The foreign secretaries of both India and Pakistan, Nirupama Rao and Salman Bashir, whilst meeting on the sidelines of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) conference in Thimpu, Bhutan have, this time round, ventured something old, something borrowed, and something slightly new. Borrowing from rhetoric that has been around in the past, both foreign secretaries agreed that India and Pakistan need to resume constructive dialogue to resolve all outstanding issues between these decades-long rivals. This is something we have all heard before, and have also seen no real headway being made in any constructive talks between the two countries. Therefore, it comes as little surprise that no date has been set for the resumption of the dialogue. This reiteration of continuing communication should be recognised for being just what it is: a small step forward. This is the first time both countries have once again raised the possibility of a dialogue resumption after the meeting between Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi and Indian External Affairs Minister S M Krishna in Islamabad in July last year. However, it cannot be overstated just how important this dialogue is. When two nuclear-armed neighbours co-exist uneasily under an umbrella of suspicion and mistrust, it is indeed dangerous to stay away from talks. That was the situation that existed after the Mumbai attacks in 2008. India and Pakistan developed a stone cold silence, which was not breached till they met again in Sharm el-Sheikh in July 2009. Dialogue was once again given key importance in Thimpu last year on the sidelines of the SAARC summit, in the same vein as seen on Sunday. However, history and evidence suggest that both countries are merely fulfilling procedural requirements when they speak of speaking. Nevertheless, there is something new in the equation now. The fact remains that both countries face the unrelenting threat of terrorism, one that is afflicting both from within. Not only that, there is a real threat of cross-border terrorism. Pakistan has the Taliban militants that it must contain and India has its own garden variety of Hindu extremists. The Samjhauta Express bombing, which killed some 68 people, including 42 Pakistani nationals, was initially being pinned on extremists from Pakistan. However, it has now come to light that the bombing was the work of Hindu extremist Swami Aseemanand, a leader of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), who confessed to this and other terror activities. This revelation has put Pakistan and India on a somewhat even keel morally, with both suffering the same problems and looking for the same solutions. Cross-border terrorism cannot be ruled out, as extremists do not care about borders. It is probably this realisation, amongst other factors, that has brought India back to the negotiation table. India’s stonewalling was also giving it a bad image, at home and abroad. By not moving forward with talks, India was beginning to look like an intransigent neighbour — not willing to solve the problem of terrorism with Pakistan — a stance that was giving it increasingly diminishing returns. All in all, this reiteration of resuming dialogue is, once again, an encouraging step. India wants an all out strategy from Pakistan to curb the terror threat that haunts the entire region and Pakistan is looking for an end to the Kashmir quagmire. Kashmir is a stalemate issue and with militancy so far spread out, it is also not an easily solvable problem. It looks like both countries have once again met each other halfway. We wait to see if they can go the distance.*