JUST a day before the arrival of US Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher in Islamabad, the Indian government pointed to the involvement of 'state actors' in Pakistan, in the Mumbai carnage. The finger-pointing comes a day after Pakistan had rejected New Delhi's demand for handing over the attack suspects, insisting that there was no extradition treaty between the two countries. At a press conference, Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi very rightly observed at that Pakistan could frame a response on matters related to last month's carnage only after India officially furnished it some evidence. One however wonders what constrained the Foreign Minister to bend over backwards in seeking friendly relations with New Delhi when the Indian leadership spares no opportunity of accusing Islamabad of sponsoring terrorism in the region. There is no point in being apologetic after Indian Home Minister Chidambaram's warning that Pakistan would have to pay an "enormous price" if terror attacks like the one witnessed in Mumbai last year, were repeated. In an interview with a television channel just ahead of his visit to the United States, he asked Pakistan to give "cast-iron guarantees" that its soil would not be used to launch a terror attack like 26/11. Mr Chidambaram's assertion that India would not be talking about war now lends credence to Mr Qureshi's claim that the tension sparked by the Mumbai attacks had been defused by the intervention of the international community. As New Delhi is desperately trying to implicate Pakistan's intelligence apparatus in the acts of terrorism on its soil, Islamabad needs to counter the move by launching a strong diplomatic offensive. There is no doubt that the Mumbai attacks caused a setback to the composite dialogue, which has not yet produced the desired results. But normalization of relations between the two nuclear-armed neighbours is not possible so long as India continues to blame Pakistan for last month's carnage without actually furnishing any evidence.