Sushma Swaraj, External Affairs Minister of India and senior BJP leader, had to put up a brave face to deny the opposition’s charges of a "climb-down" from a hawkish position and the "flip-flop" of the Modi government’s inconsistent policy towards Pakistan in a charged session of the two houses of the parliament. This time around, Pakistan’s Foreign Affairs Advisor, Sartaj Aziz, also didn’t face any embarrassment in the parliament as he did last time on the Ufa statement.

The usual leg-pulling by the opposition aside, even on the green colour of her sari and the chaste Urdu that impressed her hosts in Islamabad, the opposition parties were keen to bring the perpetrators of the Mumbai terrorist attacks to justice, while emphasising the need to make the dialogue "uninterruptible" despite a possible "subversion".

Emphasising the "need for bridging the gulf" with Pakistan for peace and stability in the region, Swaraj assured the Upper House that her government would not be provoked by the saboteurs. She deemed "cross-border terrorism" India’s overriding concern, to be handled by the two national security advisors -- over and above "comprehensive bilateral dialogue." She ruled out war or US Navy Seals-like operation, to take out Osama bin Laden, as an option in her address to the Lok Sabha.

Yet the question remains: what made Prime Minister Narendra Modi change his hardline stance towards Pakistan? And what made the Pakistani establishment a bit more flexible about the sequencing of talks as it was agreed in Ufa (Russia)? Perhaps it was a result of the COAS’s US visit and, later, the induction of Former Commander of Southern Command, Lt Gen. (retd) Nasir Janjua, as advisor on National Security to Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif.

The resumption of the dialogue is predicated on the Ufa understanding to give priority to terrorism and was adjusted in Bangkok between the two national security advisors -- representing the two establishments -- with a face-saving reference to Kashmir. Some kind of a quid pro quo seems to have been struck between Janjua and former Indian Intelligence Bureau chief, Ajit Doval, that set the ball rolling for the Islamabad meeting and the resumption of comprehensive bilateral dialogue.

Supported by a growing corporate sector keen on overcoming the energy deficit and eager to have the economy of an intra-regional and inter-regional scale, the Modi government faced hurdles both within India and across the South and Central Asian regions in delivering on its promise of economic boom and a high place at international forums, including a seat among permanent members of the UN Security Council and Nuclear Suppliers Group.

The electoral defeat of the pure Hindutva agenda left no option for Modi but to go back to the original electoral promise of ‘vikas’ (development) and ‘naukri’ (jobs). Following setbacks in reaching out to the neighbours, including Nepal, the Maldives and Pakistan, after the initial warm-opening to them on the occasion of his oath-taking ceremony, Modi had to go back to his initial friendly neighbourhood policy on the persuasions of his big-league partners among the international community.

In his first annual address to the combined commanders’ conference, he emphasised that: "Above all, it is our neighbourhood that is most critical for our future and for our place in the world." He further underlined the need of "engaging Pakistan to try and turn the page of history".

Coming from the hawk of hawks about turning the page of history -- ostensibly from enmity to amity -- is quite reassuring. And I have seen RSS hawks turning into doves, such as Advani and my late friend RSS ideologue, K R Malkani. There seems to be a unique convergence of the vision of the two prime ministers over the economic imperatives of connectivity: energy, infrastructure, investment and trade between an energy-starved South and energy-surplus Central Asia.

Read I.A. Rehman’s article: A new round on Kashmir

It was also emphasised by the fifth Heart of Asia Conference on Afghanistan held in Islamabad that focused on challenges to security and the need for greater connectivity across the regions. As geo-economics supersedes geo-politics, it is worth noting that China, the US, the Europeans, the Central Asians, Iran and Russia are all behind this consensus on the South-Central Asian region. This vision has also found place at the top of the two statements issued in Bangkok and Islamabad by India and Pakistan.

The test will come on the issues of Afghan transit trade across Pakistan to India and back to Afghanistan, and Pak transit trade across Afghanistan to Central Asia. Most important regional connectivity projects are already in the implementation phase, such as CASA-1000 electricity project and Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) gas pipeline project.

These projects, besides facilitating the flow of highly needed energy, will also create a relationship of dependence in the subcontinent and South and Central Asian regions. Interestingly, Afghan-Pakistan land route is the shortest and cheaper than Iran’s Port of Chabahar route for India, but it will require peace in Afghanistan, which partially depends on a compromise between the establishments of India and Pakistan about their respective roles.

The Iran-Pakistan-India -- and possibly also China-- gas pipeline is going to be even more plausible, now that Russia is building the South-North pipeline in Pakistan, with a convergence to China Pakistan Economic Corridor. These are possibly great openings that must override the over-stretching and ambitious security paradigms of Pakistan and India.

Now as Pakistan and India increasingly realise that peace and stability in Afghanistan is essential for the region, both countries need to exchange notes at the national security advisors’ level and should agree on how not to work against each other in a most troubled country. While Islamabad and Rawalpindi will have to rethink how to engage India to stabilise Afghanistan and concede India’s role in the economic sphere, New Delhi will have to appreciate Pakistan’s strategic interests in its backyard.

Let us hope that if Afghanistan, Pakistan, United States, India, Iran, China and Central Asian states reach some regional consensus to stabilise Afghanistan, India and Pakistan will shed mindless enmity and start talking positively.

However, given the checkered history of Indo-Pak talks, the following lessons are to be kept in mind to avoid yet another diplomatic fiasco.

Let the composite dialogue continue, not to be interrupted by any kind of subversion, in an integrated framework.

While focusing on the strategic issues vital to each side, both sides must build confidence by promptly implementing all agreements, including strict observance of ceasefire across the Line of Control (LoC), working boundary, and international border.

A draft trade-agreement should be signed and the visa regime relaxed for enhanced people-to-people and cultural exchanges.

The two national security advisors (NSAs) should focus on ending cross-border terrorism, either by the state or non-state actors. They should also focus on a strict prohibition on the use of each other’s and Afghanistan’s territory for terrorism and the creation of effective intelligence/security mechanisms to monitor and prohibit all such activities.

The dialogue process on each item of the 8-point composite dialogue agenda should be picked up from where it was left off by the current or former governments, such as the broader agreement on Kashmir between then Pakistan’s President Gen. Musharraf and India’s Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

The back channels on various issues of conflict and cooperation should be reactivated, with the cessation of verbal and psychological warfare.

Both the countries must develop a strategic framework for stabilisation, pre-emption of conflict, strategic compatibility in Afghanistan and ending proxy wars. There should be more frequent exchange visits at the highest levels of various components of state power.

Should we believe that Modi will try to turn the page of history, the way his predecessor Atal Bihari Vajpayee tried to do, and that Pakistan’s COAS Gen. Raheel Sharif will understandably support his prime minister in pursuing his laudable vision? There is nothing to lose and everything to gain.