ISLAMABAD: After a cooling-off period, relations between Pakistan and India seem to be warming up. There are some positive developments with indications that slowly but surely the two nuclear-armed neighbours now in their third year of dialogue are moving towards conflict resolution.

After the formal resumption of the composite dialogue process with the foreign secretary-level talks in Delhi last week, the foreign ministers of the two countries are to meet in Delhi on Monday, even if the meeting is officially projected as a private affair.

Kasuri will not be accompanied by his wife when he embarks on his India sojourn on Saturday. Also on the aircraft with him will be Foreign Ministry’s director-general (South Asia Division) Jalil Abbas Jilani and Indian High Commissioner Satyabrata Pal. They are travelling especially to join ‘private lunch’ that Indian External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee is hosting for Mr Kasuri on Monday. The diplomatic lunch at the Hyderabad House, the venue of several rounds of top-level Indo-Pakistan talks, will also be attended by Pakistan’s outgoing High Commissioner to India Mr Aziz Ahmed Khan.

While the meeting is no venue for a structured dialogue, clearly the conversation would not be confined merely to pleasantries or changing weather! Indications from both sides are that it will mostly revolve around Indo-Pakistan relations and be a sort of an informal review of the recently concluded foreign secretary-level talks. Siachen, Sir Creek, the joint anti-terror mechanism and Jammu and Kashmir will all be discussed.

Significantly, Mr Kasuri had a marathon session with Kashmiri leaders on the progress made so far in the composite dialogue.

Last week Mr Kasuri refrained rather uncharacteristically from giving any statement on the Siachen issue, perhaps cautioned by the ripples he created just ahead of the foreign secretaries’ meeting. In a hint that the two sides may reach an agreement on Siachen, he told curious hacks that he preferred a solution than hitting a headline.

“I wish to give the people who are going to meet (to discuss the issue) a greater chance of success. I do not want to wish to prejudge their efforts and I would rather that they succeed than my making a headline,” he had said.

His luncheon meeting with Mr Mukherjee acquires special significance as it would be the first high-level political contact between the two countries after the foreign-secretary-level talks. More importantly, it would be the first interaction that Mr Kasuri will have with Mr Mukherjee since the latter took over as the foreign minister last month. Given that Mr Kasuri was able to develop a good rapport with his former Indian counterparts Yashwant Sinha and Natwar Singh, the ‘private lunch’ would help him get to know his new counterpart better before they meet ‘officially’ for a formal review of the third round of the composite dialogue. There is also a good chance of Mr Kasuri meeting Prime Minister Manmohan Singh at the marriage ceremony on Monday evening of Union Minister Mani Shankar Aiyar’s daughter, for which he is ostensibly undertaking the Indian trip.

According to those privy to behind-the-scene developments, dates for Manmohan Singh’s visit to Pakistan have already been decided. It would take place end of February or most likely in March, they say. The predictions are that Siachen and Sir Creek issues would be settled and some tangible progress on the issue of Kashmir is likely during Mr Singh’s trip.

Mr Mukherjee has already indicated that he would travel to Pakistan in mid January. Although the visit will primarily be for extending an invitation to President Musharraf for the 14th Saarc Summit to be hosted by India on April 3-4, it will have a key bilateral dimension.

Pakistan’s former foreign secretary Niaz A. Naik who has been actively involved in track-two diplomacy and is a member of the Indo-Pak Neemrana Dialogue sounds optimistic about settlement of some key disputes by the first quarter of 2007. Incidentally, he was one of the first persons to signal a breakthrough on the Kashmir bus service.

Last week’s foreign secretary-level talks have been characterised as “very good” by members of both delegations who say the ‘Havana spirit’ did prevail. From the reports one received Mr Shiv Shankar Menon’s assurance at the meeting that in future India would never point the accusing finger on Pakistan without any credible evidence was timely and welcomed.

Also significant is the Indian acknowledgement that Pakistan too is a victim of terrorism, courtesy the joint anti-terror mechanism that is also bound to blunt the Indian propaganda against Pakistan on terrorism.

Pakistan’s Foreign Secretary Riaz Mohammad Khan who has earned the title of ‘wise man’ in the foreign policy circles is said to have handled the talks adeptly. During the 90-minute discussions on Jammu and Kashmir he underscored that equating Kashmir with terrorism was illogical and would never be acceptable to Pakistan. His argument was that the Kashmir issue was almost 60 years old and precedes the notion of terrorism. That the Kashmir problem had been there much before terrorism even emerged as an issue. He plainly conveyed to the Indian side that Pakistan could never visualise a solution to the Kashmir dispute without the involvement of the Kashmiris. At one point when Mr Menon questioned the democratic credentials of the APHC, saying that it was not an elected representative body of the Kashmiris, Mr Riaz Khan reminded him that none of those who had waged freedom struggle in the recent history were elected leaders of their people at the time.

A sour note to last week’s peace dialogue was that in a glaring departure from the past tradition, the Indian side did not entertain Pakistan foreign secretary’s request for a call on Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. Apparently the request went without a response from the Indian Ministry of External Affairs, despite repeated reminders by the Pakistan High Commission. No reason or explanation was given for not granting the call-on that has been a standard practice at both ends since the resumption of the composite dialogue in 2004. It is not clear whether it was the ministry or the Prime Minister’s Office that decided against it. Whether by design or default, the denial was disappointing for Islamabad given that the Pakistani President and Prime Minister willingly host even the Indian journalists visiting Pakistan.

When this correspondent asked the Indian High Commissioner about it at a reception last week, his explanation was that in the past a ‘call on’ the prime minister had been granted to the foreign secretary because there was no full foreign minister and the need for it was not felt this time since there was a full minister now. Mr Pal was perhaps not aware of the fact that Pakistan’s foreign secretary has met the Indian prime minister each time he has been to New Delhi for the official talks under the composite dialogue framework. Even when a full foreign minister was in place.