Following the revelation by Time Magazine that India had agreed to adjust the Line of Control by few miles as a solution to the Kashmir Problem and the Indian denial of it, there appeared a news in Asia Times with more details of the LoC deal.
Now there is a report suggesting that it was not the Congress led UPA administration that first came up with the idea.

But looking at options on J&K, the Manmohan Singh government would not be the first to have thought of forging peace with Pakistan by altering the LoC. A Rand Corporation 2001 publication states that responsible elements in the NDA government had suggested that changes in the LoC could be considered.

It says privately India admits at the “highest levels” that making the LoC the international border is the “only acceptable” option for New Delhi. To give the exact lines: “From India’s point of view, the only acceptable concession is the conversion of the LoC (perhaps with some modifications) into a de jure international border, a fact privately admitted in interviews at the highest levels of the Indian government.”

Even though India-Pakistan engagement is far from over, most “credible” solutions seem to be various “LoC formulae”. The Rand study does, however, note that “larger Indian goal is to provide a positive atmosphere so that the relevant Pakistani leadership can build public support for the concessions that Islamabad will eventually have to make”.[NDA suggested changes in LoC]

BBC News meanwhile has a feature on the possible solutions to the Kashmir problem.

Few days back we had blogged saying that since India’s Minister of State for External Affairs met Yasser Arafat, it would be only fair if the Prime Minister of India visited Israel. Well it has not reached there yet, but definitely the Prime Minister is doing the balancing act.

The PM

The Indian Prime Minister is now in New York and is meeting world leaders. But he gave the most important speech to the CEOs of American Companies in New York Stock Exchange. (and the best the Charles deGaulle next door could come up with was Pakistanis speak better english than Indians)

Calling the Exchange,

Few days back, the Time Magazine broke the story that India was willing to move the border of Jammu and Kashmir few miles to the east as a solution to the Kashmir Problem. This was immediately denied by India. But now Asia Times has more information on the deal.

First Musharraf, say Western diplomatic sources, assured US Secretary of State Colin Powell that Pakistan was agreeable to a territorial adjustment along the LoC, to which India apparently agreed during earlier discussions with Powell before he left for Islamabad from New Delhi on a recent visit to the subcontinent.

A similar statement by Manmohan, though denied by the Indian High Commission, provides credence to the claim that a blueprint for a modified LoC as an anchor to a settlement in Kashmir already exists.

A just-retired general of the Indian army, who preferred not to be quoted by name, told Asia Times Online that a settlement blueprint that has been agreed in principle by both sides exists and is being kept under wraps to be disclosed at a juncture politically suitable for both countries.

The general added that adjustment of a few kilometers on either side of LoC is unlikely to alter the strategic advantage of either India or Pakistan. He claimed that political leaders at a very senior level in the previous administration and the present United Progressive Alliance government have been briefed on this. [On Kashmir, hot air and trial balloons]

I hope the anonymous source who gave information to Time Magazine is not the same one who is telling all this to Asia Times. India’s National Security Advisor and his Pakistani counterpart have been meeting in various countries having secret discussions and anything the elected leader of India and the dictator of Pakistan will discuss in New York would have been agreed upon previously. This seems to look more than a trial balloon now.

Alex Perry of Time breaks the story of the offer that the Indian Prime Minister is going to place before the Pakistani Dictator Musharraf for solving the Kashmir Problem.

There, a senior Indian official tells TIME, Singh will make an offer to help defuse South Asia’s most dangerous flash point, Kashmir. India, says the official, will offer to “adjust” the Line of Control, the de facto border dividing Kashmir, “by a matter of miles” eastward. Indian analysts confirm that the offer has been under discussion, in India and with Pakistan’s leadership, for months

There was a proposal from the Indian side to convert the Line of Control to an international border as a solution to the Kashmir problem ? But this was turned down by Musharraf with the question, “Then why did we fight so many wars ?”.
Let’s look at each of these wars in detail. In 1948 even though the Maharajah of Kashmir had a standstill agreement with Pakistan, there was infiltration by several thousand Pashtun tribesmen from the Hazara district of NWFP. Since the NWFP were tribal areas were beyond the control of the Pakistani Government, the Pakistani Prime Minister claimed that they had nothing to do with it.
After the war with China which India lost in 1962, the Pakistanis started training Kashmiri youth in military camps to fight as guerillas. In 1965, several thousand armed men crossed the Line Of Control who were mainly professional Pakistani soldiers and non-Kashmiris. They expected support from the Muslims in the valley, but it did not happen and the war was stopped by United Nations.
In 1999 it was the Pakistanis who crossed the Line of Control again. The army did not even inform the Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. The Prime Minister had to go to Washington and agree to withdraw the troops after he started losing the war.
Each time it was the Pakistanis who violated the Line of Control and got humiliated by the Indian Army. So when Musharraf asks why did we fight so many wars, the answer is, we did not start the wars, you did, and we cannot be held hostage to your mistakes.

