Offering of amnesty to the Kashmiri youth in PoK which India considers to be an integral part of the country is not a departure from the government's policy of granting pardon to other armed rebels, the latest being Naxalites. Even earlier, the government had undertaken a similar exercise in Punjab and Kashmir. It pardoned those Sikh militants who surrendered and later even helped the police in its anti-terrorist campaign. In Kashmir also, the CRPF had in 1997-98 recruited a whole battalion of surrendered militants after they laid down arms. Besides, granting amnesty to the youth who had crossed over to PoK will be in line with the process in establishing closer ties between Kashmir's two parts. The process was first initiated during the Vajpayee-Musharraf regimes and later pursued by the first UPA government. This led to the opening of LoC for limited bus service and for opening of trade between the two parts of Kashmir. It is, however, imperative that given Kashmir's security environment the amnesty policy being drafted should ensure a proper identity check, screening and debriefing of those who surrender.

What has lent a disturbing dimension to the situation in Kashmir are the mounting protests against the killing of some innocent young men by security personnel. The security forces in the state have, no doubt, been undertaking anti-militant operations with commendable results. It is recognised that some innocent people also become victims, as had happened in Punjab, of anti-terrorism campaigns. Different national and international quarters have often voiced concern over the violation of human rights in Kashmir and action has also been taken in some cases.

But what has worsened the situation is the recent killing by certain trigger-happy security personnel of three young boys who apparently had nothing to do with militancy. Their killing has given a new dimension to the public anger leading to the spate of protests and a week-long shutdown in the state capital. The development has not only further antagonised the people but has also fuelled separatist and pro-Pakistan sentiments.

While infiltrations and terrorist violence which had been witnessing a sharp decline are again on the uptrend, it is the killing of innocent boys and the resultant anger which play a key role in prompting the local youth to join militant ranks. Such developments also contribute to Pakistan's attempts to internationalise the Kashmir issue and contribute to its insistence on treating Kashmir as a core issue in any India-Pakistan talks as it is doing in the context of the upcoming February 25 meeting.

New Delhi has stated that the focus of the talks “which does not imply resumption of the composite dialogue process” will be on terrorism. Islamabad will find it difficult to resist India's stand as Pakistan is now internationally treated as terrorism's epicentre which has been sponsoring and aiding terrorists not only in Kashmir but also in other parts of India and other countries.

While Pakistan may not be able to resist India's stand that the focus of the February 25 meeting will be on terrorism, New Delhi may find it difficult to avoid Kashmir being discussed in the meeting. Kashmir has been on the India-Pakistan talks agenda in the past also.

The two countries stands need to be seen in the background of the role the US has been playing in the region. The US priority is to fight Taliban in Afghanistan. As it considers Pakistan a vital base in the fight, it has converted the country into its virtual colony. One no longer hears Pakistani rulers protesting against America encroaching upon the country's sovereignty through drone attacks. Under US pressure, they have also changed their attitude towards Afghan Taliban with whom they have been maintaining close contacts. This change is reflected in the arrest of some Afghan Taliban leaders in Karachi, the most important being Mullah Abdul Gani Baradar, second only to Taliban's chief Mohammed Omar with whom Pakistani officials had attended meetings. Pakistani rulers are making full use of their surrender to prompt the US to pressurize India on different issues. There is no misgiving now about New Delhi deciding to hold talks with Pakistan under US pressure. It has hitherto been refusing to resume talks with Pakistan unless Islamabad takes credible steps against the perpetrators of 26/11 Mumbai attacks and stops the use of Pakistani territory for carrying out attacks on India.

No doubt, it is only through talks that controversial issues marring India-Pakistan relations can be resolved and closer and improved relations between the two countries established, an essential prerequisite for the region's peace and stability. To achieve the objective the primary responsibility falls on Pakistan which will have to decisively stop its territory's use by terrorists against India. It is also in the interest of US's strategic goals that it forces Pakistan to stop using terrorism as its state policy. On its part New Delhi will have to design its Kashmir and Pakistan policies by keeping in view the Obama Administration's pro-Pakistan over-tilt in sharp contrast to the former Bush Administration's pro-India tilt. (IPA Service)