Indian Army Chief General Bipin Rawat has said the situation in Kashmir will improve soon and the country’s armed forces are fully prepared to thwart any threat to India’s sovereignty. According to media reports quoting Rawat, “India is fully ready for two and a half front war with China, Pakistan and elements posing threat to the internal security”. The General added that “The situation in Kashmir will be normal soon.” There is an element of surreality to Rawat’s remarks. This surreality accrues from the implications of the General’s remarks: a certain bellicose aggressiveness and a degree of vanity disconnected from reality. Consider Rawat’s, “ two and a half front war” formulation. In military terminology, there’s no such thing or formulation as a “ two and a half front war”. What there is and what have been employed in the history of warfare are “two front wars”- aimed generally to deplete a warring opponent by fighting on two separate fronts. But what Rawat has in mind is a two front war between India, China and Pakistan and asymmetric war within. What the General does not either understand or realize is that “ war is diplomacy by other means”- as delineated by the great theorist of war, Carl Von Clausewitz. Wars are then not fought for the sake of wars but as a means towards certain ends. Moreover, in a triangular conventional contest between India, Pakistan and China, and with the presence of nuclear weapons in the equation, bellicosity of the type demonstrated by Rawat might not hold water. The General is then , by making the assertions he has made, has gotten carried away by his own rhetoric. In terms of Rawat’s remarks on Kashmir and the return of “normalcy” here, it is not clear what he means. The dictionary defines normalcy as “something conforming to type, standard or regular pattern”. Given this definition, what would conform to type, standard or regular pattern mean in Kashmir? What standard and benchmark of normalcy is Rawat employing? Again, the General is engaging in vainglorious talk and getting trapped in his own rhetoric. For real “normalcy” to descend in Kashmir, one major indicator would be absence of war talk. And, perhaps more importantly, it would entail the primacy of the diplomatic and the political- themes and ideas that are sorely and totally missing in the discourse in India vis a vis Kashmir. The moment when the realization of the primacy of the political and prudence informed statecraft would dawn upon powers that be in India, it might be held to be the beginning of wisdom and sagacity- both missing in abundance contemporarily by those who wield and hold power.