The learnability of states

Perhaps there is a useful concept around the 'learnability' of states. This refers per my thesis, to the ability of countries to 1.) come to terms with ground realities and not live in a state of wishful thinking 2.) recognize the legitimate (and perhaps not so legitimate) and persistent aspirations of groups of people and do something even if reluctantly, about it 3.) to correct the mainstream view of history regarding an event or events when the party line is wrong or distorted 3.) and to do this in a reasonable timeframe

The Irish 'troubles' are a classic example of lack of learning of a state. It took a huge amount of time (after the initial formation of the independent country of Ireland in the southern part ; a surprisingly forward-thinking decision for colonialist Great Britain) for the UK to come to terms with the conflict in northern Ireland and agree to the final solution that worked there. Simliarly, the Israeli state is learning at a glacial pace in the Palestinian conflict.

In India, the thinking on Kashmir. 60 years after independence, the discussion on Kashmir has pretty much not budged an inch - anything other than Kashmir as a integral part of India is not up for discussion. This is astounding given the dubious nature of the accession of Kashmir to India in the first place, and the incredible amount of conflict, displacement and death over the years. One would expect minimally some form of autonomy to be actively on the discussion agenda, but nope.
And going by this article, perhaps the conventional understanding on China and border issues with them, also needs a significant shift: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/night-of-november-19/729644/0

The relatively sudden shift of China towards capitalism and financial liberalization in India in the nineties are examples of good learning in states perhaps.