It is because of Indian ambivalent approach towards Pakistan that no major breakthrough occurred in the settlement of main issues between the two neighbouring countries despite periodic meetings of the composite dialogue. For example, before the fourth round of talks held in May 21 this year, it was indicated by the political experts that Islamabad and New Delhi had come very close to each other and could resolve the disputes of Siachen and Sir Creek, but these were left for further consideration in the fifth round. It is due to India intransigence that instead of settling some major disputes, especially of Kashmir which is the main obstacle in the normalisation of relations between the two nuclear rivals who have already fought four wars on this thorny question, even New Delhi either violates or do not implement the minor issues as agreed upon by the two states. Self-contradiction in Indian policy can be judged from the fact that in the fourth round of composite dialogue, Pakistan and India signed an agreement, granting consular access to the prisoners in each other's jail and pledged improvement in their condition to further stabilise the Confidence Building Measures (CBMs). But it is regrettable that Indian consular officials, sitting in Islamabad paid no attention to one of their spies, Kashmir Singh who had been imprisoned in Pakistan for more than 30 years. However, by taking one step in addition, the government of Pakistan released the Indian spy on humanitarian grounds including more than 100 Indian prisoners as a goodwill gesture. While on the other side, maltreatment of prisoners and even killing them in custody by Indian military agencies have become a routine matter. In the recent past, Pakistan received the dead bodies of about 8 prisoners from India, who had committed minor offences such as smuggling, crossing the border mistakenly, over-staying their visa etc. For instance, on June 13 this year by handing over the dead bodies of two more Pakistani nationals namely Rashida Bibi and Abdul Aleem who died in Indian jails due to physical torture displayed Indian sinister designs. In connection with recently received corpses of Pakistani nationals, the Foreign Office Spokesman Muhammad Sadiq said, "We have asked the Indian government to ensure humane treatment of Pakistani prisoners and provision of right to consular access," as agreed upon by the two countries recently. In this respect, Indian violations of human rights norms and the terms of the agreement shows that New Delhi is even paying no heed to the CBMs which entail dead bodies of Pakistani prisoners. This shows a greater paradox of Indian policy towards Pakistan. Apart from the settlement of other issues, the solution of the core issue of Kashmir is very essential to establish durable peace in the sub-continent. Yet no progress seems to be made regarding this problem because of Indian delaying tactics which are part of her ambivalent policy. It is of particular attention that on July 10, 2008, firing by the Indian forces on Pakistani troops at the Line of Control in breach of a ceasefire after a long time has given a setback to the composite dialogue. Nonetheless, the incident points to New Delhi's revival of old war-mongering posture by taking advantage of the volatile situation across the Pak-Afghan border. It was a pre-planned scheme because Indians want Pak Army to be engaged on both eastern and western fronts Indian clandestine diplomacy to train Afghan troops in crushing insurgency in Afghanistan and RAW-Khad nexus to send saboteurs in Pakistan, who are creating lawlessness in the Frontier Province are part of that plan. With the tactical support of the US, New Delhi and Kabul intend to destabilise Pakistan. Meanwhile, Afghan President Hamid Karzai and Indian Army Chief General Deepak Kapoor stated that Pakistan's ISI could be involved in the suicide attack on the Indian embassy in Kabul which killed more than 50 people on July 7, 2008. In this context, Indian National Security Advisor M.K. Narayanan pointed out on July 12, "The ISI needs to be destroyed." However, Pakistan foreign office rejected these baseless allegations against Pakistan intelligence agency saying, these "serve no purpose other than creating an artificial crisis in Pak-Afghan border." Even the US Defence Secretary Robert Gates said on July 9, 2008 that no foreign agents were involved in the bombing of the Indian embassy in Kabul. Particularly, the blame-game brings to light the Indian policy to follow the ambivalent approach of Americans, waging their own version of the War On Terror against Pakistan. In the same vein, it has time and again accused Islamabad for cross border terrorism in Kashmir. While, hundreds of unidentified graves with at least 940 bodies have been discovered in the Indian held Kashmir. Sources suggest that most of them had died in the custody through brutal methods of torture by the Indian intelligence agencies, especially RAW. Regarding this tragedy, event the European parliament passed a resolution, condemning India for human rights violations. Surprisingly, Indian claims of being a secular democracy run contrary to the ground realities when we witness its high-handedness in Kashmir and double standards with Islamabad. Nevertheless, it only indicates cognitive dissonance in Indian policy vis--vis Pakistan. It is mentionable that India had conducted four tests in 1998 to provocate Islamabad who was compelled to follow the suit through five nuclear tests. Same goes to missile experiments which continue from time to time by the two adversaries. There is no doubt that New Delhi took the initiative and entangled Pakistan into a nuclear deadly arms race at the cost of South Asian peace. Besides a nuclear deal with Washington, by acquisition of latest weapons from Russia, US and Israel etc, India wants to play the role of "mini-superpower" in Asia, but quite contrarily, it is making hue and cry for peace of the region. It has become questionable that as to how India will settle major issues with Pakistan including the problem of Kashmir as she is acting upon an ambivalent policy towards Pakistan, making the composite dialogue a farce. The writer is a foreign affairs analyst E-mail: