As Zulfikar Ali Bhutto said at the United Nations, "Forcible annexation of Jammu and Kashmir by India is not a guarantee of Indian secularism, democracy or territorial integrity." Communal peace is not a new concern in India. Did it not exist when India committed itself to the holding of a plebiscite in Kashmir? How can the security of India Muslims be made dependent on the occupation of Kashmir by force, if blackmail is not be countenanced? Secularism should be a function of India's own history, the composition of its population, its diversified cultural heritage, as well as its international contacts. If India's Mughal heritage and its living reminders such as the Red Fort in Delhi and the Tag Mahal in Agra do not constitute the symbol, and if the presence in it of the world's largest religious minority does not provide substance of India's composite personality, and if they are unable to avert recurrent religious pogroms, how will the forcible occupation of a Muslim majority area such as Kashmir achieve the goal? The total number of Kashmiri Muslims in Indian-occupied Kashmir is around 7.5 million, while the total Muslim population in the Indian Union is 120 million. How can the captivity of the less than five percent in a defined areas assure the safety of the remaining 95 percent scattered all over the country? There were years when because of a state of relative quiescence it was assumed by some that the Muslims of Kashmir were reconciled to their place in India or were at least taking part in Indian political life. Did attacks on Indian Muslims cease during those periods in the rest of India? They did not; on the contrary, they persisted as before. Nor has the savage repression of the Kashmiri Muslims since 1989, characterised by cold-blooded killings, rape, arson, arbitrary arrests, torture and maiming of human beings satisfied the hate-mongering elements and lessened their frenzy against the larger body of Indian Muslims. The destruction of the 15th century Babri Mosque in 1991 is an example. If the proven and well-demonstrated loyalty of Indian Muslims since independence does not guarantee their security and well-being in India, how will the coerced allegiance of the Kashmiri Muslims do that? India is the only state in the world that demands a price from others for the safety of its own citizens. And with a posture of self-righteousness, to boot.