45 Years Overdue, Peace May Be Coming to Kashmir : India: Its partition of the territory with Pakistan would defuse their nuclear stand-off.

The brutal elements destroying the Balkans--ethnicity, ancient hatred and atrocity--are also at the heart of the deadly rivalry over the beautiful Himalayan valley of Kashmir. This bitter Asian dispute may pose an even greater menace than Balkan barbarism, for if India and Pakistan fight once again over Kashmir, the world could see its first true nuclear war.

Yet there is some good news: High-level interviews here point to a refreshing change of mood in India. After three wars with Pakistan since 1947, India is now ready to accept the permanent partition of Kashmir. It also will open top-secret defense installations to foreign observers if Pakistan will do the same. But this peaceful outcome requires a firm nudge from the United States.

Kashmir’s status has been hanging since Britain left the subcontinent 45 years ago. Amid scenes of horrific bloodshed, Muslim Pakistan and the predominantly Hindu Republic of India divided British India between them on religious grounds. But when the Hindu maharajah of Kashmir, a Muslim-majority state, opted to join India, the process broke down. India and Pakistan have fought two wars directly for control of Kashmir, in 1947-48 and in 1965; hostilities also erupted between the two countries over the 1971 Bangladesh war for independence from Pakistan.

Kashmir is now the longest unresolved dispute of consequence since the end of the World War II, eclipsing even the Arab-Israeli conflict in U.N. security annals. In earlier wars, both combatants used conventional weapons. Now, both have nuclear bombs. Intelligence data suggest that Pakistan has at least six, and India as many as 25 nuclear weapons.

Until recently, Kashmir’s status remained enmeshed in East-West competition. The United States stood behind Pakistan, while the Soviet Union backed India. Both of these “givens” changed during the late 1980s. A terrible polarization widened between Indian forces and ordinary Kashmiris after December, 1989. Most Kashmiri separatists now demand full independence from both Delhi and Islamabad. Human-rights groups report grave excesses by Indian troops, and evidence mounts that Pakistan-aided fundamentalists are matching India’s brutality.

Is there any way to help? To most Westerners, the Kashmir dispute is as opaque as it is remote. But the risk of nuclear warfare in Asia should energize us to use India’s change-of-heart to coax both parties toward the conference table.

Interviews at authoritative levels of Prime Minister N. V. Narashimha Rao’s government reveal the specifics of a possible deal with Pakistan over Kashmir:

--India would accept Kashmir’s permanent partition, with the existing “line of control” becoming the international frontier.

--If Pakistan trades land to India next to Kashmir’s southern boundary, India will yield much more terrain in north Kashmir, which would enable Pakistan to secure a strategic highway with China.

--India would not frustrate any future deal between Beijing and Islamabad to determine which parts of Kashmir now occupied by the Chinese would remain in their hands.

--With the Indo-Pakistan frontier settled, India would open dozens of new transit points to a border that now has just one crossing along its entire 2,912-kilometer length. Full normalization would follow in cross-border traffic.

Progress of this kind would have another beneficial consequence, I also learned. India is already quietly receiving foreign observers at its highly secret defense and space installations. This could be broadened to include inspectors at its nuclear facilities if Indo-Pakistan tensions abate.

The United States has acted before to ease tension in the subcontinent. In May, 1990, for example, national security officials visited both capitals to dampen a move toward war over Kashmir. American diplomats are now promoting confidence-building measures between the opposing armies.

Though Pakistan insists that it will not retreat from the nuclear threshold (the government confesses to possessing “at least one” nuclear device), privately the wisdom (and cost) of this option is being reconsidered. Relaxed relations also makes sense commercially; U.S. businesses are alert to South Asia’s newly liberalized internal markets, where American investors have a rare lead over the Japanese.

Given these security and economic interests, the United States should act to broker a Kashmir peace conference. A place for the Kashmiris must be found at the table--a major flaw in the Indian proposals--and India and Pakistan must also reduce the terrorism they now routinely sponsor against each other. But if these moves can be managed, the rethinking I heard in Delhi could mark the first move toward solving one of the most complex and bitter issues to divide the planet since the end of the World War II.