|
Fact Files
Prospects of a Dialogue Between India
and Pakistan
Editor
Dr.Noor ul Haq
Assistant Editor
Asma Shakir Khawaja
The Lahore Declaration
The
following is the text of the Lahore Declaration signed by the Prime Minister,
Mr. A. B. Vajpayee, and the Pakistan Prime Minister, Mr. Nawaz Sharif, in
Lahore on Sunday:
The Prime Ministers of
the Republic of India and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan:
Sharing a vision of
peace and stability between their countries, and of progress and prosperity
for their peoples;
Convinced that durable
peace and development of harmonious relations and friendly cooperation will
serve the vital interests of the peoples of the two countries, enabling them
to devote their energies for a better future;
Recognising that the
nuclear dimension of the security environment of the two countries adds to
their responsibility for avoidance of conflict between the two countries;
Committed to the
principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations, and the
universally accepted principles of peaceful co- existence;
Reiterating the
determination of both countries to implementing the Simla Agreement in letter
and spirit;
Committed to the
objective of universal nuclear disarmament and non-proliferartion;
Convinced of the
importance of mutually agreed confidence building measures for improving the
security environment;
Recalling their
agreement of 23rd September, 1998, that an environment of peace and security
is in the supreme national interest of both sides and that the resolution of
all outstanding issues, including Jammu and Kashmir, is essential for this
purpose;
Have agreed that their
respective Governments:
shall intensify their
efforts to resolve all issues, including the issue of Jammu and Kashmir.
shall refrain from
intervention and interference in each other's internal affairs.
shall intensify their
composite and integrated dialogue process for an early and positive outcome of
the agreed bilateral agenda.
shall take immediate
steps for reducing the risk of accidental or unauthorised use of nuclear
weapons and discuss concepts and doctrines with a view to elaborating measures
for confidence building in the nuclear and conventional fields, aimed at
prevention of conflict.
reaffirm their
commitment to the goals and objectives of SAARC and to concert their efforts
towards the realisation of the SAARC vision for the year 2000 and beyond with
a view to promoting the welfare of the peoples of South Asia and to improve
their quality of life through accelerated economic growth, social progress and
cultural development.
reaffirm their
condemnation of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations and their
determination to combat this menace.
shall promote and
protect all human rights and fundamental freedoms.
Signed at Lahore on the
21st day of February 1999.
Atal Behari Vajpayee -
Prime Minister of the Republic of India
Muhammad Nawaz Sharif -
Prime Minister of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan
Joint
Statement
The following is the
text of the Joint Statement issued at the end of the Prime Minister, Mr. A. B.
Vajpayee's visit to Lahore:
In response to an
invitation by the Prime Minister of Pakistan, Mr. Muhammad Nawaz Sharif, the
Prime Minister of India, Shri Atal Behari Vajpayee, visited Pakistan from
20-21 February, 1999, on the inaugural run of the Delhi-Lahore bus service.
2. The Prime
Minister of Pakistan received the Indian Prime Minister at the Wagah border on
20th February 1999. A banquet in honour of the Indian Prime Minister and his
delegation was hosted by the Prime Minister of Pakistan at Lahore Fort, on the
same evening. Prime Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee, visited Minar-e- Pakistan,
Mausoleum of Allama Iqabal, Gurudawara Dera Sahib and Samadhi of Maharaja
Ranjeet Singh. On 21st February, a civic reception was held in honour of the
visiting Prime Minister at the Governor's House.
3. The two
leaders held discussions on the entire range of bilateral relations, regional
cooperation within SAARC, and issues of international concern. They decided
that:
(a)
The two
Foreign Ministers will meet periodically to discuss all issues of mutual
concern, including nuclear related issues.
(b)
The two
sides shall undertake consultations on WTO related issues with a view to
coordinating their respective positions.
(c)
The two
sides shall determine areas of cooperation in Information Technology, in
particular for tackling the problems of Y2K.
(d)
The two
sides will hold consultations with a view to further liberalising the visa and
travel regime.
(e)
The two
sides shall appoint a two member committee at ministerial level to examine
humanitarian issues relating to Civilian detainees and missing POWs.
4. They
expressed satisfaction on the commencement of a Bus Service between Lahore and
New Delhi, the release of fishermen and civilian detainees and the renewal of
contacts in the field of sports.
5. Pursuant to
the directive given by the two Prime Ministers, the Foreign Secretaries of
Pakistan and India signed a Memorandum of Understanding on 21st February 1999,
identifying measures aimed at promoting an environment of peace and security
between the two countries.
6. The two
Prime Ministers signed the Lahore Declaration embodying their shared vision of
peace and stability between their countries and of progress and prosperity for
their peoples.
7. Prime
Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee extended an invitation to Prime Minister,
Muhammad Nawaz Sharif, to visit India on mutually convenient dates.
8. Prime Minister, Atal Behari
Vajpayee, thanked Prime Minister, Muhammad Nawaz Sharif, for the warm welcome
and gracious hospitality extended to him and members of his delegation and for
the excellent arrangements made for his visit to Lahore.
Memorandum
of Understanding
The following is the
text of the Memorandum of Understanding signed by the Foreign Secretary, Mr.
K. Raghunath, and the Pakistan Foreign Secretary, Mr. Shamshad Ahmad, in
Lahore on Sunday:
The Foreign Secretaries
of India and Pakistan:-
Reaffirming the
continued commitment of their respective governments to the principles and
purposes of the U.N. Charter;
Reiterating the
determination of both countries to implementing the Shimla Agreement in letter
and spirit;
Guided by the agreement
between their Prime Ministers of 23rd September 1998 that an environment of
peace and security is in the supreme national interest of both sides and that
resolution of all outstanding issues, including Jammu and Kashmir, is
essential for this purpose;
Pursuant to the
directive given by their respective Prime Ministers in Lahore, to adopt
measures for promoting a stable environment of peace, and security between the
two countries;
Have on this day,
agreed to the following:-
1. The two
sides shall engage in bilateral consultations on security concepts, and
nuclear doctrines, with a view to developing measures for confidence building
in the nuclear and coventional fields, aimed at avoidance of conflict.
2. The two
sides undertake to provide each other with advance notification in respect of
ballistic missile flight tests, and shall conclude a bilateral agreement in
this regard.
3.
The two
sides are fully committed to undertaking national measures to reducing the
risks of accidential or unauthorised use of nuclear weapons under their
respective control. The two sides further undertake to notify each other
immediately in the event of any accidential, unauthorised or unexplained
incident that could create the risk of a fallout with adverse consequences for
both sides, or an outbreak of a nuclear war between the two countries, as well
as to adopt measures aimed at diminishing the possibility of such actions, or
such incidents being misinterpreted by the other. The two side shall
identify/establish the appropriate communication mechanism for this purpose.
4. The two
sides shall continue to abide by their respective unilateral moratorium on
conducting further nuclear test explosions unless either side, in exercise of
its national sovereignty decides that extraordinary events have jeopardised
its supreme interests.
5. The two
sides shall conclude an agreement on prevention of incidents at sea in order
to ensure safety of navigation by naval vessels, and aircraft belonging to the
two sides.
6. The two
sides shall periodically review the implementation of existing Confidence
Building Measures (CBMs) and where necessary, set up appropriate consultative
mechanisms to monitor and ensure effective implementation of these CBMs.
7. The two
sides shall undertake a review of the existing communication links (e.g.
between the respective Directors- General, Military Operations) with a view to
upgrading and improving these links, and to provide for fail-safe and secure
communications.
8. The two
sides shall engage in bilateral consultations on security, disarmament and
non-proliferation issues within the context of negotiations on these issues in
multilateral fora.
Where required, the
technical details of the above measures will be worked out by experts of the
two sides in meetings to be held on mutually agreed dates, before mid 1999,
with a view to reaching bilateral agreements.
Done at Lahore on 21st
February 1999 in the presence of Prime Minister of India, Mr. Atal Behari
Vajpayee, and Prime Minister of Pakistan, Mr. Muhammad Nawaz Sharif.
(K. Raghunath) Foreign
Secretary of the Republic of India (Shamshad Ahmad) Foreign Secretary of the
Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
United States Institute of
Peace Library Peace Agreements Digital Collection: India-Pakistan
21 February 1999
Retrieved from <http://www.usip.org/library/pa/ip/ip_lahore19990221.html>
Text Of
Statement Issued at Agra
The
Prime Minister of India and the President of Pakistan met today for one and a
half hours of one-to-one and over an hour of delegation level talks. The talks
were held in a very cordial, frank and constructive manner. PM and President
Musharraf will have further meetings later today and tomorrow. Talks will also
be held between the two delegations and Official and Ministerial levels. The
President of Pakistan has extended an invitation to the PM to visit Pakistan,
which has been accepted.
15 July 2001,
Retrieved from
<http://pib.nic.in/archieve/lreleng/lyr2001/rjul2001/15072001/r150720011.html>
Text Of Foreign Minister Abdul Sattar’s Press Conference
Foreign minister Abdul Sattar has said that Agra summit remains inconclusive
but it did not fail. In fact, the two leaders succeeded in covering the broad
area of common ground in the last declaration.
In a
press conference at media centre Islamabad this evening, he said that Agra
summit would provide a valuable foundation for the two leaders who reached for
the agreement at a future meeting. Compliments are due also to intellectuals,
the media and the common people in India as well as in Pakistan for their
contribution to building an environment of opinion conducive to forward
movement. Heartened by the prevalent goodwill, President Musharraf believed
popular support will be an assert also to lead who want to work for a better
future than the past.
Sattar in written statement has said that President Pervez Musharraf has
returned from India with optimistic prospects of better relations between
Pakistan and India. Considerable progress was made in summit level meetings
and in evolving the text of declaration. It is unfortunate that the expected
consolation did not materialise. Nevertheless the President remains convinced
that the existing goodwill of both sides can and will achieve mutually desired
results. President Musharraf and Prime Minister Vajpayee share a common vision
of peace, progress and prosperity for their people within the 21st
century. The President has complemented the Indian Prime Minister for the
gracious initiative to invite him for the resumption of dialogue between the
two countries after two years.
Admitting the benefits of peace and co-operation between the two countries,
President Musharraf and Prime Minister Vajpayee held wide-ranging discussions
on Pakistan India relations particularly on Jammu and Kashmir. They affirmed
commitment to addressing each others expressed concern creating an environment
conducive to the establishment of peaceful friendly and co-operative ties for
the welfare of the two people. While in New Delhi, President Musharraf
welcomed the opportunity to meet with the leaders of the all Parties Hurriyet
Conference with hope India will accord them travel documents to visit Pakistan
for consultations.
Time
did not permit substantive discussions on any specific issue but valuable
progress was made at Agra on evolving a structure for sustained dialogue
process. That was taken up: Jammu and Kashmir peace and security and terrorism
and drug trafficking at the political level while economic and commercial
co-operation Siachen, Wuller barrage, Sir creek and promotion of friendly
exchanges at various level would be addressed by the high officials of the two
countries. All these issues need to be addressed purposefully, constructively
and in an integrated manner with the sense of urgency. Responding to Press
questions, the President of Pakistan was forthcoming on discussion of many
issues of concern to India. He emphasises again that realism requires a focus
and that progress on settlement of Jammu and Kashmir would be conducive to
normalisation of relations. Prime Minister Vajpayee has accepted our
president’s invitation for a return visit. The two leaders are expected to be
in New York in September to continue their efforts to promote agreement.
The
goodwill between them is an assert for better relations between the two
countries. President Musharraf had a valuable opportunity to meet a large
number of prominent Indian leaders. His exchange of views with intellectuals
and media luminaries will no doubt contribute to better mutual understanding.
Enlightened opinion in India is no less keen than that in Pakistan to
extricate bilateral relations from the time walk in which they have years been
trapped for the best part of 54 years. Like the Indian Prime Minister, Indian
minister for external affairs Jaswant Singh brought equal goodwill to
translating the conversion of thoughts at the summit level into words. The two
sides got very close bringing the declaration close to adoption and approval.
In fact, twice yesterday it appeared we were succeeded in arriving at a
mutually acceptable formulation. It is unfortunate that the formulation of the
exercise was aborted.
17 July 2001
Retrieved from
<http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/spedition/pak-india/latest-dev.html
>
Advani Spiked Summit Deal: Indian Press
NEW DELHI:
India's hawkish home minister L.K. Advani was behind the decision to spike a
proposed agreement at the collapsed summit between India and Pakistan,
newspaper reports said Tuesday. According to the Indian Express newspaper, a
"down-to-the-wire" draft declaration referring to the "centrality" of the
Kashmir issue had been hammered out late on Monday."But a consensus wasn't
possible in the Cabinet Committee on Security," the Express said."Advani's
view that this went too far and would offend ... constituencies back home
carried the day. He was supported by the bureaucracy."
