When my article on India-Pakistan relations, ‘Where indifference can make a difference’ (Daily Times, September 18, 2014) was published on these pages last Thursday, little did I know that within hours the issue would come to the fore. And that it did with the statement by Pakistan People’s Party’s (PPP’s) Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari in which he reiterated Pakistan’s claim on Kashmir. This is the first high-level claim to Kashmir by anyone in Pakistan since Kargil and thus attracted a strong reaction from the other side of the border. Many people are trying to decipher the reasons for this statement by the leader of a political party that has ruled Pakistan more than any other political party. Some say it was mere rhetoric aimed at soothing the military establishment. Others think he was trying to connect with the Punjab audience that, according to cliché, is the only audience concerned with the Kashmir issue. Both of these may be true but I see another dimension to this statement by the PPP chairman. The statement is a sign of a more confident Pakistan, emerging after a decade or so of hardships. It is the sign of a Pakistan that, after a decade of feeling overshadowed by India’s story in the global media and its own perils at home, has found its voice and is seeing its strengths. Since Kargil, Pakistan, as a state, has been in a rough patch. The creation of Islamic militancy and its patrons in the power echelons under Zia and his protégés caused a lot of damage to Pakistan. The coup by General Musharraf was a manifestation of the infighting between those patrons in the power echelons. Kargil and the coup were followed by 9/11, which dragged Pakistan into a global conflict. This chain of events did hit the psyche of the nation hard and a defeatist mentality started seeping in. So hard was it that there came a time, around 2007, when six tribal Agencies and two settled areas of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa did not enjoy the writ of the state. The country’s largest city was feared as being on the verge of a three-way civil war. And Balochistan risked secession. At the same time, the country’s archrival, India, was the perceived success story in the global media. After a slumber of many decades, in the 1990s, India started opening up to the global economy and this coupled with a zero interest rate regime globally led to a massive influx of foreign investment into the Indian economy. This contrasting image of India and Pakistan disturbed Pakistanis a great deal. This chain of events did weaken Pakistan’s hand vis-à-vis India. Many thought that this weakness might be perpetual and echoing voices of outright submission followed soon afterwards. Even many of Pakistan’s friends in the US administration started asking Pakistan to withdraw from some of its strategic positions in relation to India. In all that turmoil, Pakistan went through a catharsis in which nothing remained sacred. The role of the judiciary, politicians, army, intelligence agencies and religious clergy faced harsh questioning. Amid all this noise and chaos, Pakistan started finding itself. For one, we realised that, despite the worst terrorism, we could still make the economy grow. We were among the first nations to recover from the shackles of the global financial crisis. More importantly, though the country has a large degree of vulnerabilities and risks, in the process we have uncovered the risks that face us. Though some of them are intense, we have started sensing that they may not be fatal. And just when the world on our west and our east is facing the rise of ISIS, Pakistan, because of its battles of the last decade, seems more prepared to face the challenge than any place else. In the process, the country has also found its socio-political direction. For the first time since Pakistan’s creation the political leadership of Sindh, Punjab, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and south, north and east of Balochistan have been unanimous over the idea of Pakistan. The 18th Amendment to the constitution is a manifestation of this consensus and marks the definition of a new set of rules between federating units. Just when they differ on modalities, the consensus on democracy as a form of government has never been stronger. While Pakistan was being battle hardened, the India story was coming to a halt after the 2008 financial crisis. Internal fissures that were overshadowed by that success story have started emerging. India is facing an internal Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) threat and the perception that it could emerge as a power to counter China has all but faded. While Pakistan is a country with many risks that are mostly known, India sits on equally dangerous risks and yet most of them are unknown. In this realigned balance, for the first time since Kargil, rather than talking of resolving Kashmir, a Pakistani mainstream political leader has reverted back to the claim on Kashmir. Where people see chaos in the PTI’s sit-ins and Bilawal’s Kashmir talk, I see the emergence of a new, more self-confident Pakistan that seems to have a clearer idea of its direction and that seems to have regained its confidence as a nation state. This Pakistan will not go the war route but will fiercely fight for its self-interest. In the natural cycle of evolution is emerging a more productive, more responsible and more independent Pakistan, more mindful of its strengths and weaknesses. The author can be reached on twitter at @aalimalik