SOMETHING is afoot in Islamabad, but few seem willing to venture a guess about what is really going on. It is curious that both the PTI and the government seem much more elastic than at any point since the former’s banishment from the corridors of power. Officially, the two are ; however, there has been little by way of tangible progress in their talks, with matters still stuck on what the PTI’s formal demands are and the PTI’s insistence on to its incarcerated founder-leader. Meanwhile, there has been a constant cycle of speculation and denial about back-channel talks between the PTI and the military establishment. Whatever the truth of those may be, it is widely understood that no talks can progress unless there is some sort of understanding between the two, especially given the latter’s expanded involvement in running the affairs of the state. The distrust between the PTI and the incumbent regime has grown into a chasm over the last few years. Bridging it is, therefore, no simple task. The mere fact that official negotiations were initiated was itself a major accomplishment, given the circumstances. That they have continued for more than two weeks, despite apprehensions on both sides, piques one’s interest. After all, one of the negotiating parties had, till recently, dismissed the other as having no real authority at all; the other still paints the former as a ‘terrorist’ entity involved in ‘anti-state activities’. It has been said that shared concerns over terrorism and the economy have, at least temporarily, helped overcome the mutual contempt both hold for each other. It is unfortunate, however, that whatever rules of engagement are being agreed upon are being decided in secret, without the public given much of a hint about what, precisely, is under discussion. It would have been much better had the ongoing dialogue been conducted in the public eye. Perhaps a bit of secrecy is still needed given how polarised the country is at the moment and because none of the parties may be comfortable making necessary concessions that may lower their public standing in any way. Still, the public deserves to know what terms are being negotiated so that there is a broader consensus on how matters will proceed thereafter. The nation’s fate has been decided through secret deals for too long, with the result that the citizenry has become increasingly alienated from the state. It is hoped, therefore, that the final round of dialogue, at least, will be conducted in the public eye so that there is a wider debate on each side’s positions. For there to be closure, all stakeholders, including the citizenry, must be brought on the same page. Once there is consensus, the nation will move forward.