The composite dialogue was the most elaborate peace endeavor ever between the two touchy neighbors. Under the process, all contentious issues were divided into eight groups and experts tried to disentangle them through a series of meetings.
Five rounds of talks were held on all eight packets of issues and the two sides had planned a sixth round when the terrorism attack occurred in Mumbai.
It is important that the foreign secretaries should not waste time over the nomenclature of talks, but rather exploit the mutual desire for talks. The aim should be instituting a tangible system of regular interactions and exchange of ideas to settle disputes.
Pakistan says the most important issue is solution of the Kashmir question while India insists that cross-border terrorism is the main issue. Under the composite dialogue plan they were joined together and discussed by the foreign secretaries. The same formula could be adopted to get the simultaneous talks underway again.
Second, the lack of movement on the key issues should not prevent progress in people-to-people contacts, visa relaxation and trade ties. India is more interested in cultural and trade matters while Pakistan wants to deal with security related issues first, insisting that lack of progress on key problems ultimately harms the normalization of relations in other sectors.
There is hope for resumption of talks, as the elected governments in the two countries are still new and do not face any obvious immediate political pressure. There is also general consensus that talks should be held and engagements continue even if there are occasional confrontations.
The two sides have shown flexibility and, despite deadly border skirmishes of last year that killed several civilians, are ready to sit together.
No major breakthrough is expected from the current meeting, however, as these are really talks about starting talks. However, if the foreign secretaries can agree on the modalities to revive the peace talks it will be a big step forward.
The writer is a columnist with China.org.cn. For more information please visit: http://www.china.org.cn/opinion/SajjadMalik.htm
Opinion articles reflect the views of their authors, not necessarily those of China.org.cn
Go to Forum >>0 Comment(s)