STRANGELY, whenever someone points to the blood-soaked Valley of Kashmir, under illegal occupation of India for good 60 years, as a veritable source of terrorism in the region, its leadership becomes overly sensitive and edgy and start reacting in a childish manner. But the history of the dispute, New Delhi's solemn commitments to resolve it in accordance with the wishes of the people expressed through a UN-sponsored plebiscite, and its continued brutal hold of the Valley cannot possibly be overlooked when serious attempts are made to find the real provocation for the raging phenomenon of militancy. The world's influential powers had in the past come to terms with India's stand in the lure of the economic benefits it offered to them and had compromised with the bilateral process that later on emerged in the shape of composite dialogue, knowing full well that this non-starter move for the normalisation of relations between the two countries was nothing more than a New Delhi ruse to let the issue fade into the murky pages of history. Hence, the Indian leadership and media's touchiness at British Foreign Secretary David Miliband's observation underlining the need to settle the issue to effectively plug the fountainhead of terrorism and discontentedness. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has reportedly written a letter of protest to British counterpart Gordon Brown. How puerile and unreasonable is New Delhi's outrage at Miliband's remarks can be judged from the fact that while it accuses Lashkar-e-Taiba as guilty of the Mumbai tragedy and several other incidents in the country, the Lashkar says "its cause is Kashmir". It is hoped that now that the US and other major powers have come to the conclusion that Kashmir does constitute a major provoking agent for terrorist acts, they should make serious efforts to get it resolved if they really want the end of militancy. Meanwhile, the irrational pressure from India continues, spearheaded by Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee, who has now suggested to the international community to discipline the "recalcitrant state" of Pakistan, which has adopted terrorism as "an act of state policy". The world has already spoken about these two charges and exonerated Islamabad. It hardly calls for a reaction from its side. It is now the obligation of influential states to pressurise New Delhi to hand over the evidence it has and in its entirety in the interest of conducting a thorough probe. They ought to bring home to it that without a complete dossier nowhere in the world a court can convict the accused.