An entirely superfluous debate has taken place in the so called “mainstream” political spectrum of Jammu and Kashmir. The debate pertains to the number of youth who have taken to militancy in the region. While the statistics trotted out by the administration suggest an increase, the debate in the “mainstream” camp revolves around finger pointing and slanging matches. This very fact and the actual elision of the reasons that undergird the conflict in Kashmir dimension make the debate superfluous. Statistics neither determine conflict and conflict sustenance or resolution; these are what they are: mere numbers from which nothing substantive can actually be extrapolated. The fact is that there is conflict in and over Kashmir. Numbers, statistics or related themes cannot and will not undercut this reality. Insurgency in Kashmir is a manifestation of the conflict. If insurgencies, global and local, are analyzed and assessed, what emerges is that there is an ebb and flow to these which depends on context, situational variables and other factors. But, unless and until, the larger conflict(s) that spawn insurgencies, are not addressed, these remain, in different forms, permutations and combinations. It is, in the final analysis history that matters; the history of Kashmir is an ungainly one which has remained a prisoner to state interests and the maneuverings that flow from this. Over time, this very fact has created a politics of truculence which views conflict resolution with jaundiced eyes. The end result is a frozen condition wherein tactics and strategy and politico-diplomatic jostling emerge as a surrogate for conflict resolution. In this schema then, statistical illusions and numbers assume salience for powers that be. The denouement of Kashmir’s politics and history, instead of feeding angst and intensification of the conflict should have instead fostered a genuine desire to resolve it. But, alas, no such paradigm has been forthcoming. The result is a gridlock which, in reality, and from a longue duree perspective, serves no one. However, nothing is too late or too passé in politics. There still is time to inject sobriety and develop a prudent perspective which, among other things, should mean elevating conflict resolution to a paradigmatic status and resolve the conflict in and over Kashmir for good. It will not only prevent much grief and energy but redirect it towards ends which can only redound to the good of the South Asian region.