The
Asian Age quoted General Rashid Qureshi as labelling Advani as the "invisible
hand" that had prevented an agreement. "They broke the ice, then froze," ran
the headline in the Indian Express after Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf
flew home from Agra without any agreement emerging from two days of talks with
Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee."So near and yet so far," was the
front-page banner in The Asian Age, reflecting comments that a joint
declaration would have been reached but for disagreement over the decades-old
Kashmir dispute.
"Kashmir, cross-border terrorism derail talks," said The Hindu, whose
diplomatic editor C. Raja Mohan warned of a damaging short-term fall-out from
the summit's failure. "Indo-Pak relations may now get worse before they get
better," Mohan said. "Talks fail, summiteers abandon climb," said the Times of
India, while The Pioneer, which supports the ruling Hindu-nationalist BJP
party, ran the accusatory headline "A belligerent Pak reduces talks to
naught."
"The
breakfast that broke the table," ran the headline of Economic Times, which lay
the blame for the breakdown on Musharraf's open criticism of India's position
on Kashmir at a breakfast meeting in the middle of the negotiations. "With
India unwilling to accept that Kashmir is central to talks between the two
countries, or even that it is a dispute, and General Musharraf adamant that
the centrality of Kashmir be recognised, it was evident even before the talks
began, that progress could at best be halting," an Economic Times editorial
said.
17 July 2001,
Retrieved from
<http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/spedition/pak-india/latest-dev.html>
Press Release
The statement of the
Spokesperson of the Indian Ministry of External Affairs on July 18 appears to
disavow the understandings reached between the two leaders during the Agra
Summit.
Earlier, on 17 July, the Indian External Affairs
Minister had stated at a press conference that “we will pick up the threads
from the visit of the President of Pakistan.” On the same day, the Pakistan
Foreign Minister had expressed a similar resolve at a press conference.
The two sides were unable to reach agreement at
Agra on the full text of a Joint Declaration because of differences on one of
its paragraphs. Nevertheless, in the course of the talks, the two leaders
reached several understandings which signify a substantial forward step in our
bilateral relations. Pakistan believes that these understandings should be
preserved and expanded in the interest of peace, security and development. We
hope the Government of India will join us in the effort to build on the
foundation of these understandings.
The President’s visit to India was an important
milestone on the road to resolve the Jammu and Kashmir dispute and other
outstanding issues and establishing good-neighbourly relations between the two
countries. Pakistan-India relations are governed by the United Nations
Charter, international law and obligations arising from multilateral and
bilateral agreements to which the two countries are parties. Pakistan adheres
to all of them.
We have moved forward at Agra and the journey
should be continued.
Press Release/statement issued by the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, Pakistan, 19 July 2001
Retrieved from <http://www.forisb.org/pr/2001/Pro1-127.htm>
Pakistan Formally Invites Vajpayee, Jaswant
Pakistan has sent formal invitations to
Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and External Affairs Minister Jaswant
Singh to visit Islamabad at their earliest convenient date for follow up talks
on Agra summit, a media report said on Monday.
"Separate letters have
been sent to both the Indian leaders on Saturday expressing Pakistan's desire
to pursue peace process and reach an understanding on all contentious issues
including the issue of Kashmir," Pakistan daily The Nation said. The
Pakistan officials were not immediately available for comments on the report.
The invitation to Vajpayee was sent by Pakistan President General Pervez
Musharraf, while the invitation for Jaswant Singh was signed by his
counterpart, Abdul Sattar.
"Through the letter Paksitan has once again
reiterated its determination to resolve all outstanding issues through
peaceful means," it said. Both Vajpayee and Singh have in principle accepted
the oral
invitations
extended during the Agra Summit to carry forward the talks in order to resolve
differences between the two countries, it said.
Though the summit talks
failed
to produce a joint declaration or a joint statement, Pakistan agreed with
India in asserting that talks have not failed but remained 'inconclusive'.
Official indications
are that Singh would visit Islamabad in September before the Vajpayee-Musharraf
meeting during the annual UN General Assembly meet at New York. Pakistan
official establishment, however, projected that Vajpayee could also be
visiting Islamabad by the end of the year.
23 July 2001,
Retrieved from <http://www.rediff.com/news/2001/jul/23inpak.htm>PTI
Suo Moto
Statement by The Indian Prime Minister In Both the Houses Of Parliament On
Summit Level Talks between India and Pakistan (I4-16 July 2001)
Following
is the text of suo moto statement delivered today by the Prime Minister Shri
Atal Bihari Vajpayee in both the Houses of Parliament on summit level talks
between India and Pakistan (14-16 July):
"Hon’ble Members would
recall my invitation to President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan to visit India.
In the days and weeks before his visit, I had occasion to exchange views and
perspectives – individually and collectively – with leaders of political
parties, eminent personalities, media representatives and intellectuals, on
the future prospects for India-Pakistan relations. They endorsed, almost
unanimously, our view that the visit should be used to seek avenues for
durable peace and cooperative friendship with Pakistan. Building on the Shimla
Agreement and the Lahore Declaration, we sought, through the invitation and
the consequent visit, to strengthen the broad-based framework of dialogue, so
that progress could be made on all outstanding bilateral issues, including
Jammu & Kashmir. We also identified the continuing cross-border terrorism as
an important subject to be addressed.
To promote a congenial
environment and confidence-building in advance of the visit, the Government
announced some significant decisions relating to peace and security, nuclear
and non-nuclear CBM’s, people-to-people contacts, humanitarian issues,
education, youth exchanges and trade. We believe these decisions have been
well received by the people of India and Pakistan. The Government remains
committed to implementing them.
President Musharraf,
accompanied by Begum Musharraf, was in New Delhi on July 14. He was accorded
full ceremonial honours. He called on the President, who hosted a State
banquet. The Vice-President, Home Minister, the External Affairs & Defence
Minister and the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha called on him. I
hosted a lunch in his honour. At the retreat in Agra on July 15 and 16,
President Musharraf and I had extensive one-to-one talks for over 5 hours. We
also had talks at the delegation level.
During these
discussions, I emphasised the importance of creating an atmosphere of trust
for progress on all outstanding issues including J&K. I took up other specific
issues, which would help the processes of peace. These included the issue of
54 POWs believed to be in Pakistani jails; the extradition of known terrorists
and criminals who have been given sanctuary in Pakistan; the upkeep of Sikh
Gurudwaras and Hindu temples in Pakistan, the treatment of Indian pilgrims
visiting shrines in Pakistan, and the enhancement of mutually beneficial
trade.
I focused
on the terrorism being promoted in the state of J&K. I conveyed in clear terms
that India has the resolve, strength and stamina to counter terrorism and
violence until it is decisively crushed. I want to reiterate this
determination today on the floor of this House.
In his
presentations, President Musharraf focussed almost exclusively on Jammu &
Kashmir. Honourable Members would be familiar with all his views, since they
were widely disseminated in both our electronic and print media.
Despite the
obvious differences in our perspectives, we made progress towards bridging the
two approaches in a draft joint document. We sought to incorporate in the
document the structure of a future dialogue process on all issues, including
meetings at official, Ministerial and Summit levels. We made proposals for
addressing the issues of Peace & Security – including nuclear and conventional
CBMs, Jammu & Kashmir, and terrorism; and all other issues from the composite
dialogue. Eventually, however, we had to abandon the quest for a joint
document mainly because of Pakistan’s insistence on the settlement of the
Jammu & Kashmir issue, as a precondition for the normalization of relations.
Pakistan was also reluctant to acknowledge and address cross-border terrorism.
My Cabinet colleagues and I were unanimously of the view that our basic
principles cannot be sacrificed for the sake of a joint document.
There are
strong views both in India and in Pakistan about Jammu & Kashmir. But it is
our conviction that an all-round development in the relationship between India
and Pakistan will have beneficial impact on our dialogue on J&K.
No
worthwhile purpose would be served by a debate on whether or not J&K is a
"core issue". But we cannot ignore the fact of terrorism and violence in the
state, which is exported from across the borders. We cannot accept that the
insurgency in Jammu & Kashmir today, with its foreign mercenaries and generous
assistance from abroad, is anything but terrorism. The daily killing of
innocent men, women and children can simply not be glorified as "Jehad" or as
any kind of political movement. Please reflect that, soon after the Agra
Summit had concluded, our pilgrims on their way to the holy shrine of Amarnath
were killed. And just two days ago another massacre of members of one
community occurred at the hands of the terrorists. That is why Pakistan’s
refusal to end cross-border terrorism is the main hurdle in the creation of a
conducive atmosphere.
Pakistan
has been seeking a solution to J&K in accordance with the wishes of the
"Kashmiri people". I am certain that the primary wish of every single
Kashmiri, whether from the Kashmir valley or Jammu, Ladakh, Pakistan-occupied
Kashmir, the Northern areas or the Shaksgam Valley, is to live in peace,
security and freedom, so that he can make economic progress. We should
constantly strive to provide him with this fundamental right. Most of the
Kashmiris have their elected representatives, through whom they express their
legitimate aspirations. We are also willing to listen to all other streams of
Kashmiri opinion, however small the minority they represent, as long as they
abjure violence. It is in this spirit that we had offered to talk to the
representatives of the All Parties’ Hurriyat Conference.
President
Musharraf has extended an invitation to me to visit Pakistan. I have accepted
this invitation. The Foreign Minister of Pakistan has similarly invited the
External Affairs Minister. This, too, has been accepted. Thus, our bilateral
engagement with Pakistan will continue. We will continue to seek dialogue and
reconciliation. We will persist with our efforts to convince Pakistan that our
bilateral cooperation should not be held hostage to the resolution of any one
issue. Though we could not conclude a joint document in Agra, we did achieve a
degree of understanding. We will build on this to further increase the areas
of agreement. Obviously, India’s concerns in vital areas – such as
cross-border terrorism – will have to find place in any document that future
negotiations endeavour to conclude.
Let me add
– we are not looking for propaganda advantage or seeking to score debating
point. We will engage in quiet, serious diplomacy. Our endeavour for a
relationship of peace, friendship and cooperation will be pursued vigorously.
24 July 2001,
Retrieved from
<http://pib.nic.in/archieve/lreleng/lyr2001/rjul2001/24072001/r2407200119.html>
Back On the Brink Of War
NEW
DELHI – India and Pakistan are back on the verge of war following a terrorist
attack on civilians in the state of Jammu and Kashmir on Tuesday, leaving 35
people dead, including women and 11 children. Three terrorists, believed to be
Pakistani infiltrators, were shot dead by army guards on the spot.
The United
States on Wednesday warned that India and Pakistan were dangerously close to
war and a small spark could ignite a battle in the aftermath of the bloody
attack in Jammu. The attack took place as US Assistant Secretary of State
Christina Rocca was beginning her visit to India in a bid to counsel
restraint. It has almost become customary for a major terrorist strike against
a high-profile civilian target to coincide with any American dignitary
visiting India or an Indian leader visiting the US. The process began with
then president Bill Clinton’s visit when a number of Sikhs were killed in
Chhitisinghpura in Kashmir, forcing the president to issue a strong statement
denouncing Pakistan-sponsored cross-border terrorism. The same thing happened
on several occasions in the past year.
Rocca, too,
felt obliged to denounce the terrorist attack vehemently, forgetting her
mission of peace. President George W Bush too made a telephone call to Prime
Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee to express his horror at the attack. Vajpayee
threatened "appropriate action" while talking to him. This has apparently
alarmed the president and he has decided to rush Deputy Secretary of State
Richard Armitage to cool tensions in the region.
Defense
Minister George Fernandes has held Pakistan President General Pervez Musharraf
personally responsible for the attack, prompting Pakistan, too, to use strong
language. The Pakistan Foreign Office said that the general could have held
Vajpayee and his cabinet colleagues responsible for "training fascist Hindu
terrorists to kill and rape members of minority communities in India". Terming
India’s charge of its involvement as "baseless", it said such allegations were
aimed at deflecting the Muslim world's attention from communal violence in
Gujarat as well as "domestic difficulties".
Vajpayee is
under severe pressure from hardliners in his Hindu fundamentalist Bhartiya
Janata Party (BJP) and his militant colleagues in sister organizations such as
the Shiv Sena (Shivaji's Army), Bajrang Dal (Monkey God-Hanuman’s Party),
Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP- World Hindu Forum) and other members of the Hindu
fundamentalist family collectively known as the Sangh Parivar. Both Vajpayee
and Home Minister Lal Krishan Advani have attracted ridicule from officials of
various Parivar organizations for being high on rhetoric and low on action in
countering Pakistan-sponsored terrorism.
Bajrang Dal convener
Surendra Jain said, "No words will suffice now. Only Agni and Prithvi missiles
[capable of carrying nuclear bombs] can do the needful." These terrorist
organizations are starting country-wide demonstrations to pressure the
government to start a full-fledged war. The ruling BJP has even said that war
remains an option.
