In fact, it was only waiting to happen because Pakistan was not in a position to dictate terms of the talks. And at the same time, it could not send home the message that it bowed before India by agreeing to an agenda that didn't include talks on Jammu and Kashmir.
Given the stated position of this government, the Narendra Modi led National Democratic Alliance government, we have reasons to believe J&K cannot be on any agenda of talks where different factions of All Party Hurriyat Conference are invited by Pakistan as the third party - at least till Narendra Modi is the prime minister of India.
India, as the doctrine goes, doesn't consider J&K a disputed territory and the present government has been, ever since its inaugural, particularly emphatic about expressing it.
The bilateral talks between India and Pakistan were broken in August 2014 when India had cancelled Foreign Secretary level talks on issue of Pakistan being adamant on talking to Hurriyat leaders.
So, obviously, if Pakistan was serious about talks, if it had accepted to go ahead with 'now cancelled' NSAs meeting, it had to keep in mind that why the talks last year were cancelled in the first place.
For the BJP, political analysis in India (and Pakistan) was growing more and more vocal about the possible stand taken by the NDA government after Pakistan invited Hurriyat leaders for talks even this time.
When a round of talk was killed last year on same issue, why to reintroduce that element again?
Because, either Pakistan wanted to kill the talks again - with its inborn compulsions to run away from words of logic and geopolitical pragmatism - or - it wanted to send home a message (to its Army) that it was dealing with India on its own terms - and so was a dominant negotiating partner - in case if India accepted Hurriyat as a party in negotiations - that meant Kashmir was on the agenda - something that India had refused from the day one - since Ufa.
India was never going to accept these terms, even if it didn't set any precondition other that those agreed at Ufa - reflected by the joint statement of both countries.
Pakistan's political leadership, under international pressure, most importantly from the US, willingly or unwillingly, agreed to restart the talks and India took a leading step here by inviting Pakistan.
But Pakistan tried to exploit even this move by propagandizing that 'India was compelled to come to the talking table' - and that Pakistan did not blink first.
Now, we know, the world community knows, and even many in Pakistan, including its military and political leadership know, that Pakistan is no match for India. India has moved much ahead and is a global economic powerhouse now. Its scientific and defence prowess are years ahead than Pakistan.
Pakistan, therefore, cannot set terms, other than agreed, while negotiating with India. That reflected in Sartaj Aziz's presser where he clarified that he was visiting India for the talks even if he was not hopeful of any outcome.
Pakistan's problem - primarily of its military establishment - and therefore of its political establishment - is - that its foreign policy has been India centric ever since the country came into existence in 1947.
And the cancelled NSA talks show nothing has changed on that front - even now.
In fact, India was always in a different, positive league than Pakistan. But we, politically, mismanaged the whole affair, with every subsequent government giving Pakistan legroom to exercise and promote its propaganda voices on different global platforms. We allowed Pakistan to even outmanoeuvre us on many times.
But, it had to end somewhere. And the process has begun - even if the realization has come very late.
India, like China, is imperative for global economy now. Yes, Pakistan, too, is a nuclear power, but its security establishment is far superior, innovative and indigenous and is accustomed to work under a democratic leadership.
India is asserting its rightful position on the global stage now and the world is taking note of it. India's neighbours (excluding China and Pakistan) see India now as a senior partner that gives them due bilateral importance.
The problem with Pakistan's political leadership is - it cannot say no even to the Hurriyat leadership - we all remember the serious note taken by Pakistan after Nawaz Sharif didn't meet them during his India visit last year in May 2014 or when Ufa statement didn't mention Kashmir this year - then how can it stand before Pakistan's military - the institution that wields real power there?
Pakistan's Army didn't want these talks to happen, as evident by escalation in incidents of ceasefire violation by Pakistan after the Ufa meeting. And the talks ultimately, expectedly, didn't happen.
It has further weakened the political establishment in Pakistan.
Hurriyat has no significance for India. The party with its different factions doesn't matter even in Jammu and Kashmir's politics. Jammu and Kashmir has elected government and people's participation, over the years, in the electoral process, has increased quite impressively, in spite of the continued run of cross-border terrorism by Pakistan, trying to incite separatist voices.
Hurriyat, in fact, is a ploy by Pakistan's Army to keep another of its anti-India ploy running - the anti-India rhetoric based on Kashmir - an eternal lifeline 'sort of thing' for Pakistan's Army.
And Pakistan's political establishment, irrespective of the realpolitik, is forced to follow whims of this ploy.