Do cricket and diplomacy mix?
We are here to play cricket and I am here as a cricket manager even though I have been a foreign secretary and a diplomat all my life. We are not here to unlock doors on Kashmir but having said that, the warm welcome by the Indian crowds, the support of the public, the reaction of your leaders towards the Pakistan cricket team, is bound to have a positive effect on relations between the two countries. A public voicehas been heard which I think will have an effect in due course. It won't unlock doors I've been talking about but it is bound to have an effect both in India and Pakistan on people who have been brought up to believe that we are totally hostile to each other, which is untrue.

Have encouraging reports come from Pakistan?
I have reports of tremendous jubilation in Pakistan, not at our victory in Chennai, but at the crowd response here. This has gone down very deep. Our commentators have reflected the scene in Delhi, the spontaneous crowds that lined the streets of Gwalior etc, and it has had a positive effect.

As a former diplomat, do you see a trend of positive moves beyond conventional diplomacy between the two countries, your determination to play here, our bus service to Lahore...?
Yes, having been a bureaucrat all my life and having participated in four rounds of foreign secretary-level talks, I do believe we need to get out of the closed-door syndrome prime ministers, foreignministers, secretaries, meeting across a table... The public in general and people who are interested, the educated elite, if you like, want to have a say in Pakistan-India relations, and it seems they are having a say. I am not saying it will change everything but it is bound to affect attitudes.

Where do you see it going?
I see it as a positive background where public opinion will push bureaucrats, parliamentarians on both sides to resolve the situation between the two countries. After all, they have to respond to public opinion.

In concrete terms, where do we go from here?
Let's look at the positive and negative aspects of the tour. First, the negative -- let's say, all this euphoria will die soon, it will be a pleasant memory, then, say, a bomb explosion in Pakistan in the future will be blamed on Indian agencies, negative statements of some leader here etc, all the euphoria can get easily buried. So, next time the two PMs meet, it will be just another photo op with no substantiveprogress. However, this cricket match was more than just that, the response here did not have a trace of hostility, so next time the PMs meet, maybe they will agree for a train service because of the response... maybe telecommunication, power projects, trade... things can happen on their own. It will be a move from the time when foreign secretaries sat on a table trotting out their known positions...

Do you really believe we can talk of trade with Kashmir still dominating relations? Do we ignore it...
I think we should go straight to the Kashmir issue, there must not be a feeling in Pakistan that Kashmir is being cast aside like in the old days when we all made statements in the UN, and nothing happened. There has to be a meaningful address of the Kashmir issue, this is my personal opinion, not of my Government's. Pakistan is also not saying first resolve Kashmir, and then only will we talk of trade, finance agreements etc.

You can always tell when talks are being meaningfully implemented, whatone doesn't want is the usual parroting of views on Kashmir. So, address the issue meaningfully, is there a meeting point, a via-media... It will take time, maybe two-three years. It is difficult, an uphill task, but Northern Ireland wasn't easy, nor apartheid, Middle East... where there is a will, there is a way.

Is Nawaz Sharif's recent statement that the US need not mediate between India and Pakistan a sign of confidence?
Yes, it is a breath of fresh air, this new approach is good. Nawaz Sharif believes what we've got to do, we've got to do ourselves. We do not need props or superpowers prompting us to do this or that... It requires an inner strength to achieve what we seek out to do. I know the PM is very anxious to build a strong economic base for Pakistan, I hope he succeeds.

Trade between us would help...?
We will get stronger if we unshackle ourselves from the negative aspects of the positions we've taken. For instance, when I was Foreign Secretary, a casual chat with theRailway Secretary revealed that we were buying locomotive engines for twice the price from Romania when we could have got the order doubled for the same price from India. You were looking for railway sleepers around the same time which we could have supplied from our factory in Lahore. This negativism is very damaging to both our economies.

Where do we begin?
A lot can happen outside the structure of foreign secretary talks. We have what is called a two-plus-six syndrome. Security and Kashmir is two, the other six are water, power, trade etc. If we begin beyond that -- from people-to-people contact, which we have just witnessed, it can influence official talks, like increase in visas, train service, business...

Cultural exchanges in the past have not been too successful...
Cultural exchanges are more difficult in Pakistan than in India, you have a multi-cultural society, a liberal outlook. You've seen western culture, women in jeans, no one bothers... With us, it is difficult, we aremore conservative, it is part of our tradition. Hindi films are alright, as long as they don't offend the senses. However, I'd like to see more Indian newspapers, magazines, programmes. There should be more schoolchildren visiting each side, also judges, journalists, parliamentarians, administrators etc. Cultural contact has to be handled with caution, one has to keep the atmosphere back home in mind.

As a distinguished member of Track Two diplomacy, how successful has the effort been?
It has shown remarkable and unexpected results. At the moment, there is a group of people like retired civil and military officers, media people and businessmen from both sides who meet regularly whether in India, Pakistan or in a third country. I belong to one where we have already had two meetings recently, one in Italy and Muscat, the next one will be in the US. After our discussions, we send a consensual report to our respective governments. Whether the government takes advantage or note of it, I don't know as Iam no longer serving, but I hear that people do read the reports. Different groups go in different directions and after discussions they go back to their peer groups and project what they have agreed. Parliamentarians to parliamentarians, judges to judges... You can learn from us, we can learn from you.

When did this effort begin?
In the last two years, the effort has intensified and therefore, it has to have an effect on the two governments. The sense of urgency comes from the negative dividend issue, if you ask me. We are falling behind South Asia even today. According to UN Human Development reports, we are behind Sub-Saharan Africa on education, health, water etc. We've realised on our 50th anniversary where we've gone wrong.

Has it been smooth?
There is another movement in another direction in Pakistan. It's not a rosy picture, in that sense, because there are people saying there should be no talks unless we have everything we feel is right -- in society, in Kashmir, elsewhere...I personally believe in a democratic society, and though it may not work as well as it should in Pakistan, extreme elements are getting fewer votes as time goes by. Fundamentalists have a right to say what they feel like everyone else, as long as everyone observes democratic norms and the law of the country. I have respect for the Jamaat-i-Islami but it is important they also agree to the democratic norms of the country.