Expressing his personal
views, Hindutva (the philosophy of Hindu domination of the subcontinent)
ideologue and minister for disinvestment Arun Shourie suggested in a TV
discussion that India should send terrorists inside Pakistan. There is no
point in thinking of a rapprochement or dialogue with that country. "As long
as Pakistan stays," he said, "it will continue to harm India," Obviously, the
suggestion is that Pakistan should be obliterated if India is to survive and
prosper. High-level Indian government functionaries expressing such views,
with the track record of India having waged a war to dismember Pakistan
before, are bound to alarm Pakistan and justify hawks in continuing supporting
cross-border militancy.
Whether or not Sangh Parivar’s country-wide demonstrations will
lead to war, they can certainly lead to civil war in the manner of the
communal strife between Muslims and Hindus that is tearing Gujarat state
apart. For the Parivar, the main agenda is to force Muslims to convert to
Hinduism, as is being attempted in Gujarat without much success to date.
The movement Bajrang
Dal is threatening to start may ostensibly be for promoting an all-out war
against Pakistan, but the Parivar is aware that war has become a difficult
option for India since it virtually forced Pakistan to acquire nuclear weapons
four years ago, by conducting its own nuclear tests unnecessarily (India had
already tested its nuclear capability in 1974).
Alarmed at the
prospects, most mainstream English newspapers are advising restraint. In a
typical comment, south India’s largest-circulated newspaper, The Hindu,
suggested, "India's enlightened self-interest dictates that all options be
weighed with the greatest care in a climate of utmost calm and absolute
realism. India must reinforce its moral indignation with a prudent policy of
spirited discretion. New Delhi will be well advised to resist the political
temptation to opt for even a limited military strike against Pakistan. Two
conspicuous factors militate against the feasibility of any form of military
solution. First, conventional wisdom and creative prognosis indicate that it
will be impossible to accomplish any objective of rooting out the suspected
anti-India terror bases in Pakistan through a limited but surgically precise
military thrust. In a perceptive scenario, the nuclear deterrence as
independently possessed by India and Pakistan will themselves deter any such
limited strike. Second, India is still far from sensitizing world opinion to
its trauma of wounds inflicted by externally sponsored political terror."
English newspapers,
however, do not make mass opinion in the country. Mostly run by Hindus
educated in missionary schools and in Western universities, they represent the
liberal, Westernized face of Hinduism. Most Hindi and some regional-language
newspapers are virulently communal supporters of the Hindutva ideology. It is
they that really shape the opinions of the Hindu masses, as was seen recently
in the role of the Gujarati-language newspaper Sandesh in fomenting communal
violence in Gujarat. Most Muslims, at least in north India, read Urdu
newspapers, although their circulation is dwindling as they receive little
government and no private sector advertising support.
The main opposition
Congress party is demanding a comprehensive, integrated, long-term policy
towards terrorism, Kashmir and Pakistan. It can’t be knee-jerk all the time,
said Congress chief and the leader of opposition Sonia Gandhi. While
supporting any move that the government may make, Gandhi told parliament on
Friday that the government has so far failed to provide safety to the people
of Jammu and Kashmir. It was known that with the snows melting, terrorist
activities would increase, she pointed out. She also referred to the recurring
coincidence of Indian-US interactions taking place against the background of
major terrorist attacks. Apparently the government, in her view, was not
vigilant enough.
While there is no
dearth of hawks in India’s defense and foreign policy establishment, some
responsible commentators are suggesting a graduated response. Former head of a
government-funded think tank (IDSA), Jasjit Singh, for instance, says, "At the
end of the road, the military option will be available, but it must remain the
instrument of last resort, and very carefully employed even then. Taking the
last point first, the way to look at it is not in terms of the traditional use
of military power, that is, in a full-scale war. That is what the world is
worried about and, more important, it carries numerous risks, including
escalation to the nuclear level. We must avoid that. This is also why the US
is concerned about the potential for conflict between two nuclear-armed
neighbors. But they need to understand that after al-Qaeda were dispersed from
Afghanistan, US-India counterterrorism interests have nearly started to
overlap. The American war against terrorism, like ours, has to zero in on
Pakistan. But the US does not appear to be ready to deal with the terrorist
infrastructure in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir [POK], which is being built up. At
the same time, the problem is that Musharraf would not take serious action to
fulfill his own commitments unless the pressure increases.
"It is often forgotten
that we have many options well below the military one. Political signals would
need to go out to highlight our increasing concern. A special ambassador for
counter terrorism could be the focus as well as the pointsman of diplomatic
efforts. Our diplomatic staff in Islamabad could be further cut down and
trade, what little exists, stopped. These would not hurt Pakistan in any
serious way. But they would convey a political resolve that the status quo,
where hundreds of innocents are being killed every month in India by jihadi
terrorists from across the borders, will not be acceptable for long,
especially in the context of December 13 [when the Indian parliament was
attacked]. But the more substantive option would be to reexamine our
commitment to the Indus Waters Treaty. Pakistani elites know the importance of
this treaty to its own economic well-being."
What has rattled most
sober India-Pakistan watchers is the publication of a gripping account of an
episode of the 1999 Kargil war by a key Clinton aide showing the Pakistan
military to be a trigger-happy rogue outfit that deployed nuclear weapons for
possible use against India. According to a report filed by the Times of
India’s Washington correspondent, a reckless Pervez Musharraf, a feckless
Nawaz Sharif, a resolute Vajpayee and a principled Bill Clinton are central
characters in an unusual policy paper titled "American Diplomacy and the 1999
Kargil Summit at Blair House", by former White House official Bruce Riedel.
The paper, presented at the University of Pennsylvania's Center for Advanced
Studies of India, reads more like a fast-paced film script than a foreign
policy critique.
Riedel's account of the
Kargil episode portrays Pakistan as an extremely unstable country where the
military was at odds with the political and civilian leadership and it was not
clear who was calling the shots. But the narrative suggests that the architect
of Pakistan's reckless adventurism at that time was none other than its
current ruler, Musharraf, who comes across as a war-mongering general who
brought the region to the brink of a nuclear catastrophe.
"Prime Minister Sharif
had seemed genuinely interested in pursuing the Lahore process when he met
with Vajpayee and he had argued eloquently with a series of American guests
... that he wanted an end to the 50-year-old quarrel with India. His military
chief, General Pervez Musharraf, seemed to be in a different mould. He was
said to be a hardliner on Kashmir, a man some feared was determined to humble
India once and for all," writes Riedel.
According to Riedel, US
intelligence had information that the Pakistani military, then led by
Musharraf, was preparing its nuclear arsenal for possible use in a wider war
arising from the Kargil clash, most likely without the knowledge of Sharif.
When Sharif pleaded
with Washington to save Pakistan from rout following a determined Indian
response to the Kargil incursion, Riedel says that he recommended to Clinton
that he use the information about Pakistani nuclear readiness only when Sharif
was without his aides, especially Foreign Secretary Shamshad Ahmad, who was
known to be very close to Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence.
When Clinton later
reveals the extent of Islamabad's nuclear preparedness, Sharif "seemed taken
aback and said only that India was probably doing the same", says Riedel, who
was asked to stay behind as a notes-taker by the US president despite Sharif's
plea that they have a one-on-one meeting. Clinton then berates Sharif, asking
"did he know how crazy that [getting nuclear missiles ready] was?"
The same "crazy"
Musharraf is now the unquestioned leader of Pakistan. A chain of circumstances
has once again made his country an ally of the United States. In India too, it
is hardliners and outright terrorists who seem to be ruling the roost in the
present administration. Vajpayee, who has assiduously built up the image of a
moderate and sober leader, has been forced to throw off his mask of
statesmanship. There is no longer any talk of dialogue with Pakistan. In a
sense, it is a more honest position. India doesn’t really have anything to
offer to Pakistan on Kashmir. What dialogue, Vajpayee asked a few months ago:
Kashmir belongs to us and that is the end of the issue. The so-called secular
allies of the Hindu fundamentalist-led coalition government have almost
completely abdicated their responsibility. The US worry for south Asian
stability is thus not unfounded. Kashmir does remain a nuclear flash point.
Sultan Shahin, 19
December 2001
Retrieved from
<http://www.atimes.com/ind-pak/DE18Df05.html>
President
General Pervez Musharaf's Address To The Nation, 12 January, 2002
On
this occasion, as President of Pakistan, I want to convey a message to Prime
Minister Vajpayee: If we want to normalize relations between Pakistan and
India and bring harmony to the region, the Kashmir dispute will have to be
resolved peacefully through a dialogue on the basis of the aspirations of the
Kashmiri people. Solving the Kashmir Issue is the joint responsibility of our
two countries. Let me repeat some of the observations made by you, Mr.
Vajpayee, some time back, and I quote: "Mind-sets will have to be altered and
historical baggage will have to be jettisoned. I take you on this offer. Let
us start talking in this very spirit. Pakistan will not allow its territory to
be used for any terrorist activity anywhere in the world. Now you must play an
active role in solving the Kashmir dispute for the sake of lasting peace and
harmony in the region. We should be under no illusion that the legitimate
demand of the people of Kashmir can ever be suppressed without their just
resolution. Kashmiris also expect that you ask India to bring an end to state
terrorism and human rights violations. Let human rights organizations, Amnesty
International, the international media and U.N. peacekeepers be allowed to
monitor activities of the Indian occupation forces. Apart from these issues, I
would also like to inform you, my brothers and sisters, that we have been sent
a list of 20 people by India.
I
want to clear our position on this. There is no question of handing over any
Pakistani. This will never be done. If we are given evidence against those
people, we will take action against them in Pakistan under our own laws. As
far as non-Pakistanis are concerned, we have not given asylum to any one. Any
one falling under this category will be proceeded against whenever one is
found.
12 January 2002,
Retrieved form
<http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/pakistan/document/papers/2002Jan12.htm>
Musharraf Calls for Talks with India
Pakistan has done enough to crush terrorism and it is now time for New Delhi
and Islamabad to hold talks to ease their military stand-off, Pakistan
President General Pervez Musharraf told an Indian newspaper.
“We want friendship,” he said in an interview published by The
Hindu on Monday, adding Pakistan was ready to talk without preconditions
but was not getting a positive response from India.
“We have taken so much action in our internal environment to curb
extremism,” said Musharraf who announced a sweeping crackdown in January to
crush Islamic terrorism.
“This was enough reason, much more than enough reason, for any
leadership in India to have decided to de-escalate,” he said. “I think we
should start talking, I think one should be strong to say that.”
The foes, which have gone to war three times, have been locked in
a military stand-off along their border since December following a raid on the
Indian parliament. New Delhi blamed the attack on Pakistan-based militants
fighting its rule in disputed Kashmir.
Pakistan has consistently called for dialogue to settle the
stand-off but India has said it will not demobilize its forces until it sees
proof that what it calls cross-border terrorism against Indian targets has
ceased.
In the wide-ranging interview in which Musharraf’s tone swung from
cordial to occasional belligerence, he said the situation in which the
nuclear-armed neighbours have a million men massed along both sides of the
border remained “extremely explosive.”
He said he wanted to resolve all disputes and was ready to discuss
all topics, provided the future of the Himalayan region of Kashmir was
accepted as the main issue.
“I have said a 100 times that I am prepared to talk on every issue
but let us not be naďve, let us not bluff ourselves-Kashmir is the main
issue.”
India has always insisted that talks be held on a broad range of
topics from nuclear security to cultural ties.
Peoples Daily, 3
April 2003
Retrieved from <http://english.peopledialy.com.cn/200204/03/eng20020403_93381.shtmll>
Excerpts Of Musharraf's Speech
Now
I would like to convey a message to the world community. Pakistan does not
want war. Pakistan will not be the one to initiate war.
We
want peace in the region. Let me also assure the world community that Pakistan
is doing nothing across the Line of Control and Pakistan will never allow the
export of terrorism anywhere in the world from within Pakistan. I urge the
world community to ask India to move towards normalisation of relations, which
really implies de-escalation and reduction of tension on the borders, which is
of mutual benefit to both the countries....
As
you know, there was an attack on the Indian Parliament on 13 of December. This
was a terrorist attack, which we had fully condemned. It was a terrorist
attack. But, the Indian leadership acted in a hasty manner and adopted
extremely irresponsible behaviour. This was a demonstration of their
traditional enmity towards Pakistan. By showing enmity towards Pakistan, they
put the blame on us and consequently brought their forces on the border.
When
there was an attack on a garrison in Jammu on 14 May in which many civilians
were killed, we ...condemned this and we think that whosoever is involved in
such terrorist attacks wants to destabilise Pakistan. I understand this and
the whole world knows that there were many acts of terrorism in Pakistan
also... but we did not blame India for these attacks...
