Anyone having some idea about the serious and knotty nature of the problems that have roiled Pak-India relations for 65 years would view the easing of visa restrictions agreed by the two countries as a mere tinkering with the tip of the iceberg. An agreement covering nine categories of visitors was signed from the Pakistani side by Interior Minister Rehman Malik and the Indian side by External Affairs Minister S. M. Krishna at Islamabad on Saturday. These restrictions had been imposed when the distrust born out of the contentious issues became acute and as long as core disputes, like Kashmir and India’s theft of Pakistan’s share of water, continue to trouble their relations there is absolutely no chance of a climate of trust to prevail. And one should not be surprised if, despite the written agreement, the relaxations in the previously strict visa regime are not always followed in practice. In any case, an untoward incident, occurring particularly in India, could be blamed on Pakistan by it, as has been done in the past. We have seen how the so-called confidence building measures virtually go by the board when terrorist acts like that in Mumbai take place. The whole process of composite dialogue came to dead end. Nevertheless, the atmosphere at the joint press conference held between Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar and External Affairs Minister S. M. Krishna after they had concluded their talks was upbeat, with Ms Khar saying, “We will not be held hostage to history…..We must learn from the past and not miss any more opportunities.” Mr Krishna endorsed her view about not being held “hostage to history” and added, “I think we will have to keep our sights to the future….to write a new chapter to our relationship…..Let us walk the talk together.” But rhetoric apart, when Mr Khar talked of the need to accommodate the aspirations of the people of Kashmir in the settlement of the dispute, Mr Krishna relapsed into India’s standard mode by saying that one should not expect “in one meeting” issues that had been bugging the two countries for six decades would be resolved. But, certainly, this was not the first meeting between the high functionaries of the two governments to discuss Kashmir, Siachen or Sir Creek. Pakistan’s stand of going more than half way to please India in order that it is persuaded to take up the issues that are at the root of tension that had more than once erupted into full-scale wars is hardly likely to make it change the tack. India’s interest lies in normalisation and for that Islamabad took a major step in according it the MFN status and, as the Foreign Minister assured her Indian counterpart, the two countries would have trade relations normalised by the end of the year. Under no circumstances, Pakistan should let its commitment not to be held hostage to  history be taken to mean that it is ready to give up its traditional, principled stand on Kashmir and other disputes because durable peace in the subcontinent, the ultimate aim of all these parleys, cannot be achieved by skirting those fundamental principles.