Message from Delhi : One side wants an 'integrated' dialogue. The other side wants a 'composite' dialogue. The one wants to discuss Kashmir as an 'issue', if not a 'dispute'. The other does not ; it wants to talk about 'cross-border terrorism'. Which border ?

The one wishes to talk of the damage to life and property inflicted by the 'jihadis'. The other says the conflict is indigenous. Point: what moral authority can be exercised over 'freedom fighters'?

Atal Behari Vajpayee, prime minister of India, and his men were lavish in the hospitality they extended as hosts. Their guests gracefully reciprocated. Our man, General Pervez Musharraf, president and chief executive and chief of army staff of Pakistan, is liked by modern India.

These Indians say he dresses correctly, wearing his shirt-tails tucked into his trousers, not appearing as if he has just leapt out of his bed. Our side, they say, exhibits its national spirit by letting its shirt-tails hang loose.

Musharraf is blunt but luckily not blank. He addressed the media on Friday evening and his message was well received in Delhi. The press is full of quotes from his press conference. To read the Indian newspapers is a treat. We, on our side, are able to read about the happenings on Wall Street, or on the main roads of Timbuctoo, but our antiquated laws do not let us read what is said on Motilal Nehru Marg, on Akbar and Aurangzeb Roads.

These latter names remain unchanged, for the Indians appear to have no qualms about the fact that they were ruled by the Great Moghuls. The Taj Mahal at Agra remains the Taj Mahal ; it has not been renamed Vallahbai Patel Mahal.

The good thing is that we, the two countries, have started talking to each other and that our two present leaders do not behave like petulant spoilt kindergarten schoolgirls, There is no shouting about 'Jill has stolen my pencil so I'm going to steal her rubber.'

Now, what has the Indian press said? Last Sunday's 'Statesman' (July 15), considered to be an anti-establishment paper, carried a front-page column by its editor, Cushrow Rustom Irani. His closing sentences read: "Prime Minister Vajpayee is doing what he can to help. And at least this newspaper will stand and applaud." It wants peace.

In yesterday morning's 'Indian Express' came a column from editor Shehkar Gupta, which opened up: "Now you know why commandos rarely rise to the top in most armies. Relentless training makes them instinctive, decisive and agressive but at the expense of the ability to calculate and look far ahead. Just the next objective, small even if vital, but not the big picture. Nobody knows if our leaders also came away with the same impression from the summit. But certainly General Pervez Musharraf gave some of the editors a rare insight into the working of his mind at his now infamous breakfast in Agra."

He continued: "Our politicians were shocked as he held forth because they are used to seeing their own soldiers being deferential, sometimes servile. So long have Pakistanis been held hostage by military power that they love it, at least initially. That's why it is wrong to see the Pak Army and the people as two different things."

Seema Mustafa in the 'Asian Age' yesterday in her front-page report from Delhi had this to say about the general's Friday evening session with the press of the two countries: "It was a masterly performance. Pakistan President General Pervez Musharraf, at his press conference, refused to indulge in recriminations, said the Agra summit was a 'good beginning,' praised, praised Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee sky-high, ridiculed protocol, described cross-border terrorism as a struggle for freedom, and urged the people of India, Pakistan 'and Kashmir' to strengthen the hands of the moderates and isolate the extremists by supporting a resolution of Kashmir and bringing peace to the 'poverty-stricken and deprived people of our two nations.'

He praised the media, defended his breakfast meeting with the editors in Agra, wondered why it had led to a major controversy, offered to hold a similar press meet for Mr Vajpayee on his visit to Islamabad, and strengthened his reputation for being a free, frank general committed to peace despite being a man in uniform. 'I told Mr Vajpayee that I accept there are problems for you,' he said, 'but you must accept that there are problems for me as well'."

On the contentious issue of the missing salute, the same newspaper reported from Udhagamandalam, Tamil Nadu: " 'If I were in uniform, I would have saluted General Pervez Musharraf," Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw said, reacting to the controversey over Air Chief Marshal A.Y. Tipnis not saluting the Pakistan president during his recent visit." And from Islamabad: "Pakistan president General Pervez Musharraf on Friday night said he was the first to salute Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee when he arrived at the Punjab governor's house in Lahore in March 1999."

Yesterday's banner headline in the 'Hindustan Times': 'Pervez plays both statesman and hawk'.

On Friday evening, whilst Musharraf was speaking at his Islamabad press event, I was dining in the company of Fali Sam Narriman, India's top-notch lawyer; the erudite Khushwant Singh, a man who needs no introduction, a man who is still laughing though well into his eighties; Lt-General Ardeshir Meherji Sethna, a former vice-chief of the Indian army staff; Admiral Ram Tahiliani, a former chief of naval staff. The admiral told me how at one point in time the three service chiefs of secular India were army General Melhotra, naval Admiral Ronald Pereira, and Air Chief Marshal Latif. We all drank a toast to 'peace in India and Pakistan and Kashmir, and goodwill to all men.'