27 May 2002
Retrieved from
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/monitoring/media_reports/2011509.stm>
Prospects for Peace in South Asia
Introduction, Conflict in the Region
I’m
pleased to be here today to discuss the prospects for peace in South Asia.
This subject is central to the goals of the United States, and to the
interests of the international community in the region. I know that a
principal concern of this gathering today is the continuing crisis between
India and Pakistan, and I will review current Administration thinking on this
issue….
India-Pakistan
Throughout South Asia, the search for prosperity and democracy is too often
overshadowed by the specter of war. The most prominent case in the region, of
course, is the continuing crisis between India and Pakistan. Twice so far this
year, the possibility of war between India and Pakistan became very real.
Hundreds of thousands of Indian and Pakistani troops were mobilized along
their border and the Line of Control in Kashmir. These crises were generated
by extremely provocative terrorist attacks, first against the Indian
parliament in New Delhi last December, and then against families of Indian
soldiers in Jammu in May. The forces of extremism once again sought to exploit
the deep and long-standing differences between India and Pakistan over
Kashmir.
They
did not succeed, and tensions have been reduced since then thanks to decisions
made in Islamabad and New Delhi, with the encouragement of the international
community. But we, and the rest of the international community remain deeply
concerned. The military mobilization continues. The rhetoric, though muted,
could bubble up again. Another major terrorist attack or a significant surge
in violence could still spark a military confrontation, with long-lasting and
devastating consequences for the entire region. The enemies of moderation in
the region are aware of this fact and have already tried to exploit it through
high-profile terrorist attacks. They could very well try again.
We
need to recognize that an important factor in the current crisis is the
willingness of extremists and terrorists to go to any length to reach their
goals. Our efforts to prevent conflict between India and Pakistan are made
even more urgent by the global war on terrorism. President Musharraf,
recognizing the danger that extremism poses to his country, has denounced the
senseless ideology of violence. Pakistani authorities have moved against
extremist groups. The extremists, showing how threatened they feel by
President Musharraf’s actions, have struck back. The government has not been
intimidated; instead it has continued its campaign against terrorists and
their supporters. We are standing by Pakistan as it faces this brutal
challenge.
Secretary Powell has said that war is just not an option in resolving the
differences between India and Pakistan – it will only make the situation
worse, probably much worse. The only realistic way forward is the path of
dialogue and confidence building. The Secretary has also publicly recognized
that Kashmir is now on the international agenda. Given the potential cost of a
conflict, the international community has focused on the need to reduce
tension and demobilize. No one from the outside can impose a settlement, but
we must work to help the two sides further de-escalate current tensions and
begin to tackle the more fundamental differences between them.
Both
sides have reaffirmed their desire for a peaceful political solution to their
differences. President Musharraf has pledged that his government will provide
no support for infiltration across the Line of Control, and that he will not
permit Pakistan to be used as a base for terrorist attacks in any other
country. Pakistan needs to sustain that pledge in order to begin a process of
resolution of the immediate crisis and of its more fundamental differences
with India. We also look to India to take further de-escalatory actions, as
Pakistan carries through with its commitments. As tensions begin to subside,
New Delhi should agree to resume talks with Islamabad on all issues, including
Kashmir. During his recent meetings with Indian leaders in New Delhi,
Secretary Powell saw that there was a solid commitment to dialogue. He said
that India understands that their dialogue had to include all the issues
between the two nations but especially it had to include Kashmir.
Kashmir
The
problems of Kashmir cannot be resolved through violence, but only through a
healthy political process and dialogue between the parties. We look forward to
India holding free and fair state elections beginning later this month. We
also encourage a continuation and expansion of the nascent efforts to engage
Kashmiri separatist leaders. Kashmiris, Pakistanis and Indians must do their
part to ensure that the upcoming elections can be held in safety and without
interference from those who would like to spoil them. Recent attacks on
officials and political party activists in Kashmir cannot be allowed to derail
the election.
State elections can be an important step in a political process, but they
alone cannot resolve the problems between India and Pakistan, nor can they
erase the scars of so many years of strife. Only a productive and sustained
bilateral dialogue on all issues, including Kashmir, will prevent future
crisis and finally bring peace to the region. We are committed to staying
engaged, in the months and years ahead, helping both parties resolve their
differences so that everyone in the region can live in dignity, prosperity and
security….
Christina Rocca, Assistant Secretary of State for South Asian
Affairs; Strobe Talbott and Nayan Chanda
U.S.
Institute for Peace Washington, DC. 10 September, 2002
Retrieved from <http://www.state.gov/p/sa/rls/rm/13376.htm>
Resolution Of Kashmir Issue will Ensure Peace: Pakistan has
No Hegemonic Designs: Kasuri
ISLAMABAD, Dec 11:
Foreign Minister Mian Khursheed Mehmood Kasuri on Wednesday said the prospects
of durable peace in South Asia would not improve without the just resolution
of the Kashmir dispute. Pakistan, he said, had offered resumption of dialogue
to India for the resolution of the Kashmir dispute and other issues. "I am
convinced that, acting in the interest of our people(s), the governments of
Pakistan and India need to find the best medium of commencing a dialogue," he
told editors and columnists of leading newspapers and magazines. Briefing the
participants, the minister spoke on objectives of Pakistan's foreign policy
and its ties with China, the United States, European countries, Iran,
Afghanistan and other Middle Eastern and Muslim countries. Mr Kasuri said that
Pakistan's steadfast position on the centrality of the Kashmir issue had made
the international community realize the imperatives of finding a just solution
to this dispute in accordance with the wishes of the Kashmiri people.
"The
entire international community now understands that Pakistan-India relations
and prospects of durable peace in the region cannot improve as long as the
root cause of tensions - the Kashmir dispute - is not resolved." Pakistan, he
said, cannot be coerced into compromising its position on Kashmir. However, he
added, it would continue efforts for de-escalation of tension caused by the
massive deployment of Indian troops along Pakistan's border and resumption of
dialogue. Referring to the postponement of the Saarc summit, Mr Kasuri said
that after having failed to achieve the desired objectives through its
coercive diplomacy, India further hardened its position on a dialogue with
Pakistan. "By refusing to confirm the dates proposed for the 12th Saarc summit
to be held in Pakistan, India created a situation where we were left with no
option but to postpone the summit," he said.
With
regard to security policy, he said, Pakistan maintained a combination of
conventional forces and strategic capabilities to deter Indian adventurism.
"Our sole aim is to prevent aggression and to safeguard our sovereignty and
territorial integrity," he said, adding "Pakistan does not harbour any
expansionist or hegemonic designs, or covets regional domination." Mr Kasuri
said the objectives of the country's foreign policy were peace, rapid economic
and social development of the country and prosperity of its people. The
minister said that Pakistan's election to the UN Security Council for a
two-year term with an overwhelming majority constituted a vote of confidence
by the international community in its pragmatic, constructive and farsighted
policies. He said the Sept 11 attacks on the United States created turmoil in
the world, which affected the policies of every nation. "Pakistan's choice to
join the international coalition in the war against terrorism has enabled the
global coalition to make important gains in the anti-terrorism campaign," he
said. Pakistan's participation in the international coalition had been widely
appreciated, he said, adding "it has significantly improved our relations not
only with the United States and the West but also with Iran, Central Asian
states, Russia and other Muslim countries." On the Islamabad-Washington ties,
the minister said, following the Sept 11 events, the US had taken many
concrete measures to assist Pakistan in various spheres. The minister
described the strengthening of Pakistan's friendship with China as a
fundamental goal of the country's foreign policy. "China has extended generous
economic assistance to Pakistan and is playing an important role in Pakistan's
infrastructure development. This assistance includes the Gwadar Deep Seaport
Project, the Thar Coal Mines and Power Plant Project and the Duddar Lead-Zinc
Mine project." Mr Kasuri said that Pakistan had strengthened its cordial
relations with the European countries. "Meaningful trade relations have been
established with them and prospect for enhanced foreign investment in Pakistan
have improved."
APP, Dawn,
12 December 2002
Retrieved from <http://www.dawn.com/2002/12/12/top10.htm>
India-Pakistan Tensions Rise Again
India's
expulsion of Pakistan's envoy to Delhi comes at a time of heightened tension
between the two neighbours. It follows an announcement 10 days earlier from
Pakistan that its forces had shot down an unmanned Indian reconnaissance
aircraft. Both events have further soured relations between India and Pakistan
which reached a new low following January's tit-for-tat expulsions of each
other's diplomatic staff.
The
reasons, advanced by both sides, were the constant harassment of their
diplomats by the security services of their hosts. Each also traded
accusations that officials were expelled for operating beyond the normal range
of their responsibilities. That is internationally recognised diplomatic speak
for spying. Both sides denied the accusations. But that is beside the point,
because the latest malaise goes far deeper.
Vote Winner
In
Pakistan, one commentator traces the onset of the latest war of words back to
President Musharraf's remarks late last year, that Pakistan was ready to use
non-conventional weaponry if India and Pakistan had gone to war earlier in the
year. That was taken as a reference to Pakistan's nuclear weapons arsenal,
although a spokesman for the general said he was misinterpreted, that what he
actually had in mind was the mobilisation of the Pakistani people against
Indian forces. Shortly after, the commentator maintains, India began its
latest missile tests. And thereafter it could only go downhill.
Other observers put the recent rise in tensions with Delhi down to extreme
Hinduism in India and leading figures in the main coalition party, the BJP.
Pakistan-bashing is a vote winner in India, they say, a fact amply
demonstrated in the landslide victory in state elections in Gujarat last
month. But there are some in Pakistan who believe the expulsion of the Indian
diplomats was a mistake. Far better to have seized the moral high ground and
let India stew in its own juice, they argue. Then Pakistan would have appeared
to the world as peace-loving and reasonable, while India would have been seen
as intransigent and war-mongering.
Delhi's Success
For
Pakistan, though, that is a fantasy. The reality is that it is losing this war
of words. India is trying to keep alive the impression that Pakistan is
blighted by home-grown terrorism, while Washington's gaze is focused on Iraq.
And, many commentators agree, the strategists in Delhi are succeeding. The
Indian campaign has been boosted lately by demands from the American
ambassadors to both countries for Pakistan to snuff out the activities of
militants across the line of control separating Indian-administered Kashmir
from Pakistan's part of the region. Pakistan was stung by the American demand.
Pakistan Aggrieved
Last
year President Musharraf ordered a halt to such incursions by Muslim
militants. It worked for a while and General Musharraf demonstrated to the
world that he had the power to turn the tap off. But that made him a hostage
to his own success. When the incursions resumed a short time later, he also
demonstrated to the world a lack of will to turn the tap off for a second
time. The Pakistanis say the charge that they support militants materially as
well as morally is nonsense. They say they are a front-line force in the fight
against global terrorism and neither infiltrate nor support the militants.
Many of the al-Qaeda and Taleban suspects held in Guantanamo Bay were captured
by Pakistani security forces with the help of US intelligence. That in part
explains why Pakistan feels so aggrieved at being cast as a country failing to
deal with militants.
Some Comfort
The
Information Minister, Sheikh Rashid Ahmed, says the Americans are perhaps
trying to appease India. Instead, he says they should persuade India to open
dialogue on the future of Kashmir. But talks, if they are ever convened, are a
long way off, even though the United States too wants dialogue. Washington
does not want a military conflagration in South Asia, between two nuclear
foes, when there is enough to deal with in the Gulf. But the message now is
that talks will not start until the militant incursions stop. The one crumb of
comfort is that for the moment, most of the million-plus forces lining the
Pakistani and Indian sides of the international border have withdrawn from
their positions. And they will take a long time to redeploy.
Paul Anderson, 19 February 2003
Retrieved from <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2702955.stm>
Call
For India-Pakistan Dialogue
US Secretary of State Colin Powell has said there is a need for
dialogue between India and Pakistan in order to resolve all outstanding
issues, especially Kashmir. In an interview with Radio Pakistan's news and
current affairs channel, Mr Powell said the United States will continue to do
everything to get the dialogue started. He said the United States had
demonstrated clearly and forcefully that it is greatly interested in matters
in South Asia, and has helped India and Pakistan to defuse the crisis between
them.
Story from BBC News: 1 March 2003
Retrieved from <http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/south_asia/2810583.stm>
Resuming India-Pakistan Dialogue
It is
generally recognised that the incumbent no war no peace situation is clearly
unsustainable but equally difficult task confronting both India and Pakistan
is how to break the existing what is called mutually assured deadlock between
them and to resume the much desired dialogue. While Pakistan appears to be
making tangible efforts for the resumption of the dialogue, India seems to be
firmly caught in its internal dynamics, which are not making it easy to
respond with similar degree of positive spirit. Both countries have been
advancing fairly convincing arguments in support of their hardened positions.
