My hunch is that if it were up to Manmohan Singh, he would have gone ahead. But the Congress that he represents is too cautious, too unsure of what it can concede. The party believes that if it were to make even a small concession to Pakistan, it would be suspect. On the other hand, the BJP, the Congress imagines, could get away with any concession, without arousing fear in the majority, because of the party's Hindutva credentials. There is a grain of truth in it. But the Congress exaggerates its misgivings.

The country has reaffirmed through the last general election that its temperament is secular. It has brought down the BJP by 35 seats, from 183 to 148 in the Lok Sabha (lower house). In the past three, four years people in India have also indicated that they are keen to foster good relations with Pakistan. Be it contact, cricket or a colloquium, a new type of equation is emerging between the two sides.

Tension is absent. The fear to go across the border has disappeared. Instead, there is an ardent desire to visit each other's country. Could anyone have imagined a decade ago that there would be a wave of sympathy sweeping the urban India in the wake of an earthquake in the Kashmir area under Pakistan? The desire to render assistance was spontaneous. Not only did the organizations but also individuals send money and material on their own. I saw in Delhi women going from house to house collecting cash and clothes for the victims. Even the fundamentalist among the Hindus raised no voice against New Delhi's contribution of $25 million to Islamabad.

The amiable atmosphere, it is true, has been vitiated by the Delhi blasts, which claimed the lives of 70. The murder of MR Kutty, a truck driver working on constructing roads in Afghanistan, has further spoilt the climate. India's National Security Advisor, MK Narayanan, has said that Pakistan had a role in the Taliban's killing of Kutty because it was wary of growing friendship between India and Pakistan. (Narayanan's contradiction that he was misquoted has been considered a denial under pressure.) A new spurt of violence in Kashmir has also cast its shadow over the pace of normalcy.

Yet, the general tendency is not to dwell on negative developments. Unlike the past, there is now an effort to take things in their stride. It is recognized that certain desperate elements in Pakistan, particularly some in the armed forces, are trying to thwart the peace process. But the distinction is made between people of Pakistan and the establishment. The first is trusted implicitly and the second doubted unquestionably. The inclination to have good relations with Pakistan still overwhelms the negative feelings. That is what should weigh with New Delhi.

Unfortunately, the mindset bureaucrats and the prejudiced intelligence agencies call the tune. They have a fixed line and they have not departed from it even in the new environment. The government understanding is based on the information they feed, and that is the reason the peace process doesn't pick up speed.

Knowing that the Pakistan establishment believes in maintaining distance, we do not have to react in the same way. Our endeavour should be to defeat its designs and go over its head to appeal to the Pakistanis. People-to-people contact has proved that conciliation is possible despite the Pakistan establishment. President General Pervez Musharraf has himself conceded that they could not resist the pressure of people-to-people contact. Since Manmohan Singh has said that the "peace process is irreversible," our policy has to be such that can retrieve people on the other side. They must see India reaching out to them as happened during the earthquake. Breaking away from the past is essential. New Delhi must go out of the way to improve relations with Islamabad, however obnoxiously it may behave at times. Only then the Pakistanis will realize that while India is making concessions, their own country is not responding.

Trade is one field where we can make the difference felt. Unilateral concessions in excise and duty can make the Pakistani goods competitive or even cheaper in Indian markets. The best is to let the goods from across the border come without any levy of any kind. If this is too bold a step for New Delhi to take, let it select 30 or 35 commodities for free entry. We are already 40 years behind. Had we taken such a step earlier, the entire scenario would have changed by now. The Pakistanis would have developed a vested interest in Indian markets. It is still not late to let them take advantage of India's vast market, unhampered and unencumbered.

The two points on which the peace talks are stuck are the Sir Creek and the Siachin glacier. In the first case, there is a map of 1913 which indicates the division of the Sir Creek. When we are insisting on China to accept old maps for delineation of borders between the two countries, why not go by the 1913 map on the Sir Creek? After the settlement at the Rann of Kutch on the basis of arbitration, there is hardly anything left in the Sir Creek. We are now going to the sea to determine what should be the line. This is a waste of effort.

Take the Siachin glacier. When in service, the Indian generals say that it is of great importance. But once they retire, they argue that the glacier is of no strategic value. Our Prime Minister has described it as the "mountain of peace." Why not travel towards that vision? Troops on both sides may have to be redeployed and, at one time, there was such an understanding. We reversed the decision. New Delhi's purpose should be how to convert the glacier into a "mountain of peace." We can continue to have aerial surveys even after that.

Concessions on Sir Creek and the Siachin glacier are not worth stoking fires of estrangement. India does not concede much if it makes the concessions. On the other hand, its gesture will convince people in Pakistan that India is doing its best. Strengthening the people of Pakistan is important because they are fighting a battle for the restoration of democracy. Peace with India, still considered an enemy in their textbooks, is important because in that lies the hope of Pakistanis to return to a civilian rule.

Kuldip Nayar is an eminent Indian columnist.