As Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and General Pervez Musharraf persevere with their rare exploration of a final settlement on J&K, the issue is likely to be even more politicised in the coming months. If we ever needed a balanced debate on Kashmir, it is now. And giving us an informed basis for such a discussion is Navnita Chadha Behera, with her solid volume on a conflict that has so thoroughly undermined the prospects for enduring peace in the Subcontinent.

In Pakistan, Musharraf has been accused by the Jamaat-i-Islami of abandoning long-standing Pakistani positions on J&K, including the demand for a plebiscite and independence for the state. In India, the leader of the opposition, L.K. Advani, has accused Manmohan Singh of “surrender” to Pakistan on J&K.

The criticisms in both nations come amidst the first substantive official negotiations on J&K in nearly four decades. The last time they took place was during 1962-63 between foreign ministers Swaran Singh and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto.

It is now well known that the back channel between Satinder Lambah, Manmohan Singh’s special envoy, and Tariq Aziz, Musharraf’s national security adviser, has made considerable progress in recent months on drafting a settlement on J&K.

It is known that five elements constitute the potential solution being discussed: no change in the territorial disposition in J&K, autonomy/self governance on both sides, open borders, a consultative mechanism involving the two Kashmirs, and progressive reduction of Indian and Pakistani troop presence in the state.

While many issues remain to be sorted out in these talks, no one is questioning their purposefulness and historic nature. Although a successful conclusion is by no means guaranteed, there is an unprecedented air of optimism around the current round of Indo-Pak negotiations on J&K.

Sooner than later Manmohan Singh and Musharraf would have to reveal the broad contours of this negotiation to the people of India and Pakistan. Fearing that a premature exposure of the sensitive negotiations to public scrutiny might kill the very prospects for a settlement, the two governments have avoided helping an informed discussion of the subject.

Behera gives us a timely account that helps us think more calmly about Kashmir. That an objective picture of the conflict has come from an Indian scholar mirrors the maturation of the political attitudes in the nation towards the Kashmir conflict. Unending tensions with Pakistan over Kashmir have been so absorbing for so long that much of the Indian intellectual energy has gone into a “defence” of the national position.

Although a growing number of peace activists in India have called for a radical new thinking towards Pakistan, the positive sentiment has not often been matched by an appreciation of the sources of the conflict in Kashmir.

The strength of Behera’s work lies in bringing political realism to bear upon our understanding of the Kashmir question. In the sixtieth year of our independence, we badly needed a historicisation of the conflict with Pakistan.

Behera — a professor of political science at Delhi University — does this with a clinical precision as she walks us through the local, regional and international dimensions of the Kashmir conflict. Her analysis of the multiple notions of self-determination in the state of J&K is an especially valuable antidote to the traditional sloganeering on the subject. Her chapter on “Azad Kashmir” and the “Northern Areas” fills an important gap in the Indian understanding of the complex politics in J&K on the other side of the Line of Control.

Behera succeeds brilliantly in her attempt at demystifying the Indo-Pak conflict over Kashmir. Her work will serve as a definitive source, as we begin to cope with what could be one of the great debates on the future of Kashmir and the potential transformation of Indo-Pak relations.