Several people I have met over the past week have argued that this question presupposes the survival of the state of Pakistan. But that reduces the recent tragedy in Lahore to a kind of frenzied rhetoric that is not the concern of this article. Cricket lovers, all said and done, are romantics, not even hard-boiled realists, leave aside cynics.

Mushy sentimentalism has surely no place in these troubled times, of course. What happened in Lahore was horrific. The fact that the Sri Lankan team was assaulted by armed gunmen gives lie to the belief that cricketers face no threat in the sub-continent. We now have to live with the new reality that nothing and nobody is exempt from the terror threat.

But Pakistan cricket, in as much as is possible, needs to be seen distinct from whatever else is happening in the country. Indeed, if help is forthcoming from other cricket-playing countries, it will not only help sustain the sport in that country, but might perhaps also further the larger cause of keeping young minds away from other ills that threaten to usurp everyday life there. Indeed, as Younis Khan has said, cricket could be the panacea for the state of Pakistan itself.

How can the situation be helped? Obviously no team or player would be willing to play in Pakistan currently. That is perfectly understandable. Safety to life must take precedence over all else. How long this volatile situation would continue is anybody’s guess, which means that Pakistan’s domestic cricket is also likely to suffer because in the absence of touring teams, and non-participation in international cricket will suffocate interest in youngsters. Unlike India, it must be remembered that Pakistan cricket is virtually broke.

Offshore matches involving Pakistan, therefore, would be a boost not just to cricket sentiment in that country, but also invigorate the sport itself. Getting Pakistan players to play in domestic tournaments in other countries would be another good way to keep their cricket system alive through remote access, as it were. Traditionally, English county and league cricket (and occasionally Australian, Indian and South African) has afforded such opportunity.

The examples of West Indies (till a revival of sorts was effected with financial assistance), Zimbabwe and Bangladesh show that unless such assistance is provided, small countries cannot expand their player base and either stagnate or wither away. Even New Zealand is in a bit of a struggle these days because of the paucity of players.

But unlike say even 40 years ago, cricket today is a globalised and wealthy sport, what with private leagues etc joining in as the scope of the sport has expanded with Twenty20 cricket, so this apparent lop-sidedness need not exists. Ensuring a steady stream of talent from all member countries should not be difficult, if the problem is addressed holistically, and ICC’s member countries help each other out.

The sport will be considerably impoverished if Pakistan is isolated. Cricket there must be salvaged -- as much for its own future as for that of the country. Pleas for help from the international cricket community made by Inzamam-ul-Haq and current captain Younis Khan, are not misplaced. This represents genuine anguish by people who know the ground realities better than most. Whether cricket alone is capable of warding off the rising threat of fundamentalism in Pakistan is a moot question, but even as a long shot, it is worth the attempt.