On August 15, 1947, when India became Independent, the Maharajah of Kashmir had signed a standstill agreement with the government of Pakistan, which is a precursor to accession. The Pakistanis also took over charge of Jammu and Kashmir’s post and telegraph system, food supplies and essential commodities. In September armed groups from Pakistan came from west Punjab and started looting and raping the the Muslims in Kashmir valley, the same people whom they had come to liberate. It was the Indian army which came in and chased these people back into Pakistan.
One of the major grievances against the Hindu Maharajah was that he did not care much about his Muslim subjects. Reports from the early 1900s talk about Muslims living in medieval conditions of poverty and oppression. Muslims were forced to work for the Pandit elites who were also the landlords and also they were not permitted to become officers in the state’s military. On 13 July, 1950, Sheikh Abdullah, the Prime Minister of Jammu and Kashmir introduced sweeping land reforms 700,000 landless peasants, mostly Muslims became landowners in a sweeping land reform act. (Many Malayalis incorrectly claim that it was the communists in Kerala who did land reforms first in India).
After Independence all Governments have pampered the state with special powers and lavish financial assistance.

Habibullah’s report laments that Kashmir’s ‘economy is growing more and more slowly’ and that ‘the state’s infrastructure is crumbling.’ Since he is, as always, referring here only to the J&K state of India, the reality must be pointed out that, in 2003, the reputed India Today magazine gave J&K the ninth overall rank among the then 17 big states of India, the classification being based on eight factors of macro-economic performance. Another reality is that, according to a report by G Venkatramani in The Hindu of October 8, 2004, India’s J&K has only 3.48 percent of its population falling below the poverty line and its consumption of foodgrains is higher than the norm of 420 g per capita per day set by the Indian Council of Medical Research. What’s more, the research foundation of the internationally renowned economist, M S Swaminathan, has drawn up a 15-point action plan that will achieve a poverty-free J&K by 2007. Clearly, the government of India’s massive financial assistance for over a decade and the presence of a large number of security forces with families have helped create a large market and a generally benign economic ambience in the state — without any foreign aid of significance. [Why should US have a role in J&K?]

If all these do not keep the people in the valley happy, then why are we putting so much effort ?
[References: Kashmir : Roots of Conflict, Paths to Peace, Pakistan: Eye of the Storm]

India has decided to extend its support for the Palestinian cause and to make that clear the Minister of State for External Affairs is personally traveling to meet Yasser Arafat. Will he ask Arafat to reign in his suicide bombers ? No. Will the junior minister visit Israel in this trip ? No.
This trip is to convince the Arab world that India is not really cozying up to Israel. The Minister will convey to the Arabs that the previous Govt. made of “Hindu Fundamentalists” may have gone overboard, but No, Sir, we are here at your feet.
Considering the fact that it was Israel who helped many times when India was under attack, it is only fair that the Junior Minister’s visit to Palestine be followed later by a visit by the Indian Prime Minister to Israel. As it was Congress which established formal relations with Israel in the first place, it would right for Manmohan Singh to be the first Indian Prime Minister to visit Israel.

The proposal for building a gas pipeline from Iran to Indian through Pakistan has been going on for sometime. There has also been another proposal to build a pipeline from Western India to Pakistan to carry diesel. The rationale behind these pipelines is that nations who do business with each other will refrain from going to war.

Finally, history shows that nations that do serious business with each other seldom go to war, even when they’re ideologically far apart. The best example of this is the US and China, which share huge investment and trade ties, but have vastly different political ideologies. While India and Pakistan work on the energy pipes, they should also negotiate free trade between themselves, build expressways across the border and open up each other’s sky and sea lanes to people and freight. Economic engagement pays a double dividend: We get lasting peace across our borders, and everybody gets richer.[Peace Pipes]

But this is a very risky proposition at this point as the Pakistani rhetoric is increasing day by day as if they will suffocate if they do not separate Kashmir valley from India. The Pakistani Prime Minister has even stated that the fate of the pipeline is linked to Kashmir. So long as Pakistan sticks to its Olive Trees, it is better for India to put the proposal on a slow burner.

Recently one of our readers asked for more details on the co-operation between Israel and India. You can hear that from a former Jewish General in the Indian Army.

“Actually, there is a long history to what is now happening. As early as 1962, during the war between India and China, prime minister Nehru appealed to prime minister David Ben-Gurion, asking him for military aid. Already then, Israel sent military equipment, mainly 120 mm. mortar rounds. It happened again in the war against Pakistan in 1965 and in the war in 1971: Israel supplied India with mortar rounds, even 160 mm. rounds. And Israel once again proved its generosity in the military conflict with Pakistan in 1999; on that occasion, it also assisted in supplying ammunition, even bombs meant for the Mirage jets of the Indian air force.”

The General also believes that even the present Indian Govt. will maintain excellent relations with Israel, even though they have issued statements supporting the Palestinian cause.”

A victory by the Congress Party under the leadership of Sonia Ghandi in the elections to be held in India in May will not lead to any change in India’s policy toward Israel. The good relations will continue, and in certain area even grow deeper,” assesses Lieutenant General J.F.R. Jacob, a former senior Indian army officer and a Jew, who yesterday completed a five-day visit to Israel. “If I had to rank the present-day level of relations between India and Israel,” Jacob adds, “I would give them a 9 out of 10.”[The Jewish general who beat Pakistan]

Well, India and Israel are launching programs to develop nano materials and hi-tech components needed for electronic warfare. Bilateral trade between the two countries have reached $1.23 billion dollars , an increase of about 43%.
The other day Chanakya or Kautilya or Chandragupta Maurya, who runs vichaar.org asked if India has any military allies. Israel is one country who has come to India’s help all the time and India should do everything to maintain that relation.