The history of Indo-Pak relations is studded with innumerable examples to
facilitate both parties to their satisfaction.
The
prevailing antagonistic atmosphere makes it rather difficult to suggest a
recipe that can deliver the desired goods quickly. Although it is not my
intention to undertake a detailed analysis of the factors that contributed
towards the highly charged atmosphere but to suggest a way out it is
imperative to touch some of the developments along with official positions of
both countries. Perhaps the most important factor vitiating the incumbent
atmosphere is the internal dynamics. It is not an unusual phenomenon when some
unforeseen developments both in domestic arena and international affairs force
an incumbent government to either modify or radicalise the existing policies
in order to accommodate the dictates of the time. Sometimes changes in the
policies are the product of changed environment or government. Just as there
exist countless examples in which attempts were and still are being made by
one nation to influence the behaviour of the other, history is full of
examples of domestic developments that have caused significant changes in
foreign policies and have resulted even in the perpetuation of polluted and
loaded atmosphere.
Leaders
like Gladstone had amply highlighted the importance of domestic politic when
he stressed that ‘the first condition of a good foreign policy is a good
domestic policy’. Admittedly it is not easy to define what is a good domestic
policy but one can still safely assume that a good domestic policy implies a
reasonable level of stability and security coupled with ever increasing
economic opportunities. While stability, security and economic development
could help in producing a good domestic policy, many other factors such as
images and perceptions, public opinion and the leadership seem to enjoy
considerable influence that can either contribute or effectively impede the
desired directions of both domestic and foreign policies.
By the
advent of 21st century both India and Pakistan have become victims
of images, perceptions and misperceptions that have been cultivated over the
years. While the inapt partition processes gave birth to many complex problems
confronting both nations, the ongoing Kashmir dispute continued to defy all
bilateral as well as multilateral rectification and resolution efforts. For
obvious reasons it contributed towards the evolution of undesired mutual
images and perceptions. However it does not mean that the leadership is
entirely blameless especially that of the hawks on both sides. One can
understand the efforts of hawks to derail the peace processes; the advocates
of peace promoters in South Asia need not to allow their optimism to
degenerate into pessimism.
Given the existing tense situation between India and Pakistan
efforts towards normalcy need to be intensified. The official Indian position
is that it will not start a dialogue unless what it call cross-border
terrorism stops implying that infiltrators from Azad Kashmir enter into Indian
Held Kashmir and cause violence. The violence in IHK is the product of three
sources; the Indian security forces, the indigenous Kashmiri Mujahideen and
some infiltrators. By most accounts it has already been established that the
major source of violence in IHK is the Indian security force. The All Parties
Hurriyat Conference (an umbrella organisation of many parties that are engaged
in freedom struggle) claims that the Indian Security forces have killed more
than 80,000 Kashmiris. The Indian sources almost regularly tend to put the
entire blame upon cross border infiltrators.
India also claims that Pakistan has not taken effective measures
to check the cross border infiltrations. Pakistan, on the other hand, insists
that it has taken affective measure and has plugged the infiltration. The
problem of who is telling the truth and who is not can only be verified if it
is agreed to have either the UN monitors or the international observers to
give us correct assessment of the situation. This is not acceptable to India.
Many
Indian writers and officials often refer to the Simla agreement and Lahore
Declaration in support of their arguments and avoid mentioning how Agra
meeting was scuttled and what was agreed at achieved at Agra. As a matter of
fact Simla agreed to employ a bilateral framework for the resolution of their
outstanding disputes. Around 45 meetings of the Indo-Pak officials took place
during the years 1972-1994, which discussed many issues, but it took 22 years
to hold the bilateral dialogue on the most complex ongoing Kashmir dispute.
Similarly Lahore process was almost immediately damaged by when Vajpayee went
back and misinterpreted the spirit of Lahore especially responding to a
question on the Kashmir dispute by an Indian journalist. Additional damage was
done when India once again opposed Pakistan’s application to India Ocean Rim
Association for Regional Cooperation.
It is not the intention of this scribe to highlight the mistakes
committed by both sides. Sufficient evidence exists to make a convincing case
for either side. Both sides would have fairly convincing interpretations
regarding the issues, which have made enormous contributions towards the
existing state of tense affairs. If one even starts from Lahore declaration,
issues like developments in Kashmir, infiltrations and terrorism, severing of
rail, road and air links, concentrations of troops on the borders, communalism
in Gujarat, harassment and expulsions of diplomats cannot be brushed aside. In
addition the media in both countries hardly shirks from making its adverse
contributions in the name of news.
Pakistan and India cannot afford to remain hostile neigbours
forever. They cannot change the geography but they can adjust foreign policies
in order to move towards the much-desired normalcy. Perhaps the most important
pre-requisites for the resumption of dialogue is to take full cognisance of
ground realities and be prepared to seriously consider face saving device or
compromise wherever it is deemed the only option.
Among the
ground realities that need to be taken into considerations perhaps the most
important is the recognition of Kashmir as the most dangerous dispute between
India and Pakistan. Frequent references to the ongoing Kashmir dispute, as the
most dangerous nuclear flashpoint needs serious considerations. Second, it is
the oldest dispute before the UN that has defied both bilateral as well as
multilateral efforts for its resolution. It is more than 55 years old dispute
and many developments of far reaching consequences have taken place during its
long contentious history. Third, enormous sacrifices have been made by the
Kahmiris. It is now internationally recognised that more than 50,000 thousand
Kashmiris have been killed. According to the Kashmiri sources the number of
Kashmiris killed exceeds 80,000. No solution would be a lasting one unless the
Kashmiris are party to the process aimed at its settlement. Fourth, despite
Pakistan’s earnest efforts it seems some infiltration is still taking place.
Since both the Americans and Indian are insisting on the continuation of
infiltration, one can assume that some infiltration may still be taking place.
Two factors must be taken into consideration here. The Kashmiris do not
consider the LOC as sacrosanct and feel their movement from one Kashmir to the
other is within their own territory. The other important factor is the nature
of geographical terrain, which makes extremely difficult to plug the LOC in a
watertight manner.
The second
pre requisite that needs to be seriously considered is to be mentally prepared
for a face saving device, which may not come up to the expectations of both
the Indians and the Pakistanis. This implies that the sensitivities of all the
parties would be taken into considerations and a workable formula may be
advanced. This requires educating the Indians, the Pakistanis and the
Kashmiris for a possible compromise. Given the existing state of affairs in
which both sides are insisting that the other show flexibility in order to
secure the resumption of a dialogue, perhaps it would be an appropriate
suggestion that a concerted international initiative is undertaken either by
the UN or by US (which seem to enjoy considerable influence over both
countries) or European Union or Japan jointly as well as individually. The
objective of this initiative is only to restore the dialogue initially and
later monitor it. The two sides can be advised to go back to Agra and restart
the process once again. But this time it should not start at the level of the
heads of the governments. Instead it should be resumed at the ministerial
level. All the groundwork should be completed at the officials level before
the heads of the respective governments meet. If the officials are confronted
with some intractable issues, these should be left to be dealt by the heads of
the governments.
To facilitate the
process and to create conducive environment both India and Pakistan also need
to establish a framework for negotiations and to undertake certain measures
such as announcing that both sides have agreed to take measures to stop
violence and are going to resume a dialogue on all the contentious issues
including
a)
Kashmir and what India calls cross border terrorism.
This must
be followed by;
b)
The restoration of diplomatic and communication links.
c)
Working out a cultural agreement with a pronounced emphasis on
easing visa facilities, academic exchanges, promotion of tourism etc.
d)
Encouraging people to people contact and Track II diplomacy
e)
Activating the strict adherence to the existing confidence
building measures (CBMs) and introducing more CBMs.
f)
Reviving the SAARC process with a view to quickly attain SAFTA
status as well as to encourage collective efforts to attack common problems
like over population, poverty, terrorism etc.
g)
Establishment of a joint or regional monitoring mechanism
h)
Declaration by Pakistan to do more to check the alleged
infiltrations. Such a declaration is supposed to alleviate the repeatedly
expressed concerns of the Indians.
i)
Establishing an international monitoring group to keep
vigilance on LOC, which would report periodically to give the exact picture
and status of the infiltrations.
j)
Hostile propaganda must cease.
k)
Dialogue on nuclear risk reduction measures must be initiated
Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema,
Paper presented at, Pugwash Meeting No. 280
Pugwash
Workshop on Avoiding an India-Pakistan Nuclear Confrontation
Lahore, Pakistan
11-12 March 2003
Retrieved from <www.pugwash.org/reports/rc/pakistan2003-papers>
PM Offers Talks To India
By Our Staff Reporter
Mr Jamali said he had
already taken into confidence Pakistan's friends in the Middle East during his
visit to the region. "The cabinet has taken a decision with consensus that we
cannot support war on Iraq". The Prime Minister also invited India to hold
dialogues with Pakistan in order to sort out all unresolved issues peacefully
between the two countries.
He said he had earlier
sent a message of goodwill to the Indian leadership and, "today once again I
repeat the same so that complete peace could be restored for the progress and
betterment of the people of South Asia".
The Prime Minister said
that Pakistan's foreign policy was based on mutual understanding and
international justice. "We want peace in the world and this is also a message
to the Indian leadership that war phobia will not help resolve issues between
our two nations." Mr Jamali said that his government's policy was to hold
talks with India so that people of both the countries should not suffer any
more. "Let us talk and try to convince each other, otherwise we know how to
defend ourselves," the Prime Minister declared.
12 March 2003
Retrieved form <
http://www.dawn.com/2003/03/12/top3.htm >
Pakistan in the Security Council:
Pakistan Welcomes Joint US-UK
Statement about
India-Pakistan Differences
New York,
March 28: In response to a question the Spokesman of the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs stated in Islamabad today that Pakistan believed that sincere and
objective positions by world leaders on issues affecting South Asia can make a
positive contribution to promoting peace and security in the region. In this
context, Pakistan welcomes the assertion in the joint US-UK statement of 27th
March stressing that ‘differences between India and Pakistan can only be
resolved through peaceful means and engagement’ and that ‘active steps to
reduce tension including by moves within the SAARC context’.
The
Spokesman reiterated that as an effective member of the international
coalition against terrorism, Pakistan had done the most to combat this menace
and would continue to do so. Pakistan was also ensuring that no violation of
the LoC was being permitted. In this regard the Spokesman referred to
Pakistan’s proposals for independent verification of movement across LoC,
through strengthening of UN Military Observers Group for India and Pakistan
and stationing of neutral monitors. Pakistan has been offering to talk to
India at any level any time and any place to which India has unfortunately
chosen not to reciprocate.
According
to the Spokesman, it is the irresponsible conduct and attitude of India’s
extremist BJP leadership that is preventing the resumption of talks between
Pakistan and India, the latest example of which is their derisory dismissal of
American counsel to initiate dialogue with Pakistan as ‘double standard’. It
is our hope that both USA and UK will follow up on their offer to help by
prevailing upon New Delhi to give up its intransigence and adopt peaceful ways
to resolve all bilateral disputes, including Kashmir.
28 March 2003
Retrieved from < http://www.un.int/pakistan/141203 >
Transcript of The Press Conference
Addressed by The Foreign Office Spokesman (Extract)
Question-Answer Session
…
* When his attention was drawn to the various recent statements made
by Pakistani dignitaries with regard to relations with India and whether those
utterances could be taken as policy statements of the Government of Pakistan;
the Spokesman said: I have already mentioned to you that as far as foreign
policy issues are concerned – government’s policy and position is indicated or
spelt out through the statements of the President, the Prime Minister, the
Foreign Minister, the Foreign Secretary and the Spokesman of the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs. Any other statement is the personal opinion of those
individuals who are expressing them and not the policy or position of the
Government of Pakistan.
* When his attention was drawn to unusually strong rather
un-parliamentary language being used by the External Affairs Minister of
India, and his repeated utterances that after Iraq Pakistan was a fit case for
pre-emptive strikes; the Spokesman said:
We
have spoken about this subject before. First of all these statements are
irresponsible statements. As I have already stated, if there is a case of
strikes against somebody, it is India which qualifies more than any other
country. India is in-violation of UN resolutions; India possesses weapons of
mass-destruction; India has been responsible for the worst kind of human
rights abuses, witnessed anywhere in the world. Eighty thousand Kashmiris have
been killed in the last ten/twelve years and these are the figures also
supported by Indian Human Rights organizations. There have been massacres of
Muslim and Christian minorities there in the past. If there is an action
required against any country, it is India which qualifies for that. So they
should not talk in this language.
