Looks like you have not understood Pakistan. They signed Simla agreement with India and still talk of UN resolution of 1948. They agreed to settle the kashmir issue bilaterally but raise it at every international forum. So as you suggest they would agree to freeze the issue but will continue to create trouble for India. They can always say like in past that 26/11 was masterminded by RAW, kasab was an indian, Hafiz Sayeed, Lakhvi are social workers, dawood ibrahim is businessman, border firing is started by indian army, kashmiri terrorists are home grown and pakistan only provides moral support to kashmiri militants............ so whats the meaning of such a freeze?
Personally speaking, I give two hoots about what happens in Pakistan..To me India, its development and its rise is what matters.
The Kashmir conflict has had us putting our focus on the wrong issues...this is the time India needs to develop economically, socially and militarily...or else we wont be part of what is about to become the new world order..
In order to do this, we need peace both internal and external...and scrapping it out with a smaller, irrelevant (in my opinion) enemy to our global ambitions is unnecessary..
Not saying that Pakistan can hamper our growth, but we are unnecessarily diverting our focus to minor irritants...
I'm more in favor of converting the LOC to IB, but I would compromise with a freeze as well..
The advantages are several..
Economically, we will be viewed as a stable country with a focus on peace...Foreign investors lap up these kinds of gestures.
Militarily, we can regroup and set our house in order, one that is riddled with corruption and huge delays
We can focus on the bigger picture and fortify our NEast which to me is way bigger of a threat from a boistrous China..
Lastly, we need Pakistan to be stable..We knock their feet out now and what we have is a time bomb in the making that we might feel the heat from as well (read their internal problems that could change their political outlook)
Even though Pakistans actions have been duplicitous at times, we have to do this for our own benefit, especially given that we literally have no interest in reuniting Kashmir...so to us status quo serves welll.
And no one is saying that we go play twister with them after this...freeze simply means that we consolidate our position, let saner heads prevail and come to the table at a later point.
I see nothing wrong in it.
Also, keep in mind that just because I think Kashmir should be ignored until it is the last item on the list, that I'm somehow saying India is right. I'm simply being logically minded. If India is willing to budge on the rhetoric of Kashmir being integral to India, you'll find plenty of support from Pakistani side willing to negotiate peace with India; After all, every issue between the two stems from Kashmir, if Kashmir is resolved, neither side has any reason to be hostile to one another.
This much I can confirm, that the integration of Kashmir into India has become as irreversible as the existence of the Pakistani state when it seperated from India...that ship has sailed and reversing that process is next to impossible..
In the Indian mindset, Kashmir is India...even if we change the constitution, the Indian minds cannot be changed...
Pakistan will need to come to terms with this. Only option is LOC = IB, every other formula is as good as failed in my opinion.
Do remember, peace with India is a bigger priority for Pakistan than it is for India....and one can only negotiate with an upper hand. Pakistan has no hand when it comes to India at least at this stage...
