Why do Indians find it so hard to trust General Pervez Musharraf? Why do we not see him, as western leaders seem to these days, as a genuine crusader against terrorism? Well, until I spent some quality time watching Pakistan Television (PTV) last week I was beginning to believe that we were perhaps judging the General too harshly. Thanks to PTV, I now understand why the average Indian sees Pakistan's military dictator as duplicitous and untrustworthy.

PTV is, as everyone knows, a state-owned channel and like our own Doordarshan serves mainly as a government propaganda organ. So, it is interesting that even as the General was condemning terrorism "in all its forms and manifestations", his spokesmen and anchors on PTV were announcing over and over again that Indian intelligence agencies had "stage managed" most of the acts of terrorism in India. Musharraf's spokesman-the little, mustachioed, military man called Rashid Qureshi-accused India of hijacking its own plane to give Pakistan a bad name. Every current-affairs programme I watched made similar charges. According to PTV, the Indian Government was responsible for the hijacking of IC 814, for the massacre of Sikhs in Chittisinghpora, for the bombing of the J&K Assembly, even for the attack on Parliament.

So, although the General condemns terrorism in the presence of western leaders he clearly does not accept that there have been any terrorist acts committed on Indian soil that fall in his category of terrorism. India, in his view, spends its time stage managing acts of terrorism simply to malign Pakistan. And, of course, the men who behead priests and murder innocent villagers in Kashmir cannot be described as terrorists either because they are freedom fighters. It is fortunate that the Government of India has had the sense this time not to ban PTV because without it we would never have known what was going on inside the General's head, never have noticed that in his view it is India that is the terrorist state and not Pakistan.

President George W. Bush and his roving ambassador, Prime Minister Tony Blair, would like us to give the General a chance to prove that he is taking Pakistani society in a more moderate direction. They point out that he has taken firm steps in recent days. He has banned certain Islamic fundamentalist groups, arrested religious leaders, attempted to rid the Pakistani Army of jehadi generals and spends much time these days condemning terrorism at televised press conferences. They would like the Indian Government to consider renewing a dialogue with the General, but is a dialogue possible as long as Pakistan's military ruler thinks that the Indian Government is responsible for all acts of terrorism against India? How can we even think of a dialogue that begins on such an absurd premise?

There was considerable western pressure on the General last week to be more serious about his alleged commitment to fight terrorism. Bush said, "I think it's very important for President Musharraf to make a clear statement to the world that he intends to crack down on terror." And Blair stressed at his news conference in Islamabad that "terrorism is terrorism, wherever it occurs, whoever are its victims".

Blair added that even if people felt strongly about a political cause such as Kashmir there was no justification for what happened on October 1 (attack on Srinagar Assembly) or December 13. Does General Musharraf agree? Because only if he does and if he accepts that the terrorists involved in these acts were Pakistanis, or at least had Pakistan's "moral support", is there any room for dialogue.

Without the possibility of a dialogue, we inch dangerously closer to war. Pakistan claims it does not want a war but can it be averted if all we get from the General are meaningless gestures like the handshake in Kathmandu? Can it be averted if Pakistan continues to insist that the only terrorists in the subcontinent are those who "stage manage" atrocities at the behest of the Indian Government?

If war is to be averted the General needs to go beyond meaningless gestures like handshakes and televised condemnations of terrorism. He may have succeeded in fooling western leaders but in Indian eyes he has done nothing yet that indicates that the Pakistani Army has abandoned its policy of sponsoring jehad. The defeat in Afghanistan means that we are likely to see more mujahideen in Kashmir. Does General Musharraf have the courage to prevent this?

Going by what his minions are saying on PTV, it seems clear that he does not even want to prevent it. So, whatever western leaders may choose to believe, to us he remains the same General who was planning a war in Kargil even as A.B. Vajpayee was taking a bus to Lahore to talk about the possibilities of peace. He has done nothing so far that indicates that he has changed his spots, nothing that makes him more trustworthy now than he was then.