Reports have surfaced indicating possible backchannel engagement between India and Pakistan, despite the absence of official diplomatic talks following the sharp deterioration in relations after the April 2025 Pahalgam terror attack and India’s subsequent Operation Sindoor in May. While formal Track 1 dialogue remains suspended and only the hotline between the Directors General of Military Operations (DGMOs) continues to function, accounts suggest that informal interactions may have taken place since late 2025.
Recent reports claim that retired defence officials and individuals considered close to the governments of both countries met in Colombo, Sri Lanka, during a regional security conference. A Pakistani newspaper described the interaction as a Track 1.5 dialogue, implying the participation of both serving and former officials. In diplomatic terminology, Track 1 refers to official government-to-government engagement, Track 2 involves unofficial people-to-people exchanges, and Track 1.5 occupies a middle ground with elements of both.
Some reports identified specific participants, though one of those named strongly rejected the characterization, describing it as a “totally wrong portrayal” and denying that the event constituted any form of Track 2 dialogue.
Relations between India and Pakistan have remained strained since Pakistan downgraded ties following India’s decision to revoke Jammu and Kashmir’s special status under Article 370 on August 5, 2019. The relationship further deteriorated after the Pahalgam attack. At present, there is no direct trade or significant diplomatic engagement between the two countries.
The freeze in relations has affected both sides differently. While India has faced restrictions regarding overflight access through Pakistani airspace, Pakistan faces greater challenges due to India’s decision to keep the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance after the Pahalgam attack. Given Pakistan’s heavy dependence on Indus River waters for agriculture and power generation, the issue carries major economic implications.
A report published by Pakistan’s Express Tribune claimed that serving officials from India and Pakistan participated in a Track 1.5 discussion alongside retired diplomats, former military officers, and politicians. According to the report, the meeting took place on the sidelines of the International Institute for Strategic Studies’ (IISS) annual South Asia Dialogue in Colombo. The London-based IISS focuses on global security, military affairs, and political risk analysis.
The report further stated that a senior political figure from Pakistan’s ruling coalition was involved in the discussions with Indian representatives.
Meanwhile, Hindustan Times reported that talks had indeed occurred but characterized them as Track 2 interactions, asserting that no serving Indian official participated. According to that report, the Indian delegation included former BJP national general secretary Ram Madhav, former Army Chief General Manoj Mukund Naravane, and former diplomat Ruchi Ghanashyam. The Pakistani side reportedly included serving diplomat Sajjad Haider Khan, former senator Sherry Rehman, and retired Major General Isfandiyar Ali Khan Pataudi.
The report also noted that US Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs S. Paul Kapur attended a special dinner with participants during the conference.
According to Express Tribune, Sri Lankan media also reported on the dialogue, stating that its objective was to improve communication mechanisms during crises and explore ways to prevent or manage future escalations.
Amid these reports, Ram Madhav rejected claims that the Colombo event represented Track 2 diplomacy. He stated that the gathering was a broader regional forum attended by scholars, experts, and officials from multiple countries rather than an unofficial bilateral engagement between India and Pakistan.
Posting on X, Madhav said the event was the IISS annual South Asia Dialogue and included participants from India, Sri Lanka, the United States, the United Kingdom, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. He described reports portraying it as Track 2 diplomacy as a complete distortion of the facts.
The Hindustan Times report suggested that the Colombo interaction was the latest among several informal contacts between India and Pakistan after Operation Sindoor and the military confrontation of May 2025.
India had previously dismissed suggestions made by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio that New Delhi and Islamabad had agreed to hold peace talks at a neutral venue after the ceasefire reached following Operation Sindoor.
A Pakistani Foreign Office official, speaking anonymously to Arab News, stated that he had no knowledge of any engagement beyond official Track 1 diplomacy and declined further comment.
Track 1 diplomacy refers to formal negotiations conducted directly by governments through serving political leaders, ministers, diplomats, and authorized officials. Such talks carry official authority and can result in treaties, agreements, and policy decisions.
Track 1.5 diplomacy combines official and unofficial participation, bringing together serving government representatives and independent experts, often under the umbrella of a neutral institution. This format allows sensitive issues to be discussed in a less rigid environment while maintaining some degree of official involvement.
Track 2 diplomacy, in contrast, consists of unofficial discussions involving former diplomats, retired military officers, academics, journalists, think tank representatives, and members of civil society. Participants engage in their personal capacities with the aim of building trust, exchanging ideas, and reducing tensions, though these discussions do not produce binding outcomes.
National security analyst Nitin A. Gokhale questioned the portrayal of the Colombo event as a new India-Pakistan Track 2 initiative. Writing on X, he argued that reports about meetings in Muscat, Bangkok, and Colombo were being presented as fresh bilateral developments when they were actually long-standing multilateral conferences organized by international think tanks.
According to Gokhale, retired military officers, former diplomats, and strategic experts from both countries have attended such forums for years alongside participants from numerous other nations.
He explained that the Colombo event was the annual South Asia security conference organized by the London-based IISS, which is usually held in Bahrain but was moved to Colombo because of security concerns in the Gulf region.
Gokhale added that the same think tank has conducted similar conferences in Muscat over many years, drawing attendees from countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and across South Asia.
Referring to another gathering in Bangkok, he noted that it is organized by a Canadian university with a longstanding tradition of bringing Indian and Pakistani participants together on a common platform.
He argued that while members of India’s strategic establishment may be aware of such interactions, portraying them as a new diplomatic initiative or linking them to possible policy concessions amounted to a significant exaggeration.
Recalling his own participation in a previous IISS conference, Gokhale said that several Pakistani delegates mentioned in recent reports had attended earlier meetings as well. He characterized the conference as an annual discussion forum rather than a dedicated bilateral Track 2 process.
The discussion surrounding alleged Track 2 diplomacy emerged months after RSS General Secretary Dattatreya Hosabale remarked that India should always remain prepared for dialogue with Pakistan. Hosabale is widely regarded as the second most senior functionary in the RSS after its chief.
Former Army Chief General M.M. Naravane, who was reportedly present at the Colombo conference, later echoed similar sentiments, emphasizing the importance of maintaining people-to-people contacts and connections.
Overall, although some reports framed the Colombo interactions as Track 1.5 or Track 2 diplomacy between India and Pakistan, Ram Madhav’s clarification and Gokhale’s assessment suggest that the event was a longstanding multilateral security forum rather than a new or dedicated bilateral diplomatic initiative. According to this interpretation, the Colombo gathering was part of an established series of regional engagements rather than evidence of a fresh Track 2 process between New Delhi and Islamabad.
