No country in recent history has manipulated one solitary event with such alacrity as has Bharat in the Mumbai massacre. Bharat promptly scrapped the Composite Dialogue. And, in fact, Bharat had never felt comfortable with the Dialogue and was always looking for some excuse to ditch it. The Mumbai episode came as a golden opportunity, a dues ex machina. The event furnished Bharat with yet another occasion to denigrate Pakistan and tarnish her image. It quickly branded Pakistan as the hub of terrorism and urged the US to declare Pakistan a terrorist state. Why is Bharat so hostile towards Pakistan? Is her hatred pathological or the result of some real or imagined injury? The Hindu mindset is as twisted today as it was yesterday. Look at the ignominious manner in which the BJP, the RSSS and its saffron brood have treated Jaswant Singh, their former finance and foreign minister and a senior BJP leader. They have, in a way, burnt him at the stake, reduced thousands of copies of his books to ashes and expelled him from the BJP. Why did they do this to him? What crime did Jaswant Singh commit? His only fault was that he praised Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah and held Nehru and Patel responsible for the partition of India. If Bharat cannot stomach even a modicum of praise for the Quaid what sort of goodwill or cordiality can it be expected to possess for the country he founded? The truth is that the Bharati leadership has not reconciled itself to the creation of Pakistan. Its unremitting antagonism can be gauged from the fact that it is fanning trouble in Balochistan and directing well-funded terrorist operations from its missions in Mazar, Jalalabad and Kandahar. Pakistan's PM, Yousuf Raza Gilani, found occasion to hand over a dossier showing Bharat's unwarranted meddling in Balochistan to his counterpart, Dr Manmohan Singh, and as a result the latter agreed to include the word "Balochistan" in the joint statement issued at Sharm El-Sheikh. Bharat had also exploited the Taliban issue, painted a grim and gory picture of the happenings in Pakistan and led the Americans to believe that Islamabad was about to fall and the Taliban were poised to seize Pakistan's nuclear assets. The irony is that these disclosures were made by none else than Manmohan Singh himself. Blomberg News, an American business news service, reported that in a phone call to President Obama, Dr Singh said: "Pakistan has already imploded. The nuclear weapons and the missiles are already in the hands of Muslim extremists. We see the situation with the same clarity as Israel does. India would not sit on the sidelines and watch all this happen in its neighbouring country." India is also reported to be paying terrorists to mount a spectacular attack on a major Pakistani nuclear site. The prime object is to jolt US confidence in Pakistan's stability and proclaim Pakistan's nuclear arsenal as unsafe, and also provoke the world into intervening militarily in Pakistan. Strangely enough, India's Army Chief, General Deepak Kapoor, also thought it fit to sound a note of caution at almost the same time: "I think the world community should put the kind of pressure which is required for Pakistan to cap their nuclear weapons." The presence of a Muslim nuclear power in their midst is a bit unsettling for the Hindus and the Zionists. Bharat, in fact, is in a state of continual hostility. Its corps and armoured brigades face Pakistan. Its air force bases maintain a threatening offensive posture. In collusion with Afghanistan, Bharat is striving to 'encircle' Pakistan. It is buying weapons right and left - fighter jets, tanks, Scorpion submarines, aircraft carriers and much more. It has also launched its first 60000-tonne nuclear-powered submarine 'Arihant' (Destroyer of Enemies) which may well end up as the Destroyer of Peace and the strategic balance. Against whom would these menacing weapons be used? Against China? At the moment, however, the prime target of India's displeasure, bitterness and aspersions is none else but Pakistan. Why are Bharati leaders so averse to the Composite Dialogue? Because it calls upon them to resolve the long-standing Kashmir dispute. This is something that they find most detestable. Consequently, Bharat repeats that it would not resume talks unless Pakistan demolishes the terrorist structure, stops Bharat-specific cross-border terrorism, punishes the Mumbai culprits and reassures India that such incidents would not occur again. These pre-conditions are nothing but a pretext to shelve the Kashmir problem and later do away with it altogether. The world knows that Pakistan has taken serious steps in the matter but that does not satisfy Bharat. Pakistan has furthermore gone all out against the militants and destroyed their network. It was hoped that the Zardari-Manmohan meeting on the sidelines in Yekaterinburg would break the seven-month old deadlock, but Singh's tactless opening gambit "my mandate is to tell you that Pakistan territory should not be used for terrorism against India" caused deep resentment in Pakistan. However, the talks between Gilani and Singh a month later at Sharm El-Sheikh promised to prove more positive. India agreed to de-link the issue of terrorism from the Composite Dialogue. This and the reference to Balochistan in the joint statement, however, created quite an uproar in the Lok Sabha. Dr Singh, members alleged, had changed his stance and caved in to Pakistan's point of view. Manmohan surfaced again in the House a few days later to clarify the matter and assured the members that nothing had changed. Where does that leave the Dialogue? Cloaked, perhaps, in splendid ambiguity Bharat wants Pakistan to forget Kashmir and abhors even a remote reference to it. No wonder it was cut to the quick when Miliband, on a visit to Pakistan stated that an early resolution of the Kashmir dispute was imperative as it was the root cause of terrorism. Bharat's frenzied reaction could be gauged from the fact that the Indian premier instantly dashed off a letter of protest to PM Brown. No matter what its hang-ups, Bharat must recognise what the rest of the world does, namely, that Kashmir is disputed territory. Election gimmickry, extravagant claims and political abracadabra will not extinguish the mighty flame that is KASHMIR. The problem has to be settled. Only then would Pakistan be able to live in peace with its neighbour. India should honour its pledges to the international community and concede the right of self-determination to the Kashmiris. As Bharat seems determined to think no more of the Kashmir issue, the UN must step in, fulfil its responsibility and force an arrogant and pretentious Bharat to settle the dispute. Recent US statements, however, on Kashmir and on the Dialogue and on India's global grandeur are, in fact, adding to Bharat's intransigence and hampering a quick settlement of the dispute. The statements amply revealed that the US is careful not to upset the Indo-US applecart, agrees with Bharat's views on the Composite Dialogue, is overly circumspect in the matter of Kashmir, and is out to pamper Bharat. Regardless of what the US may or may not do to suit its realpolitik, relations between Pakistan and Bharat will not take a turn for the better. How can they when Bharat maligns Pakistan, undermines her stability, dodges a settlement of the Kashmir issue and views Pakistan as the biggest stumbling-block in the way of its grandiose ambitions in the Gulf and the Middle East. Bharat will never discuss the Kashmir issue with total sincerity nor resolve it in keeping with the aspirations of the Kashmiris. The Bilateralism of half a century is as good as dead. If the powers that count do not intervene soon, the hapless Kashmiris will have no other option but to take up arms against a sea of troubles, fight and thus end them. Oppressed people have done so in the past. Who can forget the monumental sacrifices made by the Algerians, the Libyans and the Iranians in the hour of their trial. The Kashmiris, too, may be called upon to take a leaf out of their book. The writer is ex-professor, Government College Lahore. E-mail: