Can you explain this quick change of heart towards Pakistan, Mr Modi?

Forging good relations with neighbours, especially Pakistan, has been a dream of all Indian prime ministers. Indira Gandhi was the only one to go against the grain with her decision to wage war and facilitate the split of Pakistan in 1971. Yet, she too returned to the basic peace template with the Shimla Agreement much to the chagrin - even today - of strategic experts who argued that India did not extract maximum advantage from a position of superiority.

Because Atal Bihari Vajpayee had to demonstrate his distinctiveness from predecessors, among the first decisions taken by him was to test a nuclear weapon.

Predictably, this rolled back the gains made during the tenure of Inder Kumar Gujral, who led the initiative to formulate eight issues in 1998 that were the basic items on the agenda of the two nations under the composite dialogue process, now replaced with a similar sounding comprehensive bilateral dialogue during incumbent external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj's visit to Pakistan earlier this month.

But Vajpayee soon embarked on the peace route and in February 1999 undertook a bus yatra to Lahore to sign a path-breaking agreement. It is a different matter that within three months, this agreement and the bus service lay in tatters after the clandestine Pakistani intrusions in Kargil got known and resulted in a short but sharply fought war between the two countries.

In any case, the Lahore bus yatra couldn't save the Vajpayee government from being toppled and India's success in the Kargil War that was fought under him, with Vajpayee serving as the "caretaker" prime minister, did not yield any more seats for the BJP in the 1999 Lok Sabha elections. Sadly for Vajpayee, both war and peace failed to benefit him politically but he still pursued peace in the form of a unilateral declaration of ceasefire in November 2000, the Agra summit in July 2001 and eventually extending the hand of friendship to Pakistan at a public rally in Srinagar in April 2003 which eventually led to the resumption of the stalled composite dialogue process. Vajpayee pursued peace because he was a peacenik at heart.

Modi, however, is different. He was known by his "chicken biryani" comments during the campaign for the Lok Sabha elections last year. Modi was the quintessential "Hindu Hriday Samrat", modelled on veteran BJP leader LK Advani and to become prime minister he had to shed that mask and don the one of "Vikas Purush". Modi had stumped all observers, given his background, with the decision to invite the leaders the SAARC countries to his oath-taking ceremony as the prime minister. Over the past 19 months, Modi had blown hot and cold on Pakistan before finally taking to the path of peace since the short Paris meeting with Pakistan counterpart Nawaz Sharif.

It is tough to predict the future as far as the present thaw in India-Pakistan relations is concerned. Quite clearly, this has been done with an eye on the SAARC summit in Islamabad in September which is also the month of Modi's birthday and he would like the occasion to be a huge success - multilaterally as well as at a bilateral level. For the moment, the Modi government appears to have learnt from the mistakes of the Vajpayee government and has engaged with the civilian administration as well as the Pakistan army. This engagement may not be at a formal level, but there is no denying that the recent interaction at the national security advisor (NSA) level had been cleared by the Pakistani army chief, Raheel Sharif.

If the army in Pakistan represents the sections that are more hostile towards India than the civilian government, the so-called fringe forces in India have a greater degree of animosity towards Pakistan. In September, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) came out in support of the Modi's government engagement with Pakistan but with a spin - the spokesperson reminded all that Pakistan and Bangladesh could not be just treated as neighbours as they were once part of India. It is very difficult to understand what the precise position of bosses of the Sangh Parivar is. Have they repudiated the idea of Akhand Bharat or do they look at dialogue as a form of hegemonistic exercise?

But even beyond the formal resolution and statesmen, there is the larger issue of what the rank and file thinks about Pakistan and if India should take the lead to pursue peace with its western neighbour. Let us not forget that the BJP and several of its allies in the saffron fold have gained strength by playing up on the hostility towards Pakistan. It cannot be ignored that barely two months ago, BJP president Amit Shah had projected Pakistan as the country where countless Diwali Milans would be held in the event of the BJP's defeat in the Bihar polls. Modi may pursue peace with great enthusiasm, and be driven by the desire to metamorphosise his international image from a rabble-rouser to global statesman but how will he or his party be able to explain the change of attitude towards Islamabad in such a short time?

Modi's peace offensive does not have the potential to redeem his declining domestic fortunes. Instead, this foray risks the support of the cultural right, that section among Modi Bhakts who thought that a Modi victory will result in avenging several historical wrongs - in the country and the subcontinent.