Democratic institutions in both countries with booming trade would be the only logical long term conclusion.

When the money starts flowing, the Government is not breathing down your neck, and you can give your daughter tons of gold for her wedding, people will stop bitching.

However hardliners on both sides have so much to lose that it will be a difficult process. Since they draw their base from the idea of Muslim Pakistan vs. Hindu India, peace would mean that the religious issues take a back seat. They are not going to go quietly. People get too stuck in why India and Pakistan were divided. Sure, if the religous ideas are put on the backburner, it would be ironic. However, it doesn't matter anymore. The two countries are here to stay and are not going to be re-united anytime soon.

Once people get that in their heads and stop living in the past horrors of seperation, folks would be more willing to live with each other rather than wipe each out.

In the past there were opportunties militarily and diplomatically to resolve this. India has to do its bit and give Pakistan some diplomatic breathing room without getting paranoid over every step Pakistan takes (which they seem to be doing). Pakistan needs to get control over its institutions and slowly transistion back to democracy.

Once people start seeing the economic benefits, may ills tend to get cured or atleast downgrade themselves from central issue to a bearable nuisance.

The fundamental problem is not so much a Muslim Pakistan vs Hindu India, but a Muslim Pakistan vs a secular India.

The core philosophical difference goes back to the basis of creation of both the countries. While Pakistan was created on the need for a seperate muslim country because, the people who wanted it did not believe muslims as minorities would be treated fairly in a hindu majority India. Whereas this very thought is unacceptable for Indians who claim that it doesnt matter what religion its citizens belong to, all are equal.

Hence a problem like Kashmir will always remain a problem because the very fact that a muslim majority region can peacefully be a part of India is anathema to Pakistan. It goes against the very definition of pakistan - its creation and its existence.

Meanwhile, a part of India claiming discrimination based on religion and wanting seperation is unacceptable to India - whose creation and existence are based on the claim of equality of all citizens irrespective of religion,caste etc etc - all the stuff democracies are made of.

Therefore there is no "solution" to kashmir and therefore no "solution" to India-Pakistan friction.

But what is possible is lack of actual fighting. We dont need to love each other(its impossible) ... all we should aim for is not to fight about our differences.

Both countries having nuclear weapons is a therefore a very very very good thing to happen because it provides a reason not to fight irrespective of our mutual dislike for each other.

The fundamental problem is not so much a Muslim Pakistan vs Hindu India, but a Muslim Pakistan vs a secular India.

You are correct, I was saying what Hardliners use as their arguments...

However hardliners on both sides have so much to lose that it will be a difficult process. Since they draw their base from the idea of Muslim Pakistan vs. Hindu India

Therefore there is no "solution" to kashmir and therefore no "solution" to India-Pakistan friction.

Sure there is. Split along LOC as per 1972 Simla Agreement.

I agree with you Vinod, Nuclear Holocaust will not happen in South Asia because both countries are led by democratic-style government (yeah even pakistan) and educated armed forces leaders. Both sides will follow the theory of deterrence down to a T. It is the US, which has enough WMDs to blow up the entire planet, which is screwing things up (a la Dr. Strangelove) by insisting that other countries disarm without disarming itself.

Bush-style "realism" sounds all ballsy and proper but it leads to stupid outcomes (e.g. prisoner's dilemma, etc).

Dear vurdlife,
Ur "solution" of LOC as per Shimla Agreement as border is very nice. Unfortunately ur thinking it will work wont make it so. Logical solutions to problems created due to lack of logic in the first place wont help.

Too bad no one will accept it. Pakistanis wont accept because it means kashmir remains a part of India. Indians might accept, assuming they are willing to accept 'Loss of face'

Any other workable "solutions" ??? Please define the results these "solutions" are supposed to attain.

Pakistan can't accept an end to Kashmir. If it does then the need for the military to have such a big share of the budget and govt ends. Kashmir is what they use to rally the people together and India is a boogeyman that is used to frighten the massess. If Kashmir is solved then the greatest entity to suffer will be the Pakistani military.

Think about it, the people that are the ones in charge of negotiating for peace are the ones that stand to lose the most if there ever is peace!