Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf has proposed that both Pakistan and India give up claims on Kashmir and allow it to become independent:

“Compromise inherently means stepping back by both sides,’” Musharraf said in an interview yesterday with India’s NDTV network, according to a transcript. “Both sides have to give up their positions and step back. If one of us is not prepared to step back, we will not reach a solution.”

Pakistan supports a four-point solution that would give the region self-governance or autonomy, maintain Kashmir’s borders, produce a withdrawal of troops and create a mechanism for running the territory between India, Pakistan and Kashmir, Musharraf said in the interview.

Although not new, it’s none-the-less a difficult position for Pakistan to put forward as it will meet fierce resistance among religious leaders and the population itself. This is probably with good reason, as Pakistan’s original claim on Kashmir was, in my opinion, more valid than India’s:

Kashmir referred to several smaller states that had been combined by over time by the Singh family. . . Sir Hari Singh was the autocratic ruler of Kashmir, or the “maharaja,” in August 1947. Kashmir was one of the more than 550 “Princely States” that made up the Indian subcontinent under British rule. The maharaja had three choices: to become an independent state, or join either India or Pakistan.

[. . .]

All of the rulers of the Princely States faced the same decision, but practicality decided the manner in many cases, and those clearly within the bounds of India or Pakistan, or when congruous with the border, joined those nations respectively. Kashmir posed a diplomatic problem from the beginning for two reasons. First, it was strategically located near both the Soviet Union and China. Second, it was one of the few cases in which the religion of the majority of the population and that of the ruler were different – nearly 80 percent of the population was Muslim, while the maharaja was Hindu. Additionally, Kashmir was congruous with Pakistan.
[. . .]

The ruler maharaja of Kashmir would have preferred to become an independent state, but faced opposition from both the Pakistani and Indian sides, as well as the British. The British Viceroy of India, Lord Louis Mountbatten, was tasked to oversee the division of the subcontinent. . .

[. . .]

The controversy was due in part to the conflicting means of deciding the future of Princely States. On one hand, the rulers were to choose for themselves, yet on the other the Boundary Commission had instructions that demarcation should have been accomplished by “ascertaining the contiguous majority area of Muslims and non-Muslims,” and was meant to be an objective process. (Jones 2002: 59)

The commission was carried out by a respected lawyer, Sir Cyril Radcliffe, who was selected in part because he had never been to India and it was thought that that fact would prevent any appearance of being subjective. However, because it later became apparent that Mountbatten persuaded Radcliffe to award the Muslim majority area of Ferozepur to India when it had been earmarked for Pakistan, the potential for controversy was realized.

[. . .]

Although there is no evidence that Mountbatten influenced Singh on the decision to join India, he certainly created the conditions that made it a viable option when he suggested that Gurdaspur, a Muslim majority area that provided the only practical land link from India to Kashmir, could be awarded to India. India recognized this and began plans for bringing Kashmir into its domain. This has caused endless accusations from Pakistanis, who charge that Mountbatten was far from neutral. However, Mountbatten did also publicly take the position that if Singh opted for India that the decision should be temporary and should be decided by a referendum. (Jones 2002: 60-61)

The case of Junagadh also set a precedent for Pakistan obtaining Kashmir. Junagadh was a state with an 80 percent Hindu population and a Muslim leader. Although not contiguous with Pakistan, it was located in Western India and had the possibility of a sea link to Pakistan. When the Muslim leader decided to accede to Pakistan, India invaded, held a popular vote, and Junagadh became part of India. (Jones 2002: 69)

However, this was not to be the case for Kashmir. Mountbatten had opened up the possibility of Kashmir going to India, and India lobbied to Kashmir’s Hindu leader longer and harder than Pakistan did. In fact, because Pakistan thought that Kashmir would “fall into [the] lap” of Pakistan like a ripe fruit, they did not exert any pressure on Singh until far too late. (emphasis added)

If both sides can accept such a deal, a more permanent de-escalation of tensions between the two nuclear armed states will be welcomed.