Conflicts, generally speaking, spawn an ecology and an ecosystem where the voice of genuine stakeholders and parties, at times, gets obscured by those who neither have a standing in conflicts nor any mandate. The conflict in and over Kashmir is no different. It , too, has generated an ecology where certain players attempt to graft their own agendas and interests onto the conflict. One such endeavor which has come to light recently has been a conference held in Dubai wherein certain resolutions were passed without either the concurrence of the people nor did these players have any mandate or legitimacy. Most of the participants in the conference , are , in one way or the other , implicated in the power structures which seek to delegitimize the struggle of Kashmiris. This corresponds to the current climate wherein resistance to power and the structures generated thereof is sought to be delegitimized as radicalism. T he fact of the matter, in terms of Kashmir, is that there are well recognized stakeholders and parties who have been bypassed by the Dubai conference. This raises not only eyebrows bit also questions on the nature of the conference , its remit and rationale. Any attempts to bypass genuine representatives and aspirations of the people constitute a distraction and , at worse, something more insidious. Furthermore, among the participants of the Conference were members of mainstream political parties which have themselves forsworn their role in conflict resolution by their own philosophies and actions. The bane of Kashmir and its history has , at times, has been the noxious and brazen attempts by people to obscure the real issue and supplant it with themes and ideas that are palatable and sought to be promoted by powers with their own agendas. This cannot and should not be allowed to happen. The struggle of Kashmiris is not cheap. There is a certain hallowedness about it that brooks neither compromises on the cheap nor motivated interests. From the vantage point of history, it clear and obvious that attempts to by pass people and their genuine representatives can only mean machinations which while doing nothing to resolve the conflict create conditions for relapse. The conflict in and over Kashmir needs genuine and sincere attempts at resolution where the interests of stakeholders and the aspirations of the people central are held to be central and pivotal. This approach is not only noble and the desired but the only paradigm which is needed. Any other approaches lack mandate and thereby legitimacy!