PAKISTANI Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi was recently reminded of his promise to visit New Delhi to resume talks, following the meeting between him and Indian Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna some months ago.

Very little progress was made then because Pakistan insists on discussing Kashmir, while India is not willing to do so. I think the core issue is not Kashmir, but distrust between the two countries. Even if Kashmir is solved, some other issue will assume the proportion of Kashmir since there is no confidence in each other.

My information is that Islamabad wants to discuss Kashmir from scratch while India from the point which was reached during Gen Pervez Musharraf's time when 80 per cent of the problem was reportedly solved.

Both the government and civil society in India have been distancing themselves from Pakistan for some time. Increasingly, there is an attitude of indifference.

Kargil was bad enough. But the terrorist attack on Mumbai two years ago was worse. Both incidents were watched on television leaving a deep impact on the Indian psyche. Even at the best of times, New Delhi has had reservations about Islamabad. Kargil and 26/11 have deepened them.

Kargil, a mini war, is behind India because it won it. But 26/11 has not been forgotten. Had the perpetrators been brought to book, as Pakistani Interior Minister Rehman Malik had promised Indian Home Minister P. Chidambaram, New Delhi would have felt confident because there is a feeling at this end that Pakistan is deliberately delaying the pace of the prosecution.

New Delhi continues to consider action against Hafiz Saeed, chief of Jamaatud Dawa, which is alleged to be a cover organisation for Lashkar-i-Taiba, as a litmus test. Pakistan has a point when it says that he has been let off by the court 'due to lack of evidence'. Had he even kept quiet and not threatened hostilities against India, New Delhi would have appreciated Islamabad's difficulties. But this has not been the case.

The government and civil society in Pakistan place Kashmir above all else. Perhaps an agreement is possible if a comprehensive or composite dialogue is begun. Whichever item is on the agenda, it should be implemented as soon as there is an agreement. For example, a pact on Sir Creek has already been initiated by both sides. That can be formalised to the relief of fishermen in the two countries.

These are the worst of times for relations between India and Pakistan. Some improvement may change the focus in both countries, one battered by scams and embarrassing tape revelations and the other by terrorists and political wrangling.

Since the media in both the countries largely toes the official line when it comes to India-Pakistan relations, there is no pressure on the governments on either side to resume talks. Activists working for good relations between the two countries have also fallen silent. The younger generation has grown up in an atmosphere of hatred and hostility. There is no people-to-people contact because the governments on both sides have drastically reduced the number of visas to each other's nationals. India, a bigger country, should have taken the initiative and made travel free for those above 70 and below 15. Yet things in New Delhi remain frozen.

The public response sustains hope. The biggest applause that a team received at the opening ceremony of the Commonwealth Games in New Delhi after India's was that of Pakistan. Indians returning from Pakistan talk not only about the hospitality but also of the affection they receive. When India and Pakistan double up to win an international tennis match, it tells the trend is positive, not negative. It means the problem is with the governments, more so with foreign offices and the media.

New Delhi is justified in criticising terrorism emanating from Pakistan. But it should be conscious of terrorism within India. The saying that all terrorists are Muslims is no more relevant because there is saffron terrorism. It is welcome to see the government taking action against them, although belatedly.

According to the anti-terrorism squad's charge-sheet, the list of targets, as gathered from questioning the saffron crowd in custody, included Delhi's Jama Masjid, the Ajmer Dargah, the Makkah Masjid in Hyderabad and the Samjotha Express.

The charge-sheet especially mentions the attack on the Samjotha Express. “The evidence collected in the aftermath of the Samjotha Express blast … is similar to the materials and equipment used in the Ajmer Dargah blast as well as the modus operandi. One can infer from this that the Samjotha Express blast could be the handiwork of the same terrorist outfit responsible for the Ajmer Dargah blast.” I wonder if New Delhi shared this information with Islamabad.

It is a pity that trust goes down further with the news that the Punjab chief minister had tipped off the Laskhar-i-Taiba before the US decided to freeze its assets. However, it is reassuring to find that his brother, Nawaz Sharif, who really counts in Punjab, believes that normalcy between the two countries is essential for development.

India is settling down as a secular, democratic state. The structure is still weak. But elections in Bihar showed that we are beginning to overcome the politics of identity. Unfortunately, we are become too chauvinistic and one can see why activist Arundhati Roy was booked for sedition for criticising the idea of India. That she evokes little attention within the country shows that her ideas are not acceptable. A country's integrity is not dependent on stringent laws or their use but on how tolerant and accommodating it is.

Shah Rukh Khan was threatened by members of the Shiv Sena when he agreed to hold a fundraiser for Pakistan's flood victims. His hasty retreat is unfortunate. However, the fact that the Sena has little support in the country sustains hopes that such elements are no hindrance to better relations.

The writer is a senior journalist based in Delhi.