It seems that there is some realization on the part of Pakistani rulers that neither India nor Pakistan can live peacefully if trouble spots like Siachen continue to exist. Both India and Pakistan consider it right to have its presence in the Siachen valley though it is also accepted that both countries are paying very heavily for protecting their strategic interests in the region. Pakistan’s relationship with India has remained strained on account of Pakistan’s open support to the terrorists (so-called ‘freedom fighters’) in the Kashmir valley. The latest attempt to increase trade between two countries is a step right direction. But major initiative to create long term peace in the sub-continent has to come from the Pakistani establishment by way of stern action against all terrorist organizations in Pakistan. But is it expecting too much from a crumbling State?

Two fundamental issues here:

1. The basic premise for any discussion is mutual trust and understanding that the other party will remain true to its words. The level of distrust is too deep to enable this criteria.

2. Who will speak to whom. From India, will it be MMS or SM Krishna or Pranab Mukherjee? From Pakistan, will it be the Army, President or the PM? 

No matter how many of them run to Wagah with candles, India and Pakistan cannot be friends. At best, we can be indifferent to each other.

Why Kayani's Siachen overtures should be resisted : BR RAMAN

Pakistan is paying a heavier price than India in Siachen in terms of financial and human costs. Moreover, signs of alienation among the Shia population of Gilgit-Baltistan have been increasing steadily. The fact that the majority of those who perished in the avalanche were from Gilgit-Baltistan -- possibly Shias -- and that none of them could be rescued has added to the anger against the army in the area.

Talk on the urgent need for a standalone Siachen agreement with India is, therefore, assuming a desperate urgency for Pakistan. Kayani has to respond to this desperation if he has to prevent a further erosion of support for the army from the people of the area.'
 

www.rediff.com/news/slide-show/slide-show-1-why-kayanis-siachen-overtures-should-be-resisted/20120420.htm

The above link is gives better appreciation of the Kayani's remark .

Even today Pak Army sponsered Terrorists have attacked Indian Jawans killing one and injuring some in Kashmir .

Only naive or some die hard peace nicks living in dream lands will see the remarks of Kayani as some sort of peace overtures or some softness in usual hardliner attitude of Kayani towards India.

Let us not expect any change in Hafiz Sayeed or Kayani or as a matter of fact any Paki towards India.
The Pak Nation was born out of hate against Hindus and India .They will never change.

 Kayani who stands on the legs of the terrorist groups in pakisthan is highly unreliable for any conversation. Since there is an elected government,our talks can be only on the basis of the simal agreement signed by one president of pakisthan who happens to be father  in law of the present president  Kayani will be conduit of information to the terrorists and most probably he is just a toy in the hands of tererorists whom he fed and grew. Any talk and signing of treaty can be only with the civilian government where the army is subordinate

 Assess, Explore, Examine ............. The GOI is incompetent so will be unable to do any of them. Remember Gujral ?

A hawk would assess which side is bleeding more heavily. A dove would try to figure out if there is a sensible way to stop unnecessary bleeding on both sides.

Any time is good time for talks. It is okay to say, "Trust but verify," but verification does not require either avoidance of talks or suspension of CBM's.

Any time is good time for talks. It is okay to say, "Trust but verify," but verification does not require either avoidance of talks or suspension of CBM's.

A hawk would assess which side is bleeding more heavily. A dove would try to figure out if there is a sensible way to stop unnecessary bleeding on both sides.

 Assess, Explore, Examine ............. The GOI is incompetent so will be unable to do any of them. Remember Gujral ?

 Kayani who stands on the legs of the terrorist groups in pakisthan is highly unreliable for any conversation. Since there is an elected government,our talks can be only on the basis of the simal agreement signed by one president of pakisthan who happens to be father  in law of the present president  Kayani will be conduit of information to the terrorists and most probably he is just a toy in the hands of tererorists whom he fed and grew. Any talk and signing of treaty can be only with the civilian government where the army is subordinate

Why Kayani's Siachen overtures should be resisted : BR RAMAN

Pakistan is paying a heavier price than India in Siachen in terms of financial and human costs. Moreover, signs of alienation among the Shia population of Gilgit-Baltistan have been increasing steadily. The fact that the majority of those who perished in the avalanche were from Gilgit-Baltistan -- possibly Shias -- and that none of them could be rescued has added to the anger against the army in the area.

Talk on the urgent need for a standalone Siachen agreement with India is, therefore, assuming a desperate urgency for Pakistan. Kayani has to respond to this desperation if he has to prevent a further erosion of support for the army from the people of the area.'
 

www.rediff.com/news/slide-show/slide-show-1-why-kayanis-siachen-overtures-should-be-resisted/20120420.htm

The above link is gives better appreciation of the Kayani's remark .

Even today Pak Army sponsered Terrorists have attacked Indian Jawans killing one and injuring some in Kashmir .

Only naive or some die hard peace nicks living in dream lands will see the remarks of Kayani as some sort of peace overtures or some softness in usual hardliner attitude of Kayani towards India.

Let us not expect any change in Hafiz Sayeed or Kayani or as a matter of fact any Paki towards India.
The Pak Nation was born out of hate against Hindus and India .They will never change.

Two fundamental issues here:

1. The basic premise for any discussion is mutual trust and understanding that the other party will remain true to its words. The level of distrust is too deep to enable this criteria.

2. Who will speak to whom. From India, will it be MMS or SM Krishna or Pranab Mukherjee? From Pakistan, will it be the Army, President or the PM? 

No matter how many of them run to Wagah with candles, India and Pakistan cannot be friends. At best, we can be indifferent to each other.

It seems that there is some realization on the part of Pakistani rulers that neither India nor Pakistan can live peacefully if trouble spots like Siachen continue to exist. Both India and Pakistan consider it right to have its presence in the Siachen valley though it is also accepted that both countries are paying very heavily for protecting their strategic interests in the region. Pakistan’s relationship with India has remained strained on account of Pakistan’s open support to the terrorists (so-called ‘freedom fighters’) in the Kashmir valley. The latest attempt to increase trade between two countries is a step right direction. But major initiative to create long term peace in the sub-continent has to come from the Pakistani establishment by way of stern action against all terrorist organizations in Pakistan. But is it expecting too much from a crumbling State?