IT is a trifle odd to hear our Foreign Minister trying to act as an apologist for Indian Premier Manmohan Singh and declare that while he wants to have the composite dialogue with Pakistan, it is his Congress Party that is opposing it. That is a matter for the Indian government to decide whether it is in their interest or not to restart the composite dialogue. Mr Qureshi would be far more productive if he were to actually evolve a national consensus on what our India and Kashmir policies should be. Merely desiring a strong friendship with India hardly achieves anything. In fact, if one were to come to any conclusion at all on what is happening on the India and Kashmir fronts from the Pakistani side, one would be compelled to conclude that the present government is following Musharrafs covert policies which have little support either amongst the political parties or the public at large - since little is known about their content and there are suspicions that they included too many compromises at least on Kashmir. This is also borne out by the latest statement coming from Mr Kasuri - the then foreign minister - who, in his pursuit of this friendship agenda with India, has declared that there was already an interim agreement on Kashmir which was to last for 15 years. Now this is a little strange, but then like many decision makers before him, Kasuri is suffering from selective memory loss. While Musharraf had sought to move away from the UNSC Kashmir resolutions and push his four point agenda on Kashmir, there were a number of issues that had yet to be cleared and various experts were looking into these. For instance, there was no clarity or agreement on the actual territory for which the agreement would be applicable; nor was there any agreement amongst the Pakistanis as to what was meant by either autonomy or the notion of joint mechanism. So when Kasuri speaks of an 'interim agreement, he is actually referring to Musharraf and perhaps his own blueprint for which legitimacy and support was still being sought - not only within Pakistan but also from the Kashmiris. That is why there were so many visits by different Kashmiri groups. But in the end all that happened was that we antagonised the main Kashmiri leadership of the APHC and placed ourselves in a vulnerable position of undermining our own locus standi on Kashmir which stems from the UNSC resolutions. There never was an agreement that had the necessary support and legitimacy in Pakistan. Now we have our Foreign Minister talking of a desire to have a strong friendship with India rather than a strong desire to getting conflicts resolved - especially Kashmir, from which the waters dispute also arises. But conflict resolution does not mean a sell-out to Indian blueprints. Rather a principled stance on issues needs to be pushed forward including the UNSC resolutions on Kashmir. Backdoor agreements, covertly arrived at will have no acceptance in Pakistan.