For more than a year now there has been a heated debate going on for de-militarising Kashmir. The cue for the debate was given by President Musharraf in a TV interview about a year back while putting forth his four point proposal for resolving the Kashmir problem. He had suggested that after identifying the troublesome areas or regions of the state, these should be de-militarised. One of the main stream parties in the state which is a partner in the coalition government made de-militarisation as the main plank of their political campaign. It was for the first time that a main stream pro-India party was demanding de-militarisation and withdrawal of troops. However, the main ruling party in the coalition opposed the demand. This created a very odd situation. The party demanding de-militarisation upped the ante so much that at one time the coalition itself was threatened. It was saved only by intervention of Delhi which set up a high level central committee to examine the feasibility of de-militarisation. The demand was voiced by other parties also and it started assuming a universal character. To partially placate the growing demand some troops were relocated and a number of schools, orchards, and other similar lands were vacated in a few places. During this extensively debated proposition of withdrawal of troops there were conflicting views about the ground situation. For past couple of years it had been given out by government spokesmen both from the civilian as well as defence side that the LOC (Line of Control) surveillance and border fence had considerably reduced infiltration. It was also claimed that there was substantial improvement in situation. The number of militants operating in the state which had been varying between 1500 and 3000 was also claimed to have been reduced to about 600 or so. While every body has been waiting for the assessment report of the high level central committee for de-militarisation, the local Army Commander threw a spanner in the works by giving an alarming statement about the ground situation. According to him, infiltration is still going on. There are 5000 militants waiting to cross the LOC. The training camps on the other side of the LOC are still functioning. He emphatically stated that the strength of the Army had to be increased ten fold to fully control the situation. This is essential to reduce infiltration to zero and eliminate all the militants. He out rightly ruled out any ceasefire and reduction of troops as, according to him, it will give militants time to regroup and launch a more severe and concerted offensive. It is not the first time that there is a glaring dichotomy between the politicians and the managers of the security grid. Both seem to be apparently moving on divergent currents. While as the politicians have been talking of peace, the top brass of the security grid has been giving contradictory statements to the media. In earlier times the security bosses never addressed media directly. However, at the present moment it is the security grid which seems to be calling the shots on the both sides of the divide. In Pakistan there is only one grid, the politico-military grid. The security bosses have direct control over everything and they speak out brazenly whatever they have to say without bothering about the politicians. On the Indian side even though the politicians are supposed to be in control overtly, yet all the strategic decisions appear to be dictated by the security grid which seems to be covertly controlling the entire government set up. Either the security bosses are trying to assert themselves or there is some tacit understanding for balancing each others’ actions and statements. The Pakistanis are brazen, and crude while as Indians are much more subtle and sophisticated. After all they have always excelled in diplomacy right from Chanakya’s time. Kautalya’s Arthshastra is not only the bible of the Indian Politicians but is also the text book of the Indian Military Academy. In every thing one traces the Orwellian “New Speak”. De-militarisation in actual practice means re-militarisation. Whenever the politicians are about to clinch a peace deal, someone or other from the security set up derails the whole process, and we are back to square one. Siachen is a classic example of this dichotomy between the politicians and the security bosses. In 1949 while demarcating the ceasefire line the UN Observers had left it at point NJ 9862 as it was impossible to demarcate the high altitude glaciers where even eagles did not dare to go. For more than 30 years it was a wasteland left untouched by both sides. However, in early eighties it were the security personnel who were instrumental in converting it into a bloody high-altitude battleground. After a substantial material and human loss the politicians on both sides realised the utter futility of this unnecessary drain on their countries but the security bosses did not allow the peace to be brought to this region and the conflict dragged on. Now again when politicians are talking of peace, there are unseen forces which do not want the tragic conflict to end. They find a number of intricate and sophisticated ways to jeopardise the entire effort in a matter of days! The beneficiaries of conflict somehow seem to triumph in the end every time. Same is the case with the much talked about de-militarisation. All politicians realise that the security personnel have done their job and must leave the space now to restore true normalcy and peace. Even some of the security bosses in the past have explicitly declared that the final peace can only be achieved by a political process and not through arms. However, there are some who do not want to give up the power of the gun with its consequential benefits. They are fully capable of ensuring marginalisation of the promoters of peace. They would like the vicious circle of violence to continue. Death and destruction is the outcome of this conflict for some while as some others get immense material benefits out of this mayhem. Human greed for material benefits has no bounds. It is reported that there is a high bid among paramilitary officers in Home Ministry in Delhi for getting a “lucrative” Kashmir posting. The perks and side benefits heavily out weigh the risks! While keeping people glued to de-militarisation debate, practical steps are being taken on the ground to vastly expand the security presence. Thousands of acres of land have been acquired in Kupwara, Manasbal, Pampore, and a number of other places in the valley to set up permanent security establishments. A network of roads is being built in remote areas to facilitate quick movement of troops. In fact most of the temporary sand bag bunkers set up for security personnel in the city of Srinagar have been replaced by permanent brick structures. Over and above all this security set up it has been proposed to raise locally a couple of dozen armed police battalions. At this rate very soon every second person in Kashmir will be in uniform. Added to this are the hordes of outside labour that have proliferated in every corner of Kashmir. It would be no wonder that a time may come when Kashmiris may be reduced to a minority in their own land. This is exactly what Israelis did to Palestinians and displaced them from their ancestral land. All this cannot be done by the security authorities without the full support of the political bosses notwithstanding their public postures. Unfortunately most of our “leaders” calling for de-militarisation are “protected” by the very forces they demand to be withdrawn. It appears that the common Kashmiris will have to live with more and more militarisation. They have to get used to living in an oversized cantonment called Kashmir, the so called “Paradise on Earth”! For Government of India de-militarisation is not the priority. It is rather re-militarisation which is receiving their full attention. It is the right time for our so called leaders to give up their hypocritical stances and face the stark reality. They owe it to the people to speak out the absolute truth regardless of the consequences!