Hard Talk No one should be surprised that as the prime ministers of India and Pakistan start to talk about the nuts and bolts of bilateral relations, the lightheaded atmosphere of the Lahore declaration should start to thin. Equally predictable is that the Kashmir issue will serve to lower expectations in the coming months. Mr Atal Behari Vajpayee?s talk of India not losing any more territory seems to be an attempt to reassure that Lahore will not open the door to Kashmiri secession or the surrender of more land to Pakistan. Mr Nawaz Sharif also took a conservative stance by warning talks would go nowhere if there was no Kashmir settlement in a specified timeframe. Both statements seem to target hardline sentiment in both countries without making life difficult for the other country?s leader. Mr Vajpayee?s statement left much unsaid. It failed to say whether the line of control should be a border or if India would surrender its claim to Pakistani held Kashmir. Mr Sharif did not specify a timeframe or even what he expected of a Kashmir settlement other than stressing Kashmiri ?self determination.? None of this violates either the letter or spirit of the Lahore declaration. Yet the two prime ministers obviously hope to avoid giving primitive nationalists in both countries a stick to beat them with. The statements are a reminder that Kashmir is an obstacle that will eventually interfere in the pace of any Indo-Pakistani dialogue. The Simla agreement fell apart because neither side was willing or able to fulfil the unwritten parts of the pact. Pakistan failed to accept the line of actual control as the border. India failed to keep Kashmir politically quiescent, making it impossible for Zulfikar Ali Bhutto to uphold Simla. A similar situation now holds today. The Lahore declaration speaks of abiding by the ?spirit and letter? of Simla. India?s part of this means loosening the Kashmir straitjacket. Mr Sharif?s 1997 United Nations speech outlined some means by which India could make it easier for him to check Pakistani emotions over that state. These included curbing human rights violations and reducing troop levels in that state, as well as making concessions towards self determination. India could live with such measures, especially if Kashmir?s insurgency continues to taper off. Making concessions on Kashmiri self determination will be tricky because New Delhi will need to take steps that grant Kashmir more autonomy. Mr Farooq Abdullah again forlornly raised this issue a few days ago. The point is that if India expects Wagah to become a turning point in history it needs to be more imaginative in its thinking about Kashmir. There are many shades of policy that it can follow, none of which will mean surrendering the state to Pakistan. But only such policies will give Mr Sharif the leeway to join Mr Vajpayee in making a sustainable dialogue and a sound peace.