This summit was our regions day in the global sun. We seem to have muffed it a bit. There was no agreement, no declaration, not even a joint statement. Compared to Tashkent, Simla and Lahore, we were unable even to find appropriate words to gloss over our differences. Seen by the standards of the past, this summit was clearly the least productive.

This is indeed a misfortune because never have the conditions been more ripe for, to use a clichÈ, the dawn of new era. No battle has been lost or won to blight the atmosphere. Both countries face enormous economic problems that require a change of focus from war to peace. And then, ultra nationalists are in power, both here and in India. If they move towards peace no one can accuse them of being unpatriotic. In fact they are the ones who have a franchise on patriotism and are thus ideally placed to destroy the archaic moulds of conflict. So far this has been a pipe dream.

Perhaps, we should be grateful that the post summit rhetoric has shown some maturity. The name calling, the blame game has largely been avoided. No thanks to our information gurus or Doordarshan TV. They were at it immediately after the collapse of the talks. I suppose the spin masters thought that their moment had come.

Anwar Mahmood, our Information Secretary is normally a sane, mature professional. However, on that fateful midnight after the summit, he choose to give an interview to BBC on his mobile while travelling to the airport. Surely when such momentous events are involved, a degree of reflection, the taking of a deep breath, is in order. Jumping the gun like this only helped to vitiate an already tense atmosphere.

It did not take long for Doordarshan to launch their own fusillade using Anwar's statement as a peg. Those of us who were already in despair at the collapse of the summit, thought our worst fears were coming true. That, this war of words would heat up in the next few days and make any future move forward difficult if not impossible. Mercifully during the night some cooler heads prevailed.

Jaswant Singh set the ball rolling by being careful on the morning after. While he said what he had to say, it was couched in very non-aggressive language. This was a deliberate attempt to take the high road. Abdul Sattar, though less articulate than Jaswant, responded in kind. Poor Sattar. Even when he is saying soothing words, his face goes into such contortions that he looks distinctly uncomfortable. He may be a good, professional, diplomat but a less impressive spokesman on our foreign affairs would be hard to find. Despite these handicaps, the essential message did come through. The world failure was studiously avoided and there will be summits in the future.

I am a bit apprehensive though about President Musharraf's press conference today. His blunt, straight from the heart, talk is refreshing at most times. But, when delicate diplomatic nuances are involved, it can be grating. This is precisely what happened during his meeting with the Indian editors during the summit. He spoke the only way he knows - straight, blunt, no punches pulled. He was impressive as he always is when speaking sincerely and honestly. Yet, it became a major brouhaha.

If this talk had not been televised immediately, it would still have been okay. After it hit the airwaves, the Indians were put on a spot and felt compelled to respond. Hence the delayed release of Vajpayee's opening remarks and a hardening of Indian attitude on the joint statement. No one likes their noses to be rubbed in the dirt. After the blunt talk on Kashmir by the General, it became difficult for the Indians to agree on any concessions to Pakistani sensibilities.

We may well blame Indian intransigence and mutter darkly about hidden forces that were determined to wreck the summit. They may have their own conspiracy theories. After all, there is no shortage of forces on both sides of the border that do not want peace. Yet, if genuine will is there on both sides we will move forward. We only need to understand that summits in the electronic age would have to be thought through not only in terms of substance but also the form. Images will play as important a role as reality.

In the larger context of our relationship, these last day glitches at the summit are only minor. Hopefully both sides would have learnt something about conducting summits in the media glare. The next time they should not only predetermine the agenda or the schedule but also agree on how the media would be played. Given the history of our mutual suspicion, every little detail has to be thought about and agreed to. We have enough to worry about substance we cannot afford to stumble over form.

Talking of form, we may well gloat over how forcefully our President raised the Kashmir issue. This may strengthen his position with the hardliners and within his constituency, the armed forces. It may also warm the cockles of every red blooded Pakistani's heart. But where does this get us. Every Pakistani president and prime minister in the past has made sure that they are praised for forcefully raising the Kashmir issue on international forums. Has this led to any solution of the Kashmir dispute? All this is only form and politics. It has had little impact on substance.

This summit has clearly brought out that questions of substance would not be easy to resolve. Even if we are able to convince the Indians, and perhaps the world opinion, that Kashmir is central to any peace in the sub continent, how to do we move forward. They have already rejected plebiscite as envisaged in the UN resolutions. Our insistence for years now on this issue has met with a stonewall. This is unlikely to change.

It is clear that Indians would not accept any proposal that changes the constitutional status of Kashmir. This means that they will not agree to an independent Kashmir, leave alone handing over the valley to us. If there are any such illusions on our side, they must be consigned to a drawer that is never opened.

Whatever resolution they have in mind will be without a change in the status of Kashmir. They may agree to give greater autonomy to the state. Its special status is already envisaged in article 370 of the Indian constitution. They may go further and devolve more power on subjects that are normally the domain of the central government. They may even allow its chief minister to be called prime minister, but that is it. They will go no further. This brings our objectives in Kashmir sharply into focus.

What is it that we consider a resolution to the Kashmir dispute? Obviously we have our just and moral stand about a plebiscite to ascertain the wishes of the Kashmiri people. This the Indian do not accept. Then there is the dream of the so-called Chenab option, which the Indians hand over the valley to us. This, they will never do. So what else are we going to consider a resolution?

My worry about our insistence on a resolution of the Kashmir dispute is precisely this. What we consider to be a resolution, the Indians would never agree to. What they consider a resolution is unacceptable to us. So how will this log jam ever break? President Musharraf has himself said that there is no military solution to the Kashmir conflict. If there is no military solution, and talks are unlikely to succeed because of divergent expectations, then how will we ever move towards peace?

President Musharraf says that the best confidence building measure is a resolution of the Kashmir dispute. Logic, and an understanding of the two positions, dictates that this is not likely to happen. So are we going remain stuck in the mire of conflict, as we have been for the past 54 years? This is something that the leadership on both sides would have to seriously consider.

The Kashmir dispute has not been resolved for two generations now, while there have been wars and there have been negotiations. It may not get resolved for another generation. What happens in the interim? More conflict and more fruitless negotiations? We need to take a cool headed view of all this and reassess our national priorities. The world is moving on at a rapid pace. We cannot afford to be permanently left behind.