For quite sometime now a number of people have been projecting and debating Musharraf Formula for solving Kashmir dispute. It has been pointed out in these columns that the much talked about four point formula is not a solution to the problem but could, at the best be a possible approach to find an ultimate ever lasting solution. It would have been a good beginning on the path to the ultimate solution provided it had been seriously implemented by the two sides with the participation of the local people. This did not happen and the formula has remained a subject for academic discussion. However, in some quarters impression is being created that it is possibly the best available solution for the final settlement of this most intractable and vexed problem. For those people it has become something like a holy directive or rather a divine commandment. Firstly the proposal had been mooted by the erstwhile General more as a political and a diplomatic move to put the ball in India’s court. He very well knew that the Indian Government had not been able to work out the quantum of autonomy or self-rule with Kashmiris for over 60 years so how could they do it now and that too so quickly. He virtually asked India to work out something with Kashmiris and he would accept the agreement if it satisfied them. It ultimately boiled down to India having a possible mutually agreed settlement with Kashmiris with Pakistan’s blessings. It was General’ personal idea and the public in his own country were not fully supportive of it. The people in general had thought that at the best it would give some temporary relief to suffering Kashmiris from the atrocities of the Indian security forces and create an atmosphere in which people could freely think and debate possible openings for the resolution of this decades old problem. This understanding was discernable from the first three points of the formula, namely identifying Kashmir; demilitarising it and allowing self-rule in the demilitarised areas. However, the final point about joint management or joint control or whatever nomenclature one may give it, smacks of a type of “Political Polyandry”. Polyandry means a woman having more than one husband. In remote Himalayan villages there are still some primitive people who indulge in polyandry. In order to prevent division of property with succeeding generations and retain sizeable land holdings a woman sometimes marries two or even three brothers in the same family. Thus she has multiple husbands. It is said that when one of the husbands is staying with the woman he leaves his shoes outside the door so that others know that the woman is occupied. Would Kashmiris be subject to similar treatment? They may be sometimes busy with Pakistani side and sometimes with the Indian side. How can such an arrangement work out in actual practice? Kashmir, which can be compared to a beautiful woman, has seen many husbands during last four centuries but it is proposed for the first time that she should have two husbands simultaneously. The beauty of Kashmir has been the tragedy for its people. One would have thought that the people living in this charming and enchanting land would be resting in divine peace enjoying the pristine beauty of nature. This has not happened in actual practice. Kashmiris have repeatedly suffered at the hands of foreigners who had been bewitched by the beauty of this Himalayan valley. The mountains surrounding the valley did shelter the local inhabitants for a long period of their history but ultimately this natural barrier was breached in sixteenth century and since then they have seen nothing but untold misery and suffering. They had different masters at different times. These came one after the other through repeated conquests of the valley. Finally, they were sold into bondage which continues till now. However, during the entire history Kashmiris never had two masters at one and the same time. If Musharraf Formula gets implemented in Toto, they may have for the first time two owners acting as their new masters! Polyandry had been successful in the distant past in maintaining some order in the remote Himalayan villages but it may not be practicable in a political sense in Kashmir. Even though Kashmir is also located in the Himalaya yet the situation here is much beyond the simplicity of those primitive Himalayan folks. The state as it exists at present is an example of diversity of cultures. The five or seven (General was not sure about the number) regions have hardly anything in common. Moreover, the two parts of Kashmir on either side of the Line of Control have developed in totally different ways in last six decades. On the Indian side, the State has been physically, politically, and to some extent emotionally fully integrated with the rest of India. Apart from total military hold, Delhi has built an administrative edifice consisting of three pillars of Jammu, Ladakh, and Kashmir. There are over three hundred fifty thousand employees whose salary is paid by debit to funds provided from Delhi. The pillar of Jammu in this edifice is quite sturdy as the people living here have physical and emotional attachment with neighbouring states. Ladakhis are somewhat unsure but in any case they may prefer to stay with Delhi rather than be ruled by Srinagar or Islamabad. That leaves the pillar of Kashmir which is shaky as it has been built with hollow bricks without any emotional attachment and has the tendency to make the entire edifice collapse someday. On the other side of the border, the region called “Azad Kashmir” is neither Kashmir nor Azad in the real sense. The people here have been discontented but not to the extent of separation. Similar is the situation of the region called “Northern Areas”. However, they have had the worst deal but it has been of their own making as they themselves opted for accession to Pakistan in 1947. All these years they have been like a colony. Again, they too may not go to the extent of secession but may settle for a full fledged provincial status like Punjab and Sind within Pakistan knowing that the area is a gateway to China and Central Asia which Pakistan cannot afford to lose! Thus we are ultimately left with the valley with its Kashmiri speaking periphery. Recently, a senior columnist had discussed in detail this aspect taking a cue from an opinion poll held in the sub-continent about final solution of Kashmir problem. As quoted by him, 87% of the people quizzed in the valley had opted for total independence. He had opined that it may be the ultimate solution of this decades old dispute. One may like to agree with him but this would be possible only if both the suitors decide to leave the beautiful valley alone. Musharraf Formula does not envisage that. It talks of two husbands of the “Identified Kashmir” in the final solution, which boils down to the valley. Unfortunately, that type of live in arrangement very common in the “Civilised” western countries may not be possible in this part of the world. It amounts to taking the “Enlightened Moderation” a bit too far. One has to face the ground reality and devise a solution accordingly. A lot has happened in Kashmir in last two decades. Kashmiris are yearning for ultimate liberation and release from bondage and not for multiple “husbands”. Political emancipation and not political polyandry! How can it come about? By the enlightenment of all concerned parties or by a disastrous catastrophe? Only time will decide!