For such a sceptical population to say that the situation has improved since 2002 is significant. First, it is an endorsement of the ongoing peace process. Kashmiris, stuck in a cycle of violence since the late eighties, have been looking for an opportunity for an ‘honourable exit’ since the late nineties. The peace process initiated by Atal Bihari Vajpayee in 2004 has not only sustained itself through a change of the political regime from NDA to UPA but also brought about certain tangible results in the form of ‘soft borders’ — making greater interaction between the two sides of Kashmir possible.

However, the greatest tangible result of the peace process is the decline in violence. With India and Pakistan being engaged in talks, militancy has been controlled to a great extent, bringing a sense of normalcy to the common Kashmiri. One can add another dimension to these developments — the extension of the political space since 2002. With the predominance of what Kashmiris call the ‘gun culture’ throughout the nineties, the political process was marginalised. Today, there is a new vibrancy. Not only are issues of common concern raised here but even those that earlier figured only within the realm of separatist politics. The demand for dialogue with militant organisations, the condemnation of human rights violations by the security forces and the opening of the border between the two sides of Kashmir are issues now being raised by mainstream political parties, both within the assembly and outside it. Mainstream politics overlapping with separatist politics has generated pressure not just upon the separatist leadership. It has also created ambivalence in the average Kashmiri’s response to politics.

... contd.