Contrary to Pakistan's claims that it has responded to an Indian dossier of evidences on the involvement of elements from this country in the Mumbai terror attacks, it now transpires this is still being pieced together.
"The Pakistani authorities were still examining the dossier and their reaction was expected shortly," columnist Amir Mir wrote in The News daily on Monday.
Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani said on Friday that spy agency Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) has "given its feedback" to India about the Mumbai attacks, but New Delhi maintains it has not received any response.
India's Minister of State for External Affairs Anand Sharma said on Saturday he would "only comment after receiving the reply".
According to the Indian dossier, "the evidence gathered so far unmistakably points to the territory of Pakistan as a source of the terrorist attacks in Mumbai between November 26 and 29, 2008. It is abundantly clear that senior functionaries of the LT (Lashkar-e-Taiba) were the controllers/handlers of the 10 terrorists."
"The evidence clearly establishes that the terrorists were chosen, trained, dispatched, controlled and guided by the LT, which is the organisation responsible for terrorist attacks in Mumbai," the dossier says.
In the second section of the dossier, Mir wrote, "India has pointed out the contradictory nature of the Pakistani response to the Mumbai attacks, Islamabad's failure to respond appropriately to Indian requests for cooperation when evidence was provided in the past about terrorist acts, and an outline of Pakistani bilateral and international commitments and obligations to take the terrorists to task."
"The third and last section of the dossier contains an outline of what the Indian government expects Islamabad to do in the aftermath of the Mumbai attacks," Mir wrote.
"This was a conspiracy launched from Pakistan. Gaps in knowledge can be filled by investigation and interrogation of conspirators there," the dossier concluded.
Commenting on the frostiness in Pakistan-India ties in the wake of the mayhem, the Dawn in an editorial said: "Given the vitriolic exchanges between the two governments in recent weeks, the need of the hour is for them to moderate their tone to improve the political climate in South Asia if the peace process is to be revived."
"Both sides, one can presume, understand the importance of negotiating their disputes. But it is a pity that leaders on both sides have allowed political expediencies to determine the course of events," the editorial maintained.
It also urged Gilani to "work earnestly to put an end to the war of words that has devastated the atmospherics in the region."
"This would call for a tacit understanding with India requiring both governments to stop playing to the gallery and refraining from negotiating in the glare of media publicity," Dawn said.