ever receive independence from India or Pakistan? Can Kashmir be split up? Could the Kashmiris effectively govern the region?

Haley Duschinski: Kashmiris are vocal in their demand for independence, or azaadi.  The concept of azaadi is complicated, and it means different things to different people at different times.  Kashmiris’ desire for independence is a longstanding one that is shaped by peoples’ collective memories of occupation and exploitation by a series of outside rulers –- Mughuls, Afghans, Sikhs, Dogras and now Indians –- across history. This means that the Kashmiri demand for self-determination is not simply about seceding or breaking away from India; it’s also a way of demanding an opportunity to express their collective will in relation to their own political future.

To learn more about Kashmiri experiences and aspirations, I highly recommend a recent documentary film called Jashn-e-Azadi (“How We Celebrate Freedom”) by a Kashmiri filmmaker named Sanjay Kak.

Many Kashmiris feel dissatisfied with the way that their community has been treated by India since independence in 1947. Indian rule in the region since the 1940s has included repression, economic deprivation and indiscriminate violence, including, at various times, the denial of democratic processes, the manipulation of elections, and the jailing of political leaders.  These practices, and especially the widespread human rights violations since 1990, have made generations of Kashmiris feel very alienated from the Indian state. Kashmiris also remember that they were promised the opportunity to determine their own futures through a plebiscite at the time of accession to India, and that this promise has never been fulfilled.

India and Pakistan have been pursuing a peace process since 2004 that focuses in large part on finding a way to resolve their contested claims to Kashmir. The peace process has produced some tangible results, most notably a ceasefire across the Line of Control, as well as a series of confidence-building measures such as cross-border bus service and cross-border trade routes. Although Kashmiris have generally responded positively to these developments, the measures still remain largely symbolic gestures without tangible consequence for most people living in the valley.

A soldier by the Dal Lake in Srinagar.

Q. How can this situation be resolved?

Haley Duschinski: Many different plans have been proposed for resolving the Kashmir situation. Before he resigned as president of Pakistan, Pervez Musharraf proposed a four-point solution involving (1) porous borders in Kashmir with freedom of movement for Kashmiri people, (2) local self-governance within each region of Kashmir, (3) phased withdrawal of troops from all regions, and (4) a joint supervisory mechanism involving India and Pakistan.

Some political factions in Kashmir Valley support this plan, or variations of it, while others continue to push a separatist agenda.

U.S. President-Elect Barack Obama has indicated that he will prioritize a resolution to the Kashmir conflict as part of a more comprehensive and interlocking strategy in South Asia.

As an American academic, it’s certainly not my place to offer resolutions to the Kashmir situation.  I will, however, point out that it’s impossible to imagine any meaningful or productive political settlement that does not take seriously the longstanding grievances and democratic aspirations of the Kashmiri people.

- Haley Duschinski

Photos courtesy of Flickr users NotMicroButSoft and dave watts under a Creative Commons license.

U.S. aid packages to Pakistan may soon depend on Pakistan’s effectiveness in fighting terrorism, according to The New York Times. On both Sunday and Monday, suspected militants attacked NATO supply depots in Peshawar.

Ahmad Kamal, a former Pakistani ambassador to the United Nations, speaks with Martin Savidge about these developments.

A sign outside of Martin Savidge’s hotel in Srinagar. Photo: Martin Savidge

Boats on a Kashmiri lake. Photo: Martin Savidge

Worldfocus anchor Martin Savidge tries to use a historical U.S. metaphor to understand the origins of the conflict in Kashmir.

It was only a few weeks ago I blogged about good news involving India, Pakistan and Kashmir. The region was celebrating the opening of a new trade route between the two nuclear rivals through the disputed land.

Now Kashmir is back in the news, and there are concerns India and Pakistan may be back on the brink of war over it. Kashmiri separatists (Lashkar-e-toiba) are the leaders in the clubhouse when it comes to blame for carrying out the massacre in Mumbai and fingers are pointing to Pakistan for, at the very least, serving as the refuge and training ground for the terrorists.

Kashmir has inspired more than 60 years of bloodshed. Since 1947, India and Pakistan have fought three wars over the region. In 2001 and 2002, they nearly fought a fourth. That’s when I was in Kashmir. Fortunately it didn’t happen. There was fighting — artillery duels mainly, daily across the line of control — but all-out war was avoided.

On Wednesday, I interviewed Vikram Singh, a fellow with the Center for a New American Security, a non-partisan research group that examines national security and defense issues. I was trying to understand why Kashmir in the minds of Indians and Pakistanis was worth such a toll in blood.

I remember talking to those on both sides of the conflict while in Kashmir. Indian officials said India would never give up Kashmir. Kashmiri separatists said they would never stop desiring Kashmir. With both sides using words like never, compromise is hard to find.

It was what Vikram said after our interview that triggered a light bulb of understanding for this American. Vikram described the feelings about the conflict in a way to which I could relate.

