Gen. Pervez Musharraf in an interview with NDTV has proposed an `out of box' settlement of the Kashmir issue. Now, he says, he is prepared to give up Islamabad's claim on Kashmir (which he was not entitled to, in the first place), if India and Pakistan ``are able to work out a solution based on self-government for Jammu & Kashmir''. It is in this context that certain things must be made clear.

First, it must be accepted that the partition of India into three segments was an act of criminality. It was based on the wrong presumption that Muslims primarily, it turned out, upper class Muslim landlords cannot live under a Hindu majority government.

Pakistan, in the circumstances, has been a grave mistake. Two, every state in India had the freedom to join either India or Pakistan. The matter was the prerogative of the State's ruler. The demography was irrelevant. The people besides, also were in favour of the state becoming part of India.

Had Mohammad Ali Jinnah not conspired to send Pakistan troops to take over Jammu & Kashmir by force and given the Maharajah time to make up his mind, it is anybody's guess how he would have reacted. Pakistan's invasion, unprovoked and illegal, gave the Maharajah no option but to join India.

Indian armed forces were all set to liberate Jammu & Kashmir but at the last minute Nehru decided, very foolishly, to take the issue to the Security Council and thereby handed the state's future on a platter to a hostile Britain and United States.

The matter was compounded by two factors: One, the belief among Pakistani generals that when it is war against India, Pakistan will win hands down on the theory that one Muslim soldier was equal, to a dozen Indian sepoys a mind-set Pakistan has yet to get over. The other factor was that Jammu & Kashmir was a Muslim majority state, forgetting the fact that this did not apply to Ladakh and Jammu, but only to the Kashmir Vale. And that if Muslims formed a separate state, then all Muslims in India will willy nilly have to migrate to Pakistan, a ridiculous proposition.

In its arrogance and hatred Pakistan fought three wars against India, losing all three. It can fight another three thousand more if it so wishes only to lose. Pakistan then tried terrorism to fight India on another level, and that hasn't helped it either. It is evident that Pakistan has now begun to see sense, realising that it is fast losing the support of its old allies, Britain and the US. So Musharraf is trying a new trick, without defining what it means.

He wants ``self-government'' for Jammu & Kashmir (something, incidentally, he is denying to Baluchistan). He is willing to give up his demand for a plebiscite in J&K, knowing fully well that India will not accept the idea under any circumstances. So, if war is to be ruled out, if terrorism has failed, Musharraf has only one option left. Ask for self-government for the beleaguered state. But what is selfgovernment?

There are half a dozen models. India has chosen what is relevant to its tradition and its future. It can't compromise on that. Besides, the Indian Constitution gives plenty of leeway to its constituent federal units. Barring defence, foreign policy and currency, which are Union subjects, J & K has just as much powers if not more than, say the Punjab or West Bengal, Maharashtra or Kerala. There is free movement of people within India. (See Introduction to the Constitution of India by Dr. Durga Das Basu).

Jammu & Kashmir should be pleased with what it enjoys now something denied to Pakistanoccupied territory. If India gives self-government to J&K, says Musharraf, who hasn't obviously read the Indian Constitution, he'll give up Pakistan's claim to it.

How nice. Like George Bush who has now realised that he can't keep Iraq under America's thumb for ever, Musharraf is beginning to realise that he can't take J&K whether by force or terrorism.

So what should he do to convince India that he means business? One, he can put a complete halt on terrorism, and dismantle the ISI. Two, he can withdraw his troops from Siachen. Three, he can see that the thousands of Kashmiri Pandits who had been driven out of the Vale in a clear case of ethnic cleansing, arefully rehabilitated, with their ancient properties restored to them. Four, he can give up his claim to Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir to the original J&K state, to prove his credentials as an honest broker.

And then, instead of wanting to be a partner with India in running the J&K administration, he can agree to a confederation between India, Pakistan and an autonomous J&K with a common currency, a common foreign policy and a common defence force, keeping out all alien elements like the United States and China, at arms length.

In due course, the Confederation can even include Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal, not to speak of other neighbouring territories, to become the most powerful nation in the world, capable of holding its own against the United States, China and even the European Union. The advantages are immense.

Indian and Pakistani scientists can work together for a common purpose, instead of being at cross-purposes. Both countries can easily cut down on defence expenditures, but more importantly Pakistan can get back its self-respect, instead of being treated as a pet poodle of the US or China. The beneficiaries would be all the people of south Asia.

More attention then can be given to primary education, health services, communal harmony, trade and commerce, and turn south Asia into a model for all countries to follow. The question of Muslim penetration of Assam and West Bengal will then cease to be an important issue, ULFA will become irrelevant and even Baluchistan could be persuaded to be cooperative.

Maoism will become a thing of the past and the resultant economic growth will turn out to be the envy of the world. Some time before he passed away, Jawaharlal Nehru wrote to his Muslim friend the Nawab of Bhopal, how evil impulses had triumphed in the creation of India and Pakistan and how ``all my sense of history rebels against the unnatural state of affairs....''

And, at the end of his long letter, he added: ``Ultimately, I have no doubt that India and Pakistan will come close together... in some kind of federal link... there is no other way to peace''. No, there isn't. Especially not in these days of globalisation.

And when one thinks of how East and West Germany came together, how Germany and France, once bitter enemies, came together to become intrinsic parts of the European Union, even while maintaining their individual identities, there is no need to despair.

Musharraf is coming to see sense. He has come a long way since Kargil, let alone 1947. His natural friend is neither China nor the United States, but it is India with which it shares a common past and a common heritage, let alone a common sense of belonging to each other. Sixty years is a long time to keep the embers of hatred glowing. We need a South Asian variant of the Treaty of Westphalia to restore to south Asia its old glory and untapped capabilities.

A confederated south Asia will be invinsible and it is never too late to make a start towards taking a new road to beckoning prosperity. Think again, General Musharaff.

Try to go down in history as a nation builder and not as a pet poodle to Beijing or Washington. They don't want you any longer.

Courtesy: www.samachar.com, 2006