In the aftermath of last month’s foreign minister-level talks between India and Pakistan, there has been some understandable concern expressed by Indian commentators and Opposition politicians about whether we should be talking to Islamabad at all. We are talking, the critics say, to a civilian government that is either unable or unwilling to restrain the terrorist attacks upon us. Why waste time on a government hamstrung by its own weakness in the face of an implacable military — a military long accustomed to calling the shots in Pakistan? Such a government, the critics say, is hardly a valuable peace partner.
There is no doubt, of course, that a climate of peace can only be built on a foundation of trust, unimpeded by the use or the threat to use terror as a means to achieving narrow ends. British Prime Minister David Cameron recently reminded Pakistan that it could not win the respect of the world so long as it condoned the export of terror to India. To acknowledge that trust does not exist right now, however, is not to suggest that trust can never be built.
The differences that bedevil our relations with Pakistan can be surmounted if we can arrive at mutually acceptable parameters that can define our relationship in the future. Terrorism is certainly not one of those parameters. The terrorist attacks on Mumbai in November 2008 were a great setback on the path of normalisation. It will take concerted and credible action by Pakistan on two fronts to set things right: action to bring the conspirators and perpetrators of this dastardly attack to justice, and action to begin dismantling the infrastructure of terrorism, the platform from which so many attacks have been launched against our country in the last two decades. If these are done, India will respond; as our Prime Minister has said in Parliament, if Pakistan takes the first step, we will meet them more than half way. But only credible action by Islamabad will instil a modicum of confidence in the people of India that dialogue is worthwhile and that our neighbours are as determined as us to give peace a chance. If such action is taken — for instance, against individuals and organisations known to be fomenting violence against India — the basis for building trust again can be laid.
The UN Secretary-General’s spokesperson recently came in for some opprobrium in India for suggesting that the “composite dialogue” should be revived. It was following the commitment made by Pakistan in January 2004, that it would not permit territory under its control to be used to support terrorism against India in any manner, that a composite dialogue process was resumed at that time. The dialogue covered eight subjects: peace and security, including confidence-building measures; Jammu and Kashmir; terrorism and drug trafficking; friendly exchanges; economic and commercial cooperation; the Wullar Barrage/Tulbul Navigation Project; Sir Creek; and Siachen. That six-year-old commitment by Pakistan is in shreds, given the overwhelming evidence of the involvement of elements in Pakistan in executing the Mumbai terror attacks, and in the conspiracy that planned, funded and launched it. Besides, an increase in ceasefire violations, continued infiltration across the Line of Control and the attacks on the Indian embassy in Kabul in July 2008 and October 2009, as well as the murderous assault this year on a residence housing Indian aid workers, have also placed immense strain on India-Pakistan relations in general and on the dialogue process in particular. Pakistan’s evasive responses and denials in response to our requests for cooperation in exposing the conspiracy behind the Mumbai terror attacks and bringing all its perpetrators to justice have led to a sadly evident deterioration in bilateral relations. That is why there has been a pause in the composite dialogue process.
In recent months there have been high-level statements from Pakistan seeking the resumption of the dialogue process and about Pakistan itself also being a victim of terrorism. Our position, first articulated by our Prime Minister in Parliament a year ago, is that we can have a meaningful dialogue with Pakistan only if they fulfil their commitment, in letter and spirit, not to allow their territory to be used in any manner for terrorist activities against India. The inability or unwillingness of the Pakistani government to prevent its soil from being used to mount attacks on another state seriously undermines its own sovereignty, not just its credibility.
As good neighbours, Indians should be saddened by the continuing incidents of terrorist violence in Pakistan; we must wish Islamabad well in its efforts to repel militancy and fanaticism within its own borders. We would welcome indications that Islamabad shares our view that the forces of terrorism emanating from Pakistani soil are indivisible and that those plotting attacks on India from Pakistani territory are as much the enemies of Pakistan as they are of India. From such a diagnosis, the only possible prescription is that of co-operation, to build peace and security together. We hope that those who rule that country will make that diagnosis, and share the same prescription.
It is frankly preposterous to hear Pakistanis arguing that their actions are impelled by an “Indian threat”. To put it bluntly, th­e­re is no Indian threat. Pakistan has nothing that we want to wr­e­st by force. India does not covet any Pakistani territory. Because we wish to focus on our own pe­ople’s development and prosperity in conditions of security, we remain committed to long-term peace with Pakistan. If the civilian government in Islamabad sees that the need is for concerted action against terrorists wherever they operate, whether in Pakistan, in India or in Afg­hanistan, we can find common ground. Our willingness to talk will best be vindicated by their willingness to act. Trust can be earned, which is why peace must be pursued. But we must pursue peace with our eyes wide open.

Shashi Tharoor is a member of Parliament from Kerala’s Thiruvananthapuram constituency