It is difficult to get excited about the prospect of peace talks between India and Pakistan. Not that the meetings do not matter. It's just that the South Asian neighbors have fought three wars and have narrowly averted several others -- a history made even more worrisome by the two governments' possession of nuclear weapons. True to form, this week's meetings ended with little more than an agreement to keep talking. That is not necessarily a bad thing: Reduced expectations might ease the negotiating process.

Peace negotiations have periodically surfaced on the two countries' diplomatic agendas. The last meeting between the two foreign secretaries was six years ago. This round was agreed last January, when the two governments decided to discuss all issues on their bilateral agenda, including the contentious one of Kashmir. There were fears that the upset experienced several weeks ago by the Bharatiya Janata Party government and Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee in national elections would delay or cancel the talks, but to their credit, both governments persevered.

Two days of talks between Pakistani Foreign Secretary Riaz Khokhar and his Indian counterpart, Mr. Shashank, yielded pleasantries, but no agreements. They did commit to a "peaceful negotiated settlement" of the Kashmir dispute, but neither side tabled a specific proposal. Their commitment was little more than a reiteration of the 1972 Simla agreement, which stipulates that the two governments will resolve their differences peacefully. The only concrete development was an agreement to restore their diplomatic missions to full strength. They had been cut after Islamic guerrillas attacked the Indian Parliament in December 2001.