India - Pakistan Diplomatic Ties
- Thread starter _Anonymous_
- Start date
Important hydro projects are now back on the priority list.
In Colombo, Bangkok this week, India and Pakistan met again for track 2 talks
Indian and Pakistani delegates held fresh Track 2 talks in Colombo and Bangkok, discussing crisis-management mechanisms, terrorism and water issues. The backchannel engagements come despite frozen official dialogue
www.wionews.com
In Colombo, Bangkok this week, India and Pakistan met again for track 2 talks
Indian and Pakistani delegates held fresh Track 2 talks in Colombo and Bangkok, discussing crisis-management mechanisms, terrorism and water issues. The backchannel engagements come despite frozen official dialogue
This isn't government to government level formal talk. How can be these people consider delegates of respective countries when they haven't been selected by the government formally?
Last edited:
Siddhant explained it in his previous article and current article.
Current article:
Previous article:
Track 2 channels active between India and Pakistan even as official relations remain in freeze
After the deadly 2020 Galwan Valley clash, India and China froze much official contact. But Track 2 exchanges helped keep lines open. High-level signals of thaw followed: Prime Minister Narendra Modi met President Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the SCO summit in Tianjin in 2025.
www.wionews.com
For India and Pakistan, the backchannel track 2 has been continuing for decades. At one point, nearly 20 such dialogues ran simultaneously.
Inputs from these help make an assessment when ties remain snapped, as they are currently. No breakthrough is expected from such engagement, but it is seen as a channel of informal communication away from public glare. No press releases are issued, no statements are made after these meetings, and above all, no one will confirm or deny them.
The Neemrana Dialogue has been, in the past, one of the longest-running dialogues, bringing together voices from both sides.
Track 2 is not new. The term, coined in 1981 by American diplomat Joseph Montville, describes informal, non-structured talks between non-officials, often former officials, journalists, business leaders, and civil society voices. The goal is to build trust, test ideas, and create space for understanding, away from the glare of politics and media.
Unlike Track 1, formal government-to-government negotiations like the Camp David Accords, Track 2 offers deniability and flexibility. A hybrid version, Track 1.5, mixes serving officials (acting unofficially) with outsiders. This pattern repeats globally when relations sour. For example, the Oslo Accords, the initial phase (1993), when unofficial meetings in Norway between Israeli academics and PLO representatives took place.
PS There are more examples in the article
Bonus:
Pakistan welcomes 'positive' call by RSS's Hosabale for dialogue between Delhi & Islamabad
Earlier this week, the RSS general secretary had said India should keep channels of communication open with Pakistan without compromising on ‘security, self-respect’.
theprint.in
In an interview with news agency PTI on 12 May, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh General Secretary Hosabale said India should keep channels of communication open with Pakistan without compromising on “security and self-respect”.
An Indian Express report earlier revealed that in recent months, former Indian military and intelligence officials met their Pakistan counterparts in at least two unofficial gatherings, including one in Qatar and another in an undisclosed Asian capital.
During the Pahalgam attack and the subsequent military confrontation, officials said, the only functioning channel between the two countries was the hotline connecting their Directors General of Military Operations, who now speak weekly.
Former Indian Army chief Gen Manoj Naravane Thursday endorsed Hosabale’s comments, stressing on the importance of “people-to-people connections” and track-II diplomacy.
“Ordinary people live on both sides of the border, and common people everywhere have the same concerns,” Naravane said in a PTI interview. “When friendship develops between the people of two countries, it naturally helps improve relations between the countries themselves.”
At the same time, Naravane reiterated that India would continue to respond militarily if necessary, pointing to the dual-track thinking now emerging in parts of the Indian establishment: deterrence coupled with controlled engagement.
This is what I posted on the other forum -Siddhant explained it in his previous article and current article.
Current article:
Previous article:
Track 2 channels active between India and Pakistan even as official relations remain in freeze
After the deadly 2020 Galwan Valley clash, India and China froze much official contact. But Track 2 exchanges helped keep lines open. High-level signals of thaw followed: Prime Minister Narendra Modi met President Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the SCO summit in Tianjin in 2025.
For India and Pakistan, the backchannel track 2 has been continuing for decades. At one point, nearly 20 such dialogues ran simultaneously.
Inputs from these help make an assessment when ties remain snapped, as they are currently. No breakthrough is expected from such engagement, but it is seen as a channel of informal communication away from public glare. No press releases are issued, no statements are made after these meetings, and above all, no one will confirm or deny them.
The Neemrana Dialogue has been, in the past, one of the longest-running dialogues, bringing together voices from both sides.
Track 2 is not new. The term, coined in 1981 by American diplomat Joseph Montville, describes informal, non-structured talks between non-officials, often former officials, journalists, business leaders, and civil society voices. The goal is to build trust, test ideas, and create space for understanding, away from the glare of politics and media.
Unlike Track 1, formal government-to-government negotiations like the Camp David Accords, Track 2 offers deniability and flexibility. A hybrid version, Track 1.5, mixes serving officials (acting unofficially) with outsiders. This pattern repeats globally when relations sour. For example, the Oslo Accords, the initial phase (1993), when unofficial meetings in Norway between Israeli academics and PLO representatives took place.
PS There are more examples in the article
Bonus:
Pakistan welcomes 'positive' call by RSS's Hosabale for dialogue between Delhi & Islamabad
Earlier this week, the RSS general secretary had said India should keep channels of communication open with Pakistan without compromising on ‘security, self-respect’.
In an interview with news agency PTI on 12 May, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh General Secretary Hosabale said India should keep channels of communication open with Pakistan without compromising on “security and self-respect”.
An Indian Express report earlier revealed that in recent months, former Indian military and intelligence officials met their Pakistan counterparts in at least two unofficial gatherings, including one in Qatar and another in an undisclosed Asian capital.
During the Pahalgam attack and the subsequent military confrontation, officials said, the only functioning channel between the two countries was the hotline connecting their Directors General of Military Operations, who now speak weekly.
Former Indian Army chief Gen Manoj Naravane Thursday endorsed Hosabale’s comments, stressing on the importance of “people-to-people connections” and track-II diplomacy.
“Ordinary people live on both sides of the border, and common people everywhere have the same concerns,” Naravane said in a PTI interview. “When friendship develops between the people of two countries, it naturally helps improve relations between the countries themselves.”
At the same time, Naravane reiterated that India would continue to respond militarily if necessary, pointing to the dual-track thinking now emerging in parts of the Indian establishment: deterrence coupled with controlled engagement.
@Jaymax
Hopefully some sense prevails and GoI don't end up repeating the age old mistakes that our policymakers have been making for decades. All we can do is hope. Expecting to have a peaceful relationship with Pakistan is epitome of insanity. All it has ever led is this expression by GoI when they inevitable has happened..
