Under the circumstances, it is easy to be cynical, but the importance of confidence-building measures such as the PrimeMinister's trip should not be underestimated. First and foremost, it sends a clear message to the international community that the two nuclear powers are as responsible as any other, and can be counted upon to try and resolve their differences amicably. That should dispel the worries of a nuclear conflagration being sparked off in the subcontinent. In turn, this could lead to a deal with the other nuclear powers as a result of which sanctions against both countries can be lifted. But, while an amicable relationship with our western neighbour is certainly desirable, we need to keep in mind that it is China, rather than Pakistan, with which we need to achieve a balance of power.

It would also be facile to dismiss the fact that, in the ultimate analysis, India and Pakistan represent two poles of an ideological divide. Pakistan is based on the principle of exclusion, an exclusion based on religion. The Indian state, on the other hand, stands on a strong secular foundation, despite the fact that some elementshave called that into question recently. The religious foundation of Pakistan lends itself to the pernicious two-nation theory, never mind that the emergence of Bangladesh should have buried this idea. In this sense, the real issue is not Kashmir, but the ideology of sectarianism which Pakistan represents.

However, this does not mean that the attempt to break the ice is not useful. Rather, such people-to-people contacts, together with trade ties, should in time create a constituency for peace within Pakistan. Our strategy must, therefore, be to step up trade and cultural exchanges between the two countries, because that alone will damp down the negative influence of sectarianism in the subcontinent.