“Think of Texas,” he said, “which was once a part of Mexico.” (Kashmir is actually about the size of Kansas.)

Vikram was asking me to imagine if that conflict had never been resolved, or if Mexico suddenly wanted Texas back. Beyond not wanting to give up a huge swath of U.S. geography, Texas is also part of the American psyche.

Its wide-open ranges, its history, cowboys, wildcatters, the stars at night they burn so bright — Texas is not just a place. It embodies much of America’s essence. We’d never give up Texas. Kashmir is Texas to India…unfortunately, it’s also the same to Pakistan.

Other experts have suggested that now could be the best time for India and Pakistan to resolve their long feud over Kashmir. That is extremely naïve.

It cannot be fixed with a week of shuttle diplomacy. Nor can separatists hope to win it by murder and terror. Instead, it will take small steps over years, like trade routes, to bring a resolution.

For now, the best we can hope — for India, for Pakistan and for Kashmir — is that these nuke neighbors back off the brink and lift their fingers from the button.

- Martin Savidge

The attacks in Mumbai have brought new attention to an old dispute between India and Pakistan about the land of Kashmir.

The region of 13 million straddles Pakistan, India and China, but India has controlled the majority of Kashmir for decades. Pakistan controls a much smaller area, as does China.

Since 1947, India and Pakistan have fought three wars over the part of Kashmir controlled by India. Though India is mainly Hindu, two-thirds of the population in this part of Kashmir is Muslim, the predominant religion of Pakistan.

An anti-Indian insurgency in Kashmir has recently intenstified, and India believes such insurgents may have been responsible for the attacks in Mumbai.

Haley Duschinski is a cultural anthropologist at Ohio University who regularly travels to Kashmir, most recently in February. Her research focuses on violence and war, human rights and transitional justice in Kashmir within the context of the ongoing peace process between India and Pakistan.

Thank you all for your questions. Professor Duschinski has answered them here.

The region of 13 million people straddles Pakistan, India and China, but India has controlled the majority of Kashmir for decades, while Pakistan controls a smaller area.

Vikram Singh, a fellow with the Center for a New American Security, joins Martin Savidge to discuss the importance of Kashmir, the Lashkar-e-toiba group thought to be behind last week’s attacks in India and what Secretary of State Condaleeza Rice’s visit to India may mean for the conflict over Kashmir.

Have questions about Kashmir? Ask cultural anthropologist and Ohio University professor Haley Duschinski here.

Jeff Stein of Congressional Quarterly continues the discussion of Pakistan’s possible role in last week’s Mumbai attacks, evaluating the ability and willingness of Pakistani officials to help fight terrorism in the region.

Martin Savidge and his producer, Sanjay Sethi, in Kashmir. Photo courtesy of Martin Savidge.

Anchor Martin Savidge remembers reporting in Kashmir in 2002 and examines the news of a new trade route through the region.

If I had my way, our lead story on Tuesday night would have been the opening of a new trade route between India and Pakistan through the bitterly contested region of Kashmir.

Trucks with grain and honey rolled amid a fanfare of celebration. I read about one 72-year-old man who said that the last time he saw this trade route used, he was 12.

We didn’t lead with the story, but we did have it in the program. As chief writer Ed Deitch put it so well: “Pakistan and India did something today they hadn’t done in six decades.”

In a world where we seem to stumble from one crisis to the next, this was welcomed news. I watched all of the big domestic newscasts that night…none mentioned it.

I was in Kashmir when tanks — not trucks of grain — rolled, when artillery thundered across the so-called “Line of Control.” I was there in the summer of 2002 when both countries threatened to go to war over Kashmir as they have done several times in the past.

Only this time, both nations prepared their nuclear arsenals.

I remember being in India-controlled Kashmir and expressing my concerns to a government official about being a little nervous covering a story that might end in a nuclear flash. He assured me New Delhi and Islamabad might die in an atomic fire, but neither country would harm the land they love and have fought over so frequently. I was in the safest possible place, he said.

Actually, I understand why both nations lay claim to Kashmir. It is simply the most beautiful place I have ever been. When people ask me to describe it, I say it’s like the Alps (only greener) and like a dream (only real). Kashmir has mystical and exotic qualities along with a natural beauty that makes the land seem enchanted.

One day in your life, you must glide in a shikara [wooden boat] across the mirror-like waters of Lake Dal in Srinagar.

These gondola-like vessels gracefully balance between floating and sinking. Pushed by an oarsman, you glide in the shadow of mountaintop palaces, past Victorian-era carved wooden houseboats that look as though they are still home to the British administrators from the time of the Raj.

The rise of militancy in the political struggle over Kashmir has driven away the tourists that in the 70s and 80s would jet set here. It’s still a dangerous land…but perhaps both Pakistan and India have opened a new route to peace.

– Martin Savidge

Find one of Martin’s 2002 CNN reports from Kashmir here.