THE Hindi broadcasters on the Indian electronic media have invented a marvellously evocative word for the current occupants of the bunkers in Kargil: they are calling them "ghusbaithyas" (literally "intruders").

But whatever the legal status of these individuals, it is clear the Indian authorities are having a lot of trouble evicting them from their mountain redoubts. While their exploits might provide some solace to Pakistanis still smarting from the hammering their cricket team received from the Indians in the recent World Cup encounter, the fact is that their continuing presence across the Line of Control is raising the stakes in the unending confrontation between India and Pakistan.

As you read this, our Foreign Minister will be in New Delhi in an attempt to defuse the situation. But given the heady rhetoric and the sound of sabres rattling in both capitals, it is difficult to see what will be achieved through these talks. Basically, Pakistan is saying that we are only providing the fighters in Kashmir 'moral and political' support, while the Indians accuse Islamabad of not only arming and training the 'ghusbaithyas', but also sending Pakistani soldiers across the LoC. The truth, as always, probably lies somewhere in between these two positions.

Television in both countries is overflowing with crocodile tears as newscasters solemnly inform us of the plight of Kashmiri civilians on both sides of the Line of Control separating the two armies. Day in and day out, we are told about the devastation shelling is producing among civilians. Obviously, PTV makes no mention of the casualties our shells are causing while Doordarshan and Zee TV are equally silent on the mayhem the Indian Bofor guns are dealing out to the villagers on our side of the LoC.

This approach is the one constant factor in this conflict since iterupted over a half century ago: both sides have pretended to be greatly concerned about the fate of the Kashmiris, while in reality all they have ever cared for is the land. As a consequence, they are both prepared to fight until the last Kashmiri. Had they an iota of genuine feeling for the people caught up in this debilitating and draining conflict, they would have asked them what they wanted. Instead, both India and Pakistan cling stubbornly and blindly to their respective positions, repeating them like mantras that have lost all their original meaning, but continue to be mumbled like incantations against evil spirits.

Having mortgaged our past, present and future to the Kashmir conflict, generations of leaders and successive governments in New Delhi and Islamabad are now locked rigidly into their respective positions. Powerful vested interests militate against any flexibility. Instead of moulding public opinion to accept change in South Asia when the world is in flux, opportunistic politicians in both countries have used Kashmir as a stick to beat their opponents with. The result is that whenever there is a crisis, leaders respond with a series of knee-jerk reactions that are as unimaginative as they are predictable.

Whoever planned the current escalation apparently forgot that India is currently (and, it seems in recent years, perpetually) in election mode. This puts the caretaker BJP government under pressure not to appear soft on Kashmir. As it is, Mr Vajpayee is taking flak for his famous bus ride to Lahore, and his Defence Minister has not helped the BJP cause by his conflicting signals. Congress is in the enviable position of criticising the government from the sidelines for not having been aware of the 'intrusion' initially, and then not responding effectively enough. The danger is that in order to limit the political damage it has suffered, the BJP might choose to escalate further.

In Pakistan, Nawaz Sharif's government is apparently in the comfortable position of denying any complicity while offering to send Sartaj Aziz to New Delhi. Indian commentators are already asking that since Pakistan says it has nothing to do with the 'ghusbaithyas', what is the point of holding talks with its Foreign Minister?

Benazir Bhutto is advocating prudence from her self-imposed exile; while she was in power, she made the most bellicose noises over Kashmir and has repeatedly accused this government (wrongly, alas) of wanting to reduce the defence budget. While abroad, she talks of peace and co-operation in South Asia because that is what her Western audiences want to hear. At home, the opposition is willy-nilly supporting the government.

But this endless domestic point scoring obscures the real dangers posed by this posturing and muscle flexing. Given the potential the current crisis has of spiralling into the unknown territory of nuclear conflict, one would have expected a little more sense of responsibility in New Delhi and Islamabad. But alas, it is politics as usual. Judging from the macho talk emanating from both capitals, one would imagine that the nuclear tests simply did not take place last year. Do we really want such immature people to have their itchy fingers on the atomic trigger?

However, we cannot afford to say "a plague on both their houses", and wash our hands of the whole affair. The people of the two countries share a subcontinent; ultimately, it is their lives, their land and their destinies on the line here. Already, three generations have been blighted by this mindless conflict. But if we have suffered, the people of Kashmir have suffered even more through this unending confrontation. We have to stop blaming each other and get on with solving this problem once and for all.

Leaders and opinion makers in both countries have to grasp the simple fact that neither side can get what it wants through force now that nuclear arms have entered the equation. If they consult the people of Kashmir instead of the defence and foreign policy establishments, they will come to the conclusion that a resolution is not impossible, given political will and a degree of humanity. Unfortunately, both commodities are in short supply in the two capitals. According to an Indian opinion poll, 72% of Kashmiris interviewed in Indian-controlled Kashmir wanted independence.

If the Hindu and Buddhist areas of the state go to India, we keep Azad Kashmir, and the Vale (that beautiful bone of contention) is declared independent, we could have the contours of an agreement. Both sides would have something to appease public opinion, and the Kashmiris would have something to show for their long struggle. Open borders would reduce the pain of partition. This is not a new proposal, but unfortunately, it has not been sufficiently debated because reason and logic are constantly being overtaken by passions and paranoia.