The joint statement talked about an agreement over sharing real time, credible and actionable information on terrorist threats. It went on to say that Gilani mentioned that “Pakistan has some information on threats in Balochistan and other areas”.

Observers are of the opinion that what is implied in the inclusion of the term “threats in Pakistan” is that somehow those threats are linked to India, a proposition that the Indian leadership should have rejected comprehensively, in the same manner it has done all these years.

Pakistan has regularly blamed India for fomenting trouble in Balochistan, often using this argument to counter New Delhi’s assertions about Pakistani support to terrorists operating in India. So far, India had vehemently opposed Pakistan’s repeated attempts to seek parity on this count and stoutly denied any attempts to link it with the largely ethnic unrest in Pakistan’s western region bordering Iran and Afghanistan. This, observers say, has now been watered down and opens up the space for Pakistan to rake up this issue in future bilateral talks.

Manmohan Singh, however, said India had nothing to hide.

“We have nothing to be afraid of. Our conduct there (Balochistan) is like an open book,” he told reporters when questioned about the reference in the joint statement.

The Opposition BJP criticised the de-linking of action on terrorism from the composite dialogue process, describing it as “contrary” to the agreement reached between Atal Behari Vajpayee and General Pervez Musharraf in 2004.

“This is a disturbing development. No meaningful dialogue and normal relationship would be possible with Pakistan without the resolution of the issue of terrorism against India emanating from the soil of Pakistan,” BJP spokesperson Ravi Shankar Prasad said. Prasad said the joint statement was a departure from what India had been publicly saying till just a fortnight ago. “Why this tectonic shift in position? Hardly a fortnight ago, the Prime Minister had told Pakistani President that the territory of Pakistan must not be allowed to be used for terrorism against India. How come this sudden change has been brought about?” he asked.