We are against the principle of pre-emptive strikes. We feel that
all issues should be resolved through dialogue, through the process of
negotiations and through the good offices of the United Nations. That is why
despite all the provocations and heightening of tensions to almost intolerable
limits, we have shown restraint and maturity, and continued to state that we
are ready to resolve all outstanding issues including the core issue of Jammu
and Kashmir through dialogue and negotiations.
* When his comments were sought on a US Intelligence report that
there was a serious threat of war between India and Pakistan; whether that was
true; if yes, why the silence was prevailing in the region; the Spokesman
said:
Yes, the situation in the sub-continent is tense. In the past, it
had reached a level which really made the entire world take notice of that.
Even otherwise so long as the Kashmir problem is not resolved, the process of
dialogue is not started, the situation would remain tense and people would
take notice of that. The international community has expressed the need to
resolve this situation, and we welcome this. We have tried very hard on our
own to convince India to get to the negotiating table to have a meaningful
dialogue, so that these problems are resolved and the poor people of the
sub-continent can benefit from that peace and security that ultimately would
prevail here. So in that context, people do get worried about the situation
here. But at the moment, you see that Pakistan has tried its best to keep the
situation calm, not to allow the tensions to escalate and we will continue to
do so.
* When his comments were sought on a reported statement of PML (Q)
President Chaudhry Shujaat that the Kashmir issue would be resolved in a
couple of years; the Spokesman said:
I
would say that we want it resolved. Pakistan has made the best possible
efforts to have the dialogue process started, so that all outstanding issues
with India including the core issue of Jammu and Kashmir are resolved once and
for all. It is Indian intransigence which is preventing that. We hope that
they would give up that unproductive stance that they have adopted and come to
the negotiating table….
Ministry of Foreign Affairs Pakistan, 14 April 2003
Retrieved from <http://www.forisb.org/briefings/FOS03-12.htm >
From Valley, PM Extends a Hand to Pakistan (Extract)
Vajpayee shares ‘grief, sorrow’, promises ‘special care’,
Srinagar, April 18:
At
the first rally by a prime minister in the Valley after the onset of
militancy, Atal Behari Vajpayee said he had come to share the pain and sorrow
of the Kashmiri people and the doors of Delhi were always open to them.
Promising them jobs and ‘‘special care,’’ but shying away from making any
concrete commitments, Vajpayee drove home the point that the situation will
change in the state and talks were the only way out.
Problems cannot be solved by the gun. Guns only kill people, not hunger,’’ he
said, addressing a packed Sher-e-Kashmir stadium today. All issues, ‘‘whether
internal or external’’, could be solved only by talks, he said. ‘‘It may take
time but no blood will be spilt. Humanity has to be the bottomline.’’
Avoiding any references to cross-border terrorism, Vajpayee said that despite
two unsuccessful attempts at peace with Pakistan — in Lahore and then at Agra
— he was still willing to extend his hand of friendship, provided they
reciprocate.
The
rally was officially boycotted by the Congress — a major ally of the PDP
government in the state. Deputy Chief Minister Mangat Ram Sharma and nine
Congress ministers stayed away from the rally since they did not want to
‘‘welcome the PM officially.’’
However, the politics did not deter the 20,000-strong crowd, which spilt over
from the stadium into the streets of Srinagar. Vajpayee told them that he was
concerned about Jammu and Kashmir and had come to share the pain and sorrow of
the people.
For
those who were expecting him to make any major announcement related to
development, the PM’s speech had nothing to offer. As PDP leader Mehbooba
Mufti explained, ‘‘It is not about what the PM has to say but the message that
he gets from the people here, and his subsequent response. That is more
important.’’ …
Bhavna Vij Aurora,
19 April 2003
Retrieved from <http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=22297>
Past failures should not hinder India and Pak dialogue: Indian
PM (Extract)
Past
failures should not stop India from making yet another effort to have friendly
relations with Pakistan, Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee said on Saturday
after his two-day visit to Jammu and Kashmir.
Addressing a press
conference at the Srinagar airport before leaving for Delhi, Vajpayee said it
would be in the interests of India and Pakistan to sort out their differences
through talks. "We are willing
to discuss all issues, including Jammu and Kashmir. But the route of
cross-border terrorism cannot go on. There has been no benefit from it and
there cannot any benefit in future." It was up to Pakistan to respond
positively to the hand of friendship extended by him by ensuring an end
to cross-border terrorism and infiltration, he added.
"What has happened
in Iraq is a warning, particularly to developing countries who are struggling
to get out of poverty and economic difficulties. I would not like to elaborate
but would stress that the international situation is changing very fast,"
Vajpayee said in response to a question when asked if the situation on the
ground level has changed to warrant Indo-Pak dialogue. "Past failures should
not stand in the way of making a new beginning. I have extended the hand of
friendship and it is for Pakistan to respond. The day Pakistan stops
cross-border terrorism and dismantles terrorist camps, I would send a senior
official of the ministry of external affairs to Pakistan to firm up the
details (for talks)," he said. "I did not mention the massacre of the 24
Kashmiri Pandits in Nadimarg because I wanted to make a new beginning and
Chief Minister Mufti Mohammad Sayeed's policy of providing a healing touch is
a good one." …
Onkar Singh, 19
April 2003
Retrieved from
<http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/apr/19jk.htm>
Transcript Of The Press Conference Addressed By The Foreign Office Spokesman
(Extract)
Question-Answer Session
* When his comments were sought on a wish of the Indian Prime
Minister expressed during a press talks the other day at Sri Nagar that he did
not like the security arrangements made for him during his visit to the State
and he would have loved to have come without any kind of security arrangements
if the security situation of the State so permitted; how could Pakistan help
the Indian Prime Minister in fulfilling his wish; the Spokesman said:
The
solution is very simple. The solution to the issue of Jammu and Kashmir in
accordance with the wishes of the Kashmiri people will solve all these
problems and everybody will be able to breath easy, particularly the Kashmiri
people who have been subjected to all these atrocities over the past so many
years….
* When his comments were sought on an offer made by the Indian Prime
Minister for talks between Pakistan and India and to find solution to all
outstanding issues between the two countries including the issue of Jammu and
Kashmir, and how much optimistic Pakistan was about the offer; the Spokesman
stated:
As
far as the Indian Prime Minister’s offer of talks is concerned; let me first
of all say that we have already welcomed it; the Prime Minister has welcomed
it; the Foreign Minister has welcomed it. After all the statements that we
have been hearing from across the border lately, I think it is a very welcome
statement, because this is the only positive statement that we have had after
a long time. We have welcomed it also because, if you recall, we have been
throughout insisting that the only way problems can be solved is through
negotiations, through dialogue and not through war, not through the use of
force and not through the threat of use of force.
As far as being optimistic is concerned, I would just say that we
did not lose our optimism and positive attitude even at the time when India
had deployed almost its entire military strength along Pakistani borders. We
have been exercising restraint throughout and counseling that the only way we
can resolve problems is through dialogue and negotiations. So to that extent
we hope that immediate steps would be taken so that a dialogue process can
start and all problems can be discussed at the negotiating table.
* To a question with regard to pre-conditionalities being made for an
Indo-Pak dialogue; the Spokesman said:
As
far as, pre-conditionalities are concerned, I think a dialogue and
negotiations can only succeed if there are no pre-conditions. Secondly, this
is not the first time these allegations have been made and we have responded
by saying that we have a different perception about it while yours is
different. You claim one thing, we claim another thing. The best way to sort
out this matter is that neutral international observers, better UN observers,
which are already appointed by the Security Council, may be augmented and
asked to verify the situation for themselves and report who is right, who is
wrong. That is the only way we can get out of this logjam.
Pakistan has always called for a dialogue without pre-conditions.
It is not for the first time that I am saying this. It has always been said
that we should sit across the table and discuss all the problems. Dialogue is
the only way to resolve problems. As far as these pre-conditions are
concerned, we have always maintained that nothing of this sort is happening.
This is wrong, and in order to prove our bona-fides we have always invited
neutral international observers – UN observers….
* To a question with regard to the ensuing visit of Mr. Armitage to
India and Pakistan and whether that could be for a kind of mediation and to
help the two countries to start a dialogue; the Spokesman said:
Mr.
Richard Armitage has been visiting this area in the past also and the United
States has maintained interest in this region. We hope that they will continue
to maintain that interest because we need international assistance to resolve
the problems facing the region. We have seen that the bilateral approach has
not worked and that’s why we have asked that apart from bilateral dialogue,
Pakistan would also welcome mediation, facilitation or whatever you may call
it, so that the problem can be resolved….
Asked as to how dialogue between India and Pakistan could start; whether
Pakistan could take some initiatives in that regard and identify parameter of
talks; the Spokesman said:
I will just repeat what Pakistan has been repeating since the
times of Agra Summit, i.e. dialogue at any time, any place and at any level.
India will not find us wanting. Let them give us a chance. We have no problem
in this regard and can go for dialogue even tomorrow, here in Pakistan or
anywhere in India. Now the ball is in their court; the onus is on them; it is
now they who are to decide the venue, time and the level of the talks they
intend to have with Pakistan.
* Asked whether the SAARC process could be helpful in resolving the
problems between India and Pakistan; the Spokesman said:
If the SAARC process can be helpful; most welcome. It is not
Pakistan again which has been shy of using the SAARC process to resolve some
of the bilateral political issues….
* Asked as to what role Washington could play in bringing Islamabad
and New Delhi to the negotiating table; and whether Mr. Armitage was coming to
the region with any agenda in that regard; the Spokesman said:
We
feel that the international community can play an important role in helping in
the resolution of all the problems that bedevil the sub-Continent. We have
never hesitated in using means other than bilateral e.g. through UN umbrella,
through international mediation or facilitation to resolve issues facing the
sub-Continent for such a long time. American senior leaders have been visiting
this region – Pakistan and India – frequently in the past also. These visits
provide us an opportunity to discuss bilateral issues as well as the situation
in the region and other important issue. The visit of Mr. Armitage, whenever
it takes place, would be one such an occasion again to discuss all these
issues.
* Asked as to what Pakistan expected from India with regard to the
solution of the Kashmir issue: whether India should go for the implementation
of the UN resolutions or take an initiative to start the dialogue afresh on
the subject with Pakistan; the Spokesman stated:
Either way is OK. If they implement UN resolutions – nothing like that, this
is the best and the easiest solution possible. But if they are not willing to
do that, even then we can sit across the table and discuss ways and means to
resolve the issue….
Ministry of Foreign
Affairs Pakistan, 21 April 2003
Retrieved from
<http://www.forisb.org/briefings/FOS03-13.htm >
Transcript Of the Press Conference Addressed By The Foreign Office Spokesman
(Extract)
Question-Answer Session
* When his comments were sought on a recent statement of Deputy Prime
Minister of India Mr. Advani calling for some conditionalities as a prelude to
Mr. Vajpaye’s offer for resumption of dialogue between India and Pakistan; the
Spokesman said:
You
will recall that we had welcomed the offer at that particular time and we
would continue to maintain that position for the simple reason that we feel
that the only solution of the problems is through dialogue and negotiations
and the sooner they get started, the better it would be….
* When his comments were sought on US Secretary of States’ statement
with regard to LoC violations; the Spokesman said:
As
far as Secretary of State Colin Powels’ statement is concerned, all he said
was that there is lot of propaganda going on emanating from India, which can
mislead opinions. The best way to verify whose contentions, claims are correct
is to position observers on both sides of the LoC. For this purpose India and
Pakistan Observers Group, sanctioned by the UNSC, over five decades ago, is
already present. However, its number can be increased further and they can
verify whose claim is right and whose is wrong. We maintain our position that
without having physical presence there, you cannot verify contradictory
claims. The claims of the parties can of-course be self-serving and
unacceptable as such. The best way to verify is through the presence of
neutral observers, for which we are ready….
* When his comments were sought on the resignation of the US
Ambassador to India, Robert Blackwill, during whose term very strong
anti-Pakistan rhetoric used to emanate from India; the Spokesman said:
I am
sure the Kashmiris in the IHK would be delighted with the news, because during
his entire tenure all he did was to toe India’s line and did not say anything
about the sufferings of the poor Kashmiris. At times, it appeared as if he was
the Spokesman of the Ministry of External Affairs of India rather than the
Department of the State. So I am sure, the Kashmiris would heave a sigh of
relief and welcome his departure….
* When his attention was drawn to reports regarding occupied
Kashmir’s former Chief Minister Farooq Abdullah’s wish to visit Pakistan; the
Spokesman said:
Yes,
I have seen the report. It was during the tenure of Farooq Abdullah that
maximum atrocities were committed against the Kashmiri people. He has blood of
a lot many Kashmiris on his hands. He should first go and apologize to the
Kashmiri people and the Hurriyat Conference. If they forgive him, then perhaps
a delegation led by APHC leaders, in which others can be included, would be
welcome to Pakistan….
