Interior Minister Rehman Malik has come down hard on India. ‘We have solid evidence that not only in Balochistan but India is involved in almost every terrorist activity in Pakistan,’ Mr Malik said on Wednesday. On Balochistan, it is understood that, despite denials by both sides, Pakistan handed over a dossier on Indian activities there at the meeting between the Pakistani and Indian prime ministers in Sharm el Sheikh in July, capping a long series of complaints on the issue by Pakistan. What is notable about the claims of Indian involvement in Balochistan is that the international powers have not downplayed them. On the issue of Indian involvement in ‘almost every terrorist’ act in Pakistan, however, Mr Malik’s claim would appear to be an exaggeration, for it is well known that there are non-state actors inside Pakistan whose goal is to destabilise the state for ideological reasons that have nothing to do with India; indeed, many of those non-state actors regard ‘Hindu’ India as an even bigger enemy.

Be that as it may, we believe that the gist of Mr Malik’s blunt comments on India is correct. Whatever India may or may not be doing inside Pakistan, it is clear that the Indians are still unwilling to move out of the accusation mode. From the prime minister downwards, hardly a few days pass without some statement on ‘Pakistani’ involvement in yet-to-be-committed terrorist acts inside India. Puzzlingly, the Indians appear to be content with issuing public warnings and seem uninterested in sharing intelligence with Pakistan on the planning of such attacks. Surely, whatever doubts the Indian government has about Pakistan’s bona fides as a partner in the fight against terrorism, it has a bigger duty to try and thwart future attacks — and public warnings but no intelligence-sharing seems to run contrary to the fulfilment of that duty.

More generally, the Indian pressure is counterproductive for two reasons. One, Indian cage-rattling is liable to distract the security establishment here just as the Pakistan Army is locked in battle with militant groups. True, India’s concerns are about the Kashmir-centric, anti-Indian militants, whereas the Pakistan Army is focused on fighting the anti-state militants. But consider this: many of the groups the army is fighting today are the same ones it was willing to ‘shield’ only a few years ago. Clearly, then, the Pakistan Army’s security calculations are not inflexible. Second, the problems between India and Pakistan go beyond militancy and involve genuine disputes. Ignoring the latter will not help defeat the former; India must recognise this and re-engage a Pakistani government that has repeatedly expressed its willingness to talk.