The Heart of Asia conference concluded with a declaration calling for a regional and international effort against terrorism and terrorist sanctuaries. The names of terrorist groups that went in this declaration seem to be a product of hard haggling between the representatives of participating countries. Reportedly, Indian and Afghan pressure led to the inclusion of Lashkar-e-Tayiba (LeT), Jaish-e-Mohamed (JeM), and the Haqqani network, while Pakistani insistence was behind the inclusion of Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and Jamaat-ul-Ahrar. Pakistan, India, and Afghanistan have, of late, been stuck in a web of accusations and counter-accusations, centred around the premise that terrorism in their land is being supported from across the border. Where Pakistan blames India for using Afghan soil to train and finance the TTP so that it can create instability in Pakistan, India alleges Pakistani support towards the LeT and JeM for strategic objectives. Similarly, Afghan distrust of the Pakistani government stems from Kabul’s belief that Pakistan supports the Haqqani network, which perpetrates terrorism in Afghanistan. Hence, Pakistani participation in the conference was amidst a precariously tense environment in which there was little expectation of any breakthrough over thawing of relations with India or Afghanistan. The diplomatic front that Pakistan is putting forward by going the extra mile for dialogue is one of a country that is committed to peace and security in the region. While it was uncertain what India’s response would be to Advisor to Prime Minister on Foreign Affairs, Sartaj Aziz’s participation in the conference in Amritsar, nevertheless it was hoped that, at the very least, a meeting in person with Indian officials might break the cycle of jingoistic point scoring that the two countries have been locked in. Pakistan made it clear that Aziz would accept an invitation from the India side to meet on the sidelines of the conference. And there were meetings on the sidelines of the conference. Aziz was able to meet India’s National Security Advisor Ajit Doval, and even Afghan President Ashraf Ghani. However, there seems to be no concrete take away from all this. Meanwhile, Modi did not spare the opportunity to refer to Pakistan in a thinly veiled manner as a country backing terrorism in the region. The reference comes in an environment in which India has been very open about labelling Pakistan as a terrorist state, and putting off dialogue for the same reason. All of this puts Pakistan in a very difficult position. Continued Indian bellicosity is shaping Pakistani public opinion against rapprochement with India. Various political observers and analysts are opposing dialogue with India over self-styled notions of national honour and by pandering to the jingoistic sentiment in Pakistan to give a reply to India in its own language. This naturally puts pressure on the Pakistani government to indulge in point scoring at the expense of meaningful engagement with India. However, as Pakistan has made it clear, negotiations would have to happen, if not now then later. And it is better to not delay them over intransigent positions that militate against acceptable terms of diplomatic engagement. Furthermore, at the heart of the all that happened in Amritsar is a common concern: the spectre of terrorism. Shorn of all the implied incriminations of the declaration, it does agree on the transnational character of terrorism that the region is victim to. Hence, nothing short of a combined effort to eliminate terrorism can achieve peace and security in the region. This requires mutual trust and goodwill amongst the countries of the region, something that can hardly be achieved through over-simplified appropriations of blame on one country or the other. At the end of it all, a sincere effort through which Pakistan, India, and Afghanistan can resolve their outstanding issues can create the conditions for the kind of cooperation that is required in eliminating regional terrorism. *