Quote Originally Posted by hammer View Post
It does. A big change in fact. It will prove the extreme right wing argument that you cannot live peacefully with muslims. It will prove their argument that, the day the muslim minority becomes majority, you will need to secede a part of your country to the most proximate muslim nation and risk having the Hindu minority driven our of their homes at gun point.

It will confirm our worst fears and it would change our secular character forever and god knows what next.

In fact, a friend of mine told me once that when he asked a retired Indian army officer why we are still fighting for Kashmir instead of letting it loose, he said that he does not have any objection of granting freedom to Kashmir , as long as the whole Indian muslim population is moved out to Pakistan.

I don't buy it. Right wing loonies succeed best in whipping up hatred when India is threatened by islamicts in pakistan (terrorism etc). It does not affect the poor hindus (their concerns are far more existential) but sways the middle class (by polarizing our society) and the right wing factions end up getting the "security" vote. Even though the last federal elections disproved this point the growth of Indian middle class means that the above point is not entirely invalid. Muslims in kashmir whether they live under Joint admin or under complete control also does not count much in my view. Indian polity will not be affected negatively - and thats what counts to me the most. Failure to act does in ways I explained above. Military interests/perspectives may differ but ultimately "national interests" should be redefined to take this into account.