I honestly don't think so.
Musharaff has nothing to gain, and everything to lose, by going nuclear. I know he says he doesn't know where the nukes are and can't control them, but I simply don't believe that. He is, above all else, a military dictator.
Since he wants to maintain his power, it's in his advantage to let India clean out the rat's nest in Kashmir.
All due respect but that is one the most uninformed statements I have ever seen on FR.
If India attacks Pakistan....which they are now justified to do after this recent attack that murdered women and children...then Pakistan "must" retaliate.
The Pakistani people already see Musharaf as an illigitimate tool of the United States that is betraying Islam [I am not talking about the radicals...in our definition, the majority of Pakistanis would be considered radical] and if he were to then allow India...their "bitter to the point of stupidity" enemy to assault into Pakistan, he would most assuredly lose the power you refer to.
This thing could blow...and if it did come to an exchange...it would really be ugly. Without a doubt the single greatest loss of life in history. Not that I would mind some neighborhood revitalization in that region but nobody intentionally wants that kind of slaughter.
This is what you get when you have two idiot religions in control of nuclear weapons.
Grace Lord, grace.
That is a highly unlikely scenario. If India attacks into Pakistan, the Kashmir border would be the worst place to do it. They have historically attacked into the open central plain, cutting Pakistan in half. This plain is excellent tank country. The Kashmir, on the other hand, is heavily defended mountain passes that would negate any military advantages the superior India Army has. It would be extremely costly for them to attack there, a monumentally stupid stragtegic move.
If the Indians do successfully attack Pakistan, and the Pakis feel they're about to be overrun, they have promised to use their nukes. Under such circumstances, they would likely do so.