Ministry of Foreign Affairs Pakistan, 28 April 2003
Retrieved from < http://www.forisb.org/briefings/FOS03-14.htm >
Prime Minister Vajpayee's statement in Parliament on Pakistan
I received a telephone call on the evening of 28th
April, from Prime Minister Jamali of Pakistan. PM Jamali conveyed his
appreciation and thanks for the comments I had made in Srinagar and my remarks
about India-Pakistan relations contained in my statement in the two Houses of
Parliament. He also condemned terrorism.
As Honourable members are aware, we are committed to the
improvement of relations with Pakistan, and are willing to grasp every
opportunity for doing so. However, we have repeatedly expressed the need to
create a conducive atmosphere for a sustained dialogue, which necessarily
requires an end to cross border terrorism and the dismantling of its
infrastructure.
We discussed ways of carrying forward our bilateral relations.
In this regard, I emphasized the importance of economic cooperation, cultural
exchanges, people-to-people contacts and civil aviation links. These would
create an environment in which difficult issues in our bilateral relations
could be addressed. PM Jamali suggested resumption of sporting links between
the two countries. We agreed that, as a beginning, these measures could be
considered.
In this context, it has been decided to appoint a High
Commissioner to Pakistan and to restore the civil aviation links on a
reciprocal basis.
I also emphasized the importance of substantive progress on the
decisions for regional trade and economic cooperation taken at the SAARC
Kathmandu Summit. Agreements arrived at Kathmandu must be implemented.
Embassy of India, New Delhi, 2 May 2003
Retrieved from http://www.indiagov.org/pm/pm_may_02_03.htm
India and Pakistan to renew ties (Extract)
South Asia's two
nuclear rivals, India and Pakistan, are to re-establish full diplomatic
relations.
Prime Minister Atal
Behari Vajpayee told the Indian parliament he would restore full Indian
diplomatic representation in Islamabad. Hours later Pakistan announced it
would reciprocate. The threat of war between the two traditional enemies has
caused huge concern since an attack on the Indian parliament in December 2001.
The moves were welcomed by US Secretary of State Colin Powell, who
congratulated the two countries for taking what he called very promising first
steps to peace. UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said he hoped they would be
the cue to "normalising" relations between India and Pakistan, and pledged
Britain's continuing support.
PM's 'last effort'
"It has been decided to
appoint a high commissioner to Pakistan and to restore civil aviation links on
a reciprocal basis," Mr Vajpayee said in his parliamentary address.
"We are committed to
the improvement of relations with Pakistan and are willing to grasp every
opportunity for doing so."
However, on the
possibility of talks to resolve the Kashmir dispute, Mr Vajpayee said that
there would be no role for any "third-party" to mediate, a long-standing
demand of Pakistan. Mr Vajpayee, now 78, said this, his third attempt to
settle differences with Pakistan, "will be decisive and will be the last in my
lifetime". In Islamabad, Pakistani Foreign Minister Khursheed Kasuri welcomed
the move. "Pakistan wants high commissioner (ambassador) relations with
India," he said according to the Associated Press news agency. On Monday,
Pakistani Prime Minister Zafarullah Jamali used a phone call with Mr Vajpayee
to invite him to Islamabad. The BBC's Sanjeev Srivastiva in Delhi says Mr
Vajpayee is unlikely to accept that invitation in a hurry, as India-Pakistan
summit meetings in recent years have failed to take the peace process much
forward. The emphasis this time around seems to be on a more graded and
cautious approach, with both Delhi and Islamabad apparently agreeing on
initiating official level discussions first to prepare the ground for a
possible meeting of the two prime ministers later this year….
Friday's diplomatic
moves mark a dramatic change in atmosphere after a long period of heightened
tension that saw the US leading outside attempts to prevent war breaking out.
India reacted with fury after armed gunmen attacked the federal parliament in
Delhi in December 2001. It blamed the attack on Pakistan-based militants it
said were supported by the government in Islamabad. Pakistan denied the
accusation. The ensuing months saw India deploy huge numbers of troops along
their common border, with Pakistan responding in kind.
'Dismantling
Infrastructure'
There have been a
number of signs recently that India and Pakistan are willing to take steps to
address their differences, particularly over the Kashmir dispute….
But Mr Vajpayee made
clear to parliament that he was not withdrawing India's long-standing demand
for the Pakistan Government to stop allowing militants to infiltrate into
Indian-administered Kashmir. "We have repeatedly expressed the need to create
a conducive atmosphere for a sustained dialogue which necessarily requires an
end to cross-border terrorism and the dismantling of its infrastructure," he
said. Pakistan denies giving militants such support. India and Pakistan have
fought two of their three wars over Kashmir.
BBC
News: 3 May,
2003
Retrieved from
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/south_asia/2994853.stm>
Press Release, Ministry of Foreign Affairs Pakistan
In
response to a question about the reported remarks of the Foreign Minister that
"Pakistan was willing to discuss trade with India before the core issue of
Jammu and Kashmir", the Spokesman clarified that Pakistan believes that
progress on economic cooperation and other issues can only be achieved in an
environment free of tension. It, therefore, remains our policy that dialogue
should be held in a composite manner the details of which have already been
agreed upon, whereby the two sides give primacy to meaningful negotiations on
Jammu and Kashmir and simultaneously discuss other issues.
A
discussion on economic cooperation, people to people contacts, cultural
exchanges etc. to the exclusion of the core issue of Jammu and Kashmir would
not produce the desired results, he said.
Islamabad, 5 May
2003
Retrieved from
<http://www.forisb.org/PR03-136.htm3>
Prime Minister Jamali’s statement AndTranscript Of The Press Conference
Addressed By The Foreign Office Spokesman (Extract)
Question-Answer Session
* When his attention was drawn to reported ‘contradictory statements’
appearing in the press with regard to Pak-India relations; Foreign Minister
saying that Pakistan was prepared for trade and economic activities with
India, while a press release of the Foreign Office said that commercial
activities were subservient to the resolution of the Kashmir issue; the
Spokesman said:
It
seems you are not satisfied with the press release that we have issued and in
which we have clarified the situation. The purpose of that press release was
to clarify the situation. Pakistan’s position as reiterated in that press
release is that Pakistan is for a composite dialogue on all issues including
the core issue of Jammu and Kashmir. The remark of the Foreign Minister was in
fact quoted out of context in the sense that the Foreign Minister, while
talking to that particular radio service, had stated that India keeps talking
about trade, commercial and economic relations; there was a good opportunity
and there still is a good opportunity in the form of the Turkmenistan
Afghanistan-Pakistan gas pipeline project, in which the three countries have
invited India also to participate. If India wishes so much to have commercial
relations it is a good opportunity to participate in this project. But that is
totally a separate issue. That is why, on bilateral relations between the two
countries, we had issued the clarification yesterday which states very clearly
that Pakistan’s stand point, as far as dialogue with India is concerned, is
that Pakistan desires a meaningful and a positive dialogue on all outstanding
issues including the core issue of Jammu and Kashmir.
* When his attention was drawn to a map of the sub-Continent, put up
by the CIA on its website recently, showing the LoC as permanent border
between India and Pakistan; the Spokesman said:
Somebody picked up something wrong. If you go to the CIA website and download
the map of the sub-continent, it shows Kashmir as a disputed territory. This
is a short answer that I can give.
* On remarks by the Indian Prime Minister on the need to have a
careful assessment of the ground situation; the Spokesman said:
Pakistan has responded positively to all gestures from India. You are aware of
the movements that have taken place in the past two days. We have welcomed
those movements. We want to enter into a dialogue process and negotiations
with a positive frame of mind. We want to discuss everything with a positive
bend of mind. We want to discuss all outstanding issues including the core’
issue of Jammu and Kashmir in a composite dialogue. We have been maintaining
in the past also our position of dialogue at any level, any place, any time.
We maintain that position. We would accommodate whatever position that they
take in this regard.
While on the negotiating table, everybody takes a careful assessment of the
ground situation. We are also not unmindful of the ground situation. We will
also take a very careful view of the ground situation. But the fact of the
matter is that we feel that a dialogue process should start. We welcome that
India has come down to that and has announced certain measures, which would
undo some of the things that they had done since December 2001 i.e.
restoration of Ambassadorial level diplomatic relations, restoration of
flights etc. These are all welcome measures; but these measures bring us only
to a situation where we were almost a year and a half ago. Now from hereon we
can go further through dialogue.
Even
when those measures were taken, we had said that those were wrong — that the
best solution is through dialogue. Then tension was created at the borders;
forces were mobilized, we had still maintained that the best way is to have
dialogue rather than show of force. We are glad that slowly and gradually all
those measures have been withdrawn and now a situation is created where we
hope that dialogue would start very soon….
* When his attention was drawn to various statements emanating from
Pakistan’s side terming the Jammu and Kashmir issue as the core issue; whether
that meant that J&K would get precedence in the dialogue with India and other
bilateral issues would become subservient to that; the Spokesman said:
I
will take you back several years; if you look all our statements and our
position, it has always been for composite dialogue. We are ready to discuss
all issues, but we feel that the J&K issue is the core issue, and the sooner a
serious attention is paid to it the better it would be. But it does not mean,
and we have never meant, that it would be exclusive and we are not ready to
discuss other issues as well. If you recall, even at the Foreign Secretaries
level dialogue between the two countries, several areas were identified and
eight groups were made, and that was a composite dialogue. Even now we talk of
the same composite dialogue. At the same time we feel that J&K is the core
issue and the main problem between Pakistan and India. The other issues are
much easier to resolve.
* Asked whether Pakistan would agree to a dialogue with India on
issues minus Jammu and Kashmir; the Spokesman said:
No.
We want a composite dialogue. When we say composite dialogue it means all
issues discussed simultaneously….
* Asked as to what had changed the mindset of the Indian leadership
vis-ŕ-vis dialogue with Pakistan; whether the Mujahideens’ daring acts,
pressure from the international community or something else; the Spokesman
said:
What
I would say is that whatever it is, we welcome the opportunity that the
dialogue process is starting and that is more important….
* To a question with regard to Prime Minister Vajpayee’s response to
Prime Minister Jamali; the Spokesman said that the response was a positive
one. “However, I cannot go into more details of the official response from
India,” he added.
Prime Minster
Jamali’s Statement
During my phone call to Prime Minister Vajpayee on 28 April 2003, I sensed a
positive desire on his part to break the impasse in our relationship and to
take steps which would lead to improved relations between Pakistan and India.
The entire international community is watching with hope and expectation the
movement towards a future of peace, security and prosperity in South Asia.
I
have sent a formal invitation to Prime Minister Vajpayee to visit Pakistan. He
is welcome to visit Pakistan whenever he wishes to do so. The current global
situation is marked by several challenges facing the international community.
It is our duty to deal with these challenges collectively and constructively.
The fight against terrorism is a case in point. Pakistan condemns terrorism in
all its forms and manifestations and would continue to cooperate with the
international community to eliminate this scourge. Of equal importance is the
promotion of regional peace and security in regions of the world suffering
from tensions and unresolved conflicts.
Encouraged by the recent positive developments and in order to set the stage
for a meaningful dialogue with India, I have decided on the following
measures:
i.
Since the majority of travellers between India and Pakistan use
train and bus services, these will be resumed immediately on acceptance by
India.
ii.
Resumption of airlink between India and Pakistan to facilitate
travel of the people between the two countries.
iii.
Immediate release of all Indian fishermen, 22 Sikh youth and
the 14 crew members of the Indian cargo boat “Raj Laxhmi”.
iv.
Resumption of sports ties beginning with cricket and hockey.
v.
In addition to exchange of the two High Commissioners, we also
propose restoration of the full strength of the missions of the two countries
in their respective capitals.
In
order to give impetus to SAARC to make it a more effective regional body, I
have decided:
a.
To place additional seventy eight items on the positive list.
It is my hope that this will clear the way for a more meaningful SAARC role
for the promotion of regional trade.
b.
We will soon approach the Secretary General, SAARC to ascertain
the convenience of the Member States for convening the 12th SAARC Summit in
Islamabad well before the end of the current year.
c.
Pakistan is also willing to host SAF games as soon as possible.
Nuclear realities in our region impose certain obligations and
responsibilities on our two countries. It is, therefore, important for both
India and Pakistan to engage in serious discussions for nuclear and strategic
stability in our region. In this context, Pakistan supports the Confidence
Building Measures outlined in the MOU signed in Lahore in February 1999 and we
hope that a reconvened dialogue will enable us to conclude substantive and
result oriented measures for arms restraint and promotion of security in our
region.
We
believe that all outstanding issues between Pakistan and India must be
addressed sincerely and constructively and in a composite manner through a
sustained dialogue with a sense of priority.
