In a major diplomatic move following the fierce military conflict between the two nuclear-armed neighbours in May 2025, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar has reiterated Islamabad’s willingness to hold a full-scale dialogue with India on Kashmir and all other unresolved bilateral issues.
Dar stressed that no single goal will limit Pakistan’s approach to future negotiations while addressing reporters outside Pakistan’s Parliament in Islamabad. The statement reiterated Pakistan’s preference for what officials regard to as a “composite dialogue” framework. “Talks, whenever held, will be not just Kashmir but on all issues,” Dar said. Discussions on Kashmir, cross-border terrorism, trade relations, water-sharing agreements, including the suspended Indus Waters Treaty, and more extensive people-to-people interactions will all be included in an all-encompassing strategy.
Initially implemented in 2003 under General Pervez Musharraf’s leadership, the composite dialogue mechanism functioned as a structured framework that addressed important bilateral issues including as commerce, cultural exchanges, terrorism, and Kashmir. In a similar vein, Dar stressed Pakistan’s willingness to “work and cooperate with India on all fronts—from trade to counter-terrorism” in a July 2025 statement to the Atlantic Council think organisation, demonstrating a persistent diplomatic commitment in spite of the military situation.
The four-day military clash that put the nuclear-armed neighbours on the verge of a wider conflict was followed three months ago by the diplomatic overtures. The terrible Pahalgam terrorist incident on April 22, 2025, which claimed the lives of 26 civilians—mostly Hindu tourists who were singled out for persecution because of their faith—was the catalyst for the crisis. India’s military reacted quickly to the incident, which was first claimed by The Resistance Front (TRF), a front group for the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba.
Using precision missiles, India started Operation Sindoor on May 7, 2025, targeting nine terrorist training centres and infrastructure sites in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir.
Targeting areas from Muridke to Bahawalpur, the 22-minute raid was India’s largest cross-border military operation since the war of 1971. Operation Bunyan-un-Marsoos, which translates to “solid wall of lead” in Arabic, was Pakistan’s response. It used ballistic missiles and drones to target Indian military targets, including airbases.
The United States’ aggressive diplomatic engagement finally contained the rising confrontation. On May 10, Vice President JD Vance personally spoke with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, alerting him to the dangers of a catastrophic escalation and urging open dialogue with Pakistan.
Throughout the crisis, Secretary of State Marco Rubio kept in touch with authorities from both nations while coordinating concurrent diplomatic efforts. President Donald Trump announced the ceasefire accord, which ended four days of fierce cross-border fighting on May 10, 2025, at 5 PM.
Pakistan’s stance on US intervention during the May issue was significantly clarified by Dar’s most recent remarks. He made it clear that Pakistan had “been offered a meeting at a neutral venue but had not requested any mediation.” Dar further disclosed that he “had made it clear that Pakistan did not want a war” and that he “received a call from the US for a ceasefire.” According to Pakistani authorities who insist that “India had approached the United States to broker a ceasefire,” this goes against previous beliefs and places the initiative for US engagement with India rather than Pakistan.
With frequent scheduled talks aimed at preserving peace and averting tactical escalations, the ceasefire agreement resumed DGMO-level interactions between the two nations’ military leadership. Dar added that “the ceasefire agreement with India is holding” as Pakistani officials emphasised that the ceasefire arrangement is still in place.
India has been steadfast in its position on the terms of the dialogue with Pakistan. In Parliament, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh outlined India’s stance, saying that “dialogue is possible only with democratic and civilised nations, not those driven by hatred and religious extremism” and that India “will not hold talks with countries that support terrorism.” Potential talks are limited by India’s diplomatic framework to two topics: dealing with cross-border terrorism and the return of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.
This stance was reaffirmed by External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, who insisted that “terror and talks cannot go together” and that Pakistan must “shut down terrorist infrastructure” before serious negotiations can start. In his post-ceasefire remarks, Prime Minister Narendra Modi assured Pakistan that India will “precisely and decisively target the terrorist hideouts operating under the guise of nuclear intimidation” and threatened to use military force in reaction to any future terrorist attacks.
There are still major barriers to the restart of real talks, notwithstanding Pakistan’s diplomatic efforts. India’s demand on talks centred on terrorism runs counter to Pakistan’s desire for all-encompassing involvement in a variety of issue areas. Given the internal political situation and the recent military conflict, it seems unlikely that India will significantly bend its current stance in order to adopt the composite dialogue framework that Pakistan supports.
With Foreign Office spokesperson Shafqat Ali Khan restating that “Pakistan is ready for composite dialogue with India on all matters, not just the issue of terrorism,” Pakistani authorities remain hopeful about possible interaction. Dar acknowledged that “there is no contact on the political side” despite continued military-to-military communications, but no tangible steps towards real negotiations have surfaced since the ceasefire.
As both countries hold essentially contradictory stances on the terms of the dialogue—Pakistan wants full participation, while India insists on terrorism-focused talks as a prerequisite for more extensive discussions—the diplomatic impasse continues. There appear to be few imminent opportunities for resuming mediation efforts, as evidenced by the absence of planned visits by top US officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
