They were the result of a deliberate effort by some groups to disrupt the relatively slow but steady progress was made to place these relations on an even keel, while the even slower progress being made to resolve outstanding issues through renewed composite dialogue?
I found it interesting to try to find answers to these questions through a selective reading of the Indian media. The first piece Praveen Swami, "sparked wild skirmish fugitive grandmother LoC" in the Indian edition of January 9. The second was "national interest: In the Line of Control, in fact" by Shekhar Gupta in the Indian Express of January 19. The third was a blog dated Jan. 16 on the website Kafila titled 'Dear Barkha Dutt: Accountability is where? "It offers a review of a television program hosted by Barkha on Jan 15.These worth reading in its entirety by all concerned to understand what happened and why, but I'll try to summarize in the following paragraphs which I could deduce from these reports.
First, the incidents were caused by the start of construction of bunkers by the Indians a few meters from the contact line. This construction was held last September after an elderly woman from a village which lay between the LoC and the three-layer fence erected on the Indian side crossed the Pakistan side to join their children in Azad Kashmir. The Indians agreed that it was a violation of the ceasefire agreement in 2003 that banned such construction, but felt that Pakistan should have accepted this because the bunkers pointed inwards and are designed to allow monitoring of the villages on the Indian side.
They, therefore, ignored calls by the Pakistani speakers to stop the construction and the local commander, then secured approval to respond aggressively to the latter shots by Pakistani soldiers. While the Indians denied any of their troops had crossed the LoC to attack the position of Pakistan where a soldier was killed and another wounded, some Indian officials said those things happened in the heat of battle.
Second, the decapitation of enemy soldiers, which became the basis for the outrage expressed, was not a new phenomenon in the skirmishes along the Line of Control and the two Pakistanis and Indians had been guilty of this. Praveen told this by an army officer and the program Barkha Dutt This was stated bluntly by Admiral Ramdas, a retired chief of the Indian Navy.
Barkha she had written an account of the conflict in Kargil which had shown the head of a Pakistani soldier, his army Indian guide had said it was the "gift of the boys got for the brigade." She did not mention this in his own observations, but decided to change the subject.
In addition there are oblique references in these reports that decapitation and mutilation could have been the work of infiltrators civilians and Pakistani soldiers.
Third, in general, the ceasefire has held in the past decade. India lost only two soldiers across Indian Kashmir in 2012, while the ceasefire before each team lost 400-600 soldiers each year. Moreover, some 100,000 Pakistani soldiers had been moved from the eastern border and while only some may have been transferred from the Line of Control that was definitely an advantage that India did not face those troops to India. What emerges from this summary of the reports is that if the Indian media focused on the facts and not let chauvinism prevails, these incidents have led to things such as the expulsion of the Pakistan hockey players of India Hockey League or the cancellation of the visa application of recently agreed in Wagah. It would have led to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said it could not be business as usual with Pakistan, etc. So why did it happen? Part of the Indian media and official reaction had not doubt motivated by the position taken by the opposition parties led by the Bharatiya Janata Party. Some Indians believe was caused by the scars of Mumbai and the feeling that Pakistan still evasive when it was a matter of enormous importance to the Indian public. Others suggest that despite the recent thaw mistrust is still high and this has not been helped by the regional situation.
No disappointment that Pakistan is forced to play a key role in Afghan reconciliation while India can only be seen from a distance. Indians do with skepticism Pakistan's contention that his help in reconciliation is motivated by the concern that if there is also destabilize ongoing turbulence in Afghanistan after 2014.
All these factors may have played a role, but, in my opinion, the most important factor is that emphasize problem-LoC creates a justification for maintaining a strong presence of the Indian army in Kashmir. After all, if the situation is such that only two Indian soldiers have died in Kashmir in 2012 and if the LoC is common ground that there is no basis for rejecting the demand of the people of Kashmir - presented by peaceful, non-violent protest - for withdrawal of these forces and revoke special powers enjoys Kashmir Army. Now, however, the army will discuss, and few resist Indian political leaders that the situation on the Line of Control, and by extension in Kashmir between India and carried out is too volatile to permit said withdrawal.It would be pity that, in terms of progress in the normalization of relations between India and Pakistan if this happens since then Kashmiri leaders may not be able to ensure that the protests in Kashmir remain nonviolent. Pakistan, of course, then be responsible for any deterioration of the situation in Kashmir.
