In diplomacy it is the timing as much as the substance that decides the course of relations between two countries. When it comes to India and Pakistan, though, experts add another factor: the tone with which policy is stated.

PEACE OFFENSIVE: Vajpayee at the Srinagar rally

So last week when Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee made his now famous "hand of friendship" speech at a public rally in Srinagar, what was noticeable was not just the occasion but the way he put across the offer. And though he reiterated the official preconditions for resuming talks at a press conference the next day-of Pakistan ending cross-border terrorism and dismantling militant camps-the prime minister's tone was clearly non-confrontationist.

It is the first major signal that India is willing to think out of the box if Pakistan makes the right moves. It comes after months of maintaining that the policy of "no talks" was proving effective. And days after Foreign Minister Yashwant Sinha described Pakistan as being a fit case for a pre-emptive strike. Among the first to react to Vajpayee's offer was Pakistan's Foreign Minister Khurshid Mehmood Kasuri. At a press conference in Karachi, an upbeat Kasuri said, "Pakistan is sincere and serious about holding a dialogue with India and will not waste any chance offered."

Any doubts over whether Vajpayee was merely grandstanding were removed when the prime minister repeated his offer of "a new beginning" in a statement to the Rajya Sabha on his return from Kashmir. India was offering Pakistan a way out of the deadlock in a far softer tone than it has ever used in recent months. Kasuri pointed out that Vajpayee's remarks were "well-thought out" and not "off-the-cuff". It prompted Pakistan President General Pervez Musharraf to remark, "We are glad to see positive indications. We are prepared to engage in a comprehensive dialogue on Kashmir and all other outstanding issues."

QUICK RESPONSE: Musharraf and Prime Minister Zafarullah Jamali in Islamabad

So is a breakthrough in relations between the two countries in sight? It would be safe to remain sceptical. Yet there are sufficient indications that a constellation of factors may currently exist that could propel the process forward. Though perhaps not in the dramatic fashion in which both the Lahore and Agra summits were announced. An External Affairs Ministry official says, "We are again at an important juncture where the opportunity to move forward exists."

For India it is time to cash in on the gains of conducting an election in Jammu and Kashmir which has been globally acknowledged as "sufficiently free and fair". India senses a fatigue in the Valley over militancy and violence. There seems to be a shift from political activism to a demand for jobs and improving living conditions. When Vajpayee went to Srinagar-the first time an Indian prime minister had visited the Valley in 16 years-the turnout was impressive even though the Hurriyat had called for a bandh.

Internationally too, there is widespread recognition that Pakistan is responsible for much of the militant activity that has overwhelmed Kashmir in recent years. Especially in the country that matters most, the US. There has been some criticism though that India has been "obdurate" about resuming talks with Pakistan. That it had kept shifting the goalpost of what it wants Pakistan to comply with. And that Indian leaders were driven by domestic political and electoral compulsions to keep tensions between the two countries at a high. There were concerns that such hostilities could lead to a catastrophic war between the two. Vajpayee's announcement takes away some of the international pressure and puts the onus of resuming talks squarely back on Pakistan.

Pakistan's internal political compulsions may have also figured in calculations that went into Vajpayee's offer. Though Musharraf remains firmly in the saddle, his inability to forge a working relationship with India is beginning to gnaw at his domestic credibility. While the US continues to back the general, it has increasingly been annoyed over Pakistan's policy of getting the defeated Taliban fighters to regroup and pose a threat to Hamid Karzai's Government in Afghanistan. It has also been pressurising Islamabad to lower tensions with India and asked it to rein in militant groups. Also with the snow melting, India had discerned a build-up of both launching stations and militant camps across the border that could lead to an increase in infiltration and terrorist activities. The timing of India's offer may make Pakistan more circumspect in its policy to foment trouble during the summer months.

There is also the genuine personal desire of the prime minister to go down in history as a peacemaker. With a year and a half to go before his current term is over, there is still time enough to make another determined bid to normalise relations. While winning the Kargil war got him elected in 1999, Vajpayee probably senses winning the peace in the Valley and with Pakistan may fetch him and his party greater dividends in 2004. Yet, Vajpayee has to ensure that a move to normalise relations with Pakistan is viewed by Indians as an act of diplomacy and statesmanship and not one of capitulation.

If Pakistan does not fall in line, it still has the soft option through the SAARC route that India had offered last year to ease tensions. The SAARC summit that was to be held in Pakistan in January is now scheduled for December. India has maintained that if Pakistan shows substantial progress on regional economic cooperation, then Vajpayee would attend the summit. So even if there is no breakthrough, the process of reducing tensions could be carried forward. The coming weeks would determine whether the prime minister's midsummer gambit has a dream run. Or it is, as the new lexicon in India diplomacy has it, something he would invite ninda for.