It
is my hope that India will seize the moment, put aside the acrimony of the
past and purposefully move forward with Pakistan to peacefully resolve all
issues, including the core issue of Jammu and Kashmir. Such a commitment is in
the interest of harmony and stability in the region and for the prosperity of
its billion-plus people. We should begin talks from where they were left off
at Agra and work out an agenda for a tiered dialogue including Summit level
interaction.
It
is a matter of great satisfaction for me that in the endeavour we have
undertaken, I enjoy the fullest support of the people and all major political
parties whom I have consulted. With this national consensus we are ready to
engage in a serious and substantive dialogue with India.
I
want to assure my Kashmiri brothers and sisters as well as the people of
Pakistan that at all stages; their interests will be of supreme importance.
Islamabad, 6 May
2003
Retrieved from <http://www.forisb.org/pm03-05-06.htm>
Pakistan Hopes for US Diplomacy:
Analysis
The visit of US Deputy
Secretary of State Richard Armitage in South Asia is causing immense
speculation in Pakistan. Questions are being asked about whether he will act
as a mediator between Pakistan and India.
Is he arriving with a
specific formula to resolve the most contentious of all issues between the two
countries - the dispute over Kashmir? Or is he just a facilitator, who may
seek some assurance from Pakistan to stop cross-border incursions in Kashmir,
and then persuade India to ensure a sustained process of dialogue in return?
No one seems to have the answers. Mr Armitage has denied the suggestion that
he is involved in any mediation but this has not discouraged the Pakistani
media from speculating on the reasons behind his visit.
Secrecy
Richard Armitage's
mission to South Asia is as much shrouded in secrecy as has been his exact
travel schedule. If the latter is for security reasons, the former is to avoid
any diplomatic backlash. But there have been some indications that Mr Armitage
would like to be seen as some kind of a "facilitator" in a process that could
bring India and Pakistan to the negotiating table. Even before his arrival in
Islamabad, he held crucial talks with key officials from the two countries. In
Washington he held an important meeting with Lieutenant General Ehsanul Haq,
the head of Pakistan's premier intelligence agency, the ISI. During a brief
stopover in London, he met Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee's national
security adviser, Brajesh Mishra. In some ways, these two meetings are more
important than many of the formal sessions that Mr Armitage will have in
Islamabad and Delhi. Islamabad has always supported the idea of third-party
involvement in its dispute with Delhi, and is quite excited over the hype that
has been created round Mr Armitage's visit. For Mr Armitage, the success of
his mission to South Asia largely depends on the outcome of his meetings with
the Pakistani leadership. During his stay in Islamabad, he will hold formal
talks with Foreign Minister Khursheed Mehmood Kasuri and other top officials
of the foreign ministry. He is also due to meet, separately, President Pervez
Musharraf and Prime Minister Zafarullah Khan Jamali.
Musharraf
Even though Prime
Minister Jamali has lately emerged as the main Pakistani leader who will
negotiate with the Indians, officials privately admit that on substantive
issues Mr Armitage will look for guarantees from the president. Ever since he
assumed for himself the role of a so-called "facilitator" in the
India-Pakistan peace process, Mr Armitage has remained in contact with the
Pakistani military leader. He seems to have developed a liking for him,
especially since General Musharraf personally assured him in June last year
that he would do his best to stop incursions into Indian-administered Kashmir.
Pakistan's active role in rounding up the remnants of al-Qaeda, especially the
arrest of some key terror suspects in recent months, has also made President
Musharraf's role extremely important for the United States. During his brief
stay in Islamabad, Mr Armitage is expected to seek fresh assurances from the
Pakistani leadership that it will do its utmost to prevent armed militants
from crossing the Line of Control in Kashmir. Traditionally at this time of
the year, as the snow begins to melt in the Himalayan region, militants cross
into Indian-administered Kashmir. Both Delhi and Washington will therefore be
keenly following developments on the ground.
Since the process to
create a conducive atmosphere for talks has been moving at a rapid pace,
Pakistan would like Mr Armitage to persuade India to agree to a sustained and
result-oriented dialogue process. And there is a strong possibility that in
return it may make an appeal to the Kashmiri militant groups for a ceasefire.
Considering the level of mistrust and suspicion that has remained between
Islamabad and Delhi, such a development would be regarded as a huge success.
Zaffar Abbas, BBC Islamabad correspondent
BBC News, 7 May 2003
Retrieved from <http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/south_asia/3006439.stm>
Press
Release (Extract)
The
US Deputy Secretary of State Mr. Richard Armitage is visiting Pakistan as part
of a regional tour that would also take him to Afghanistan and India….
Mr.
Armitage expressed strong US support for recent developments in South Asia
beginning with Prime Minister Vajpayee’s address in Srinagar on 18 April. He
praised Prime Minister Zafarullah Khan Jamali’s recent telephone contact with
his Indian counterpart, his invitation to Mr. Vajpayee to visit Pakistan and
the announcement of a series of measures aimed at confidence building and
improving the climate of relations with India. The Pakistan side appreciated
the US efforts for the resumption of a bilateral dialogue process between
Pakistan and India. Pakistan’s earnest endeavour to lower tensions with India
and seek, through dialogue, a resolution of all outstanding issues between the
two countries, including Jammu and Kashmir, was emphasized.
Islamabad, 8 May 2003
Retrieved from <http://www.forisb.org/PR03-140.htm3>
A Ray Of Hope
The
snows are melting in the high passes along Kashmir’s Line of Control that
separate the Indian- and Pakistani-held parts of that tragic territory, a land
that has been the cause of two of the three wars fought between the two
neighbours. Typically, spring brings an upsurge in militant infiltration
across the dividing line and violence against Indian security personnel and
civilians in the Valley of Kashmir. But this spring, Kashmir may be seeing
another kind of thaw that could lead to something new — a political thaw in
the relations between these two nuclear protagonists.
Indian and Pakistani officials are talking again. When Indian Prime Minister
Atal Behari Vajpayee spoke over the telephone with Pakistani Prime Minister
Zafarullah Khan Jamali on April 28, it was the first high-level contact
between the two nations since the collapse of the Agra summit in July 2001.
That conversation was the result of Vajpayee’s recent visit to Kashmir in
which he offered to extend a ‘‘hand of friendship’’ to Pakistan if it would
reciprocate.
In
their conversation, Vajpayee emphasised the importance of economic
cooperation, cultural exchanges and people-to-people contacts between the
countries. Jamali stressed the importance of reviving sports contacts.
Pakistan is keen on cricket. Subsequently, Vajpayee announced he was prepared
to re-appoint a High Commissioner, or ambassador, to Pakistan and restore
civil aviation links on a reciprocal basis.
On
his visit to the region this week, Deputy Secretary of State Richard L.
Armitage should build on these statements. But his starting point must be with
the pledge Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf made to him in June that he
would seek a ‘‘permanent end’’ to militant incursions across the Kashmir
ceasefire line. That has not happened, and the dangers are escalating.
As
CIA Director George J. Tenet stated recently: ‘‘The cycles of tension between
India and Pakistan are growing shorter. Pakistan continues to support groups
that resist India’s presence in Kashmir in an effort to bring India to the
negotiating table.’’ Pakistan’s continuing support for these groups may
provoke a war. Senior Indian officials have said India has a better case for
waging ‘‘pre-emptive’’ war against Pakistan than the United States had for
doing so against Iraq. The recent positive change in Indo-Pakistani rhetoric
could give the United States an opportunity to be a facilitator between the
two countries. That role is possible because of improved US-Indian relations
begun under President Clinton and continued under President Bush and the
transformation of relations with Pakistan because of Musharraf’s decision to
become a key ally in the war on terrorism after 9/11.
What
is needed is for the parties to take those steps envisioned in the recent
Vaypayee-Jamali exchange and to formulate a longer-term path to resolving the
dispute that has poisoned their relationship since their mutual independence
in 1947 — Kashmir. Actions along this pathway should include:
• End Pakistani support for cross-border infiltration, resulting in a
substantial reduction in internal political violence in Kashmir.
• Mutual affirmation for the respect of the Line of Control. This should
include monitoring and confidence-building measures, with international
technical assistance, including from the United States, as requested by both
sides.
• A significant reduction in the Indian armed security presence in Kashmir
and improved respect for human rights, accelerating what began under the new
state government elected in the fall promising ‘‘a healing touch’’ for
Kashmiris.
• Substantial autonomy for the 13 million people of Kashmir, of which
about 9 million are under Indian control and 4 million under Pakistani
control.
• Functional arrangements on trade, travel, cultural and religious affairs
and economic development that would institutionalise cooperative relations
among Indians, Pakistanis and Kashmiri representatives and institutions.
• International financial support for joint development and other
cooperative projects on both sides of the Line of Control, revitalising the
devastated Kashmir economy and infrastructure.
• Indian and Pakistani agreements on long-term arrangements concerning
Kashmir, with the wishes of the people of Kashmir taken into account, possibly
followed by formal UN Security Council endorsement of these agreements.
The
ever-present threat of conflict in South Asia poses a grave threat to
Pakistan’s future, to India’s aspirations as an emerging global power and to
the stability of the region. In seeking a way out of their historical
conundrum, Vajpayee’s recent statement in Kashmir is the best possible guide:
‘‘it is time to change things.’’
Karl F. Inderfurth,
9 May 2003
Retrieved from
<http://www.indianexpress.com/archive_full_story.php?content_id=23499>
‘Can, Whoever Says J&K Will Go, Live Here?’
Replying to
a two-hour discussion on Indo-Pak ties in the Lok Sabha on Thursday, Prime
Minister A.B. Vajpayee made it clear that he would not let the fear of failure
stymie the latest peace initiative. The following is the full text of his
speech:
A.B. Vajpayee:
Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank all honorable members who have taken part in this
discussion. There are some issues on which this House gets together to take a
common stand. Our relations with Pakistan and the questions on these relations
is one such issue.
There are differences of opinion but the ultimate goal, despite these
differences, has to be reached and we all work together towards that end. The
ultimate goal is India’s victory, India’s pride, India’s fame and India’s
unity.
A
lot of old issues have been raked up in this discussion. Starting with Lahore
the story went on. That I should be blamed for Lahore is not acceptable to me.
As a friend and as a neighbour we have to live with our neighbours no matter
how we get along.
If
there is an opportunity to improve relations we should not lose the chance.
Our development is linked to internal and external peace. We do not wish to
acquire huge stocks of weapons for war or put to great use the country’s
resources. But when there is a threat to freedom, when integrity is in danger,
then it’s time to turn to all possible means to defend the country.
I
have told my friends in Pakistan many times that we can change friends, but we
can never change neighbours. Neither can you go anywhere nor can we get up and
go elsewhere. We have to live here. One way is to live as friendly neighbours
and the other way is to constantly fight each other and give the world a
chance to mock at us, not understand the feelings of our people and tread on
wrong paths.
That
is why you should always have friendly relations with your neighbour to the
extent possible. That is why I went to Lahore. It is wrong to say that there
was not adequate preparation before I went to Lahore. Even before I went to
Agra, it was said not adequate preparation had been done. What does this mean?
Governments go on, the structure of governance is in place. The Foreign
Ministry did not change because I came on the scene. I think my friends will
agree that our policy experts who are clever always fault our officials. But
the Foreign Ministry shelters those from the foreign office. We’d made
adequate preparations but then the issue of Kargil cropped up. There was an
internal fight there between the Government and the Army Chief. The
declaration made by the two countries after the Lahore accord stated that we
will hold talks in peace, solve problems and there was agreement on this.
That
declaration made no mention of Kashmir because the conclusion of the
discussion between the two countries was that the problem in Kashmir was
complex and should not be discussed. It would be better if we turn to other
issues, solve them and go ahead.
Mani Shankar Aiyar:
I have got the Lahore Declaration. It says, ‘‘...have agreed that their
respective governments shall intensify their efforts...’’.
Speaker:
I can permit you to put questions after the Prime Minister completes. Now you
may please sit down.
Mani Shankar Aiyar:
‘‘...at resolving all issues including the issue of Jammu and Kashmir.’’ You
are saying there’s no mention of Kashmir. This is before you.
A.B. Vajpayee:
Mr Speaker, I am aware of the mention that is made. You can also see the form
in which it is there. Unlike Agra, Kashmir was not made the main issue in
Lahore. It has been made now.
Mani Shankar Aiyar:
It’s the first issue, you had signed on it.
Speaker:
Let him complete the reply.
A.B. Vajpayee:
I am giving you an account of whatever has been discussed. When General
Musharraf came to Agra and held discussions, he went all out to try and get
his view on Kashmir accepted. Now it has been spread that even this did not
happen. General Musharraf had to return empty-handed from Agra.
I am
being blamed for making a blunder, for not preparing enough. If adequate
preparations had not been made, then we wouldn’t have been able to
successfully stand up to Pakistan’s attack on Kargil. We did not allow
Pakistan’s plans to succeed. Such is the internal strife in their