Explanation and elaboration

In today's world, influenced and indoctrinated as it is by the media, perception is more important than reality. This the managers of Pakistan's foreign policy seemed to have learnt as they came under a sharp attack by their detractors for 'conceding' to India - what they had not. A timely explanation or elaboration of some of the salient points agreed to by the two prime ministers in their meeting on the sidelines of the SCO summit in Russia would have definitely spared the PM's Advisor on National Security and National Affairs, Sartaj Aziz, of labour of going to the media almost a week after the event. He has vociferously defended the government position, asserting that the said meeting was at India's request and all issues and disputes between the two countries were discussed at the hour-long meeting, including Jammu and Kashmir, tension on the border and the RAW's role in fomenting insurgency in Balochistan. Of the 'concessions' Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his team are accused of making to the Indians three merit a special mention. One, the lingering dispute between India and Pakistan over Jammu and Kashmir is said to have not been raised by the Pakistan side, as it is mentioned in the joint statement issued after the meeting. Two, that the Pakistani side accepted Indian accusation of involvement in the Mumbai carnage by agreeing to provide voice samples of Lakhvi. Three, that the Indian intelligence agency RAW's involvement in fomenting terrorism in Pakistan, particularly in Balochistan, is missing from the joint statement. Yes, that is so. But one would be naïve to expect that in their first encounter - essentially pushed by the outside powers - prime ministers Nawaz Sharif and Narendra Modi could go into specifics, like the Composite Dialogue which did not deliver.
Both for Pakistan and India the best bet was to sit and talk and that is now possible. The national security advisors of the two countries would be meeting, first in New Delhi and then in Islamabad, to discuss security concerns of each other and explore ways and means to remove them. India has agreed that it is "collective responsibility" of the two sides to ensure peace and development. If India wants Lakhvi's voice samples, Pakistan has asked for "additional information" for its justification. And as they meet Pakistan would be taking up RAW's role in fomenting trouble in Balochistan, Karachi and elsewhere and the Samjhauta Express blast in 2007 killing 68 people. In the meanwhile, the senior officers of border security of the two countries would meet, followed by a meeting of the Directors-General of Military Operations to review situation on the common borders in order to defuse tension which had derailed the talks between Pakistan and India. Given the sensitivity of the issue of Kashmir for both the countries its mention by name at this stage was perhaps not possible for India. But Prime Minister Modi did accept that this should be discussed and for which he said India is prepared. To outrightly criticise the prime minister of putting Kashmir on the back burner is as much an expression of shallow understanding of process of inter-state negations as of unfamiliarity of merging ground realities in the Occupied Kashmir. And then there was no escape from this positive development on the eve of joining the Shanghai Co-operation Organisation which expected both Pakistan and India to exhibit their willingness to sign its conventions including the one which demands of the two to resolve their bilateral disputes by peaceful means.