One, he stated categorically that India was prepared for talks with Pakistan on all issues. Significantly, he made specific mention of Kashmir in this context. There is, therefore, absolutely no question of accepting outside mediation. Two, the five weapons powers who are also the five permanent members of the UN Security Council would do better to prove their professed commitment to peace by disbanding their nuclear arsenals than by interfering in South Asia.

By setting out the Indian government's position forcefully and clearly, Vajpayee hasprevented P-5 mischief on Kashmir for the time being. Although the US government spokespersons insisted prior to Geneva on putting Kashmir at the centre of P-5 initiatives, the official P-5 communique omits mention of the issue.

True to form, Pakistan has given a qualified welcome to Vajpayee's offer of talks on Kashmir as the first reaction from Foreign Minister Gohar Ayub Khan shows. But he is mistaken to think there is any scope for third-party mediation or that Pakistan has anything to gain from it. Bringing up this old question when it is abundantly clear that India will not budge on it, makes Islamabad's commitments to the bilateral process suspect.

It would be wiser if it recognised the value of the Gujral-Sharif initiatives in Male which, after a spell of avoidable confusion, were given fresh impetus at the Dhaka summit in December. Now that Vajpayee has made clear his intention to continue that bilateral process, the ball is in Nawaz Sharif's court.

The post-Pokharan, post-Chagai situationimposes important new responsibilities on the South Asian leadership. There is no room for opportunistic manoeuvres, brinkmanship and old-style adversarial rhetoric, all of which deepen misunderstandings and get India and Pakistan nowhere.

Now that both countries have given overt demonstrations of their nuclear capabilities, it is time to establish a new equilibrium and to do so in ways which are transparent and build confidence on both sides. Getting there will involve a dialogue on a broad range of military and political issues. There is no question that statesmanship of a high order is called for in dealing not only with domestic pressures but simultaneously with those in the international arena. It will not be easy.

Every step forward will be dogged by doubt and the ghosts of the past. There will be homegrown wreckers and foreign meddlers at every crossroads. But the job must be done and done here in the region by its own leaders. The P-5 non-proliferation regime is unjust and has been shakenseverely but efforts are on to restore it, not to reshape it on an equitable basis. Only by resolving their own problems will South Asian leaders be in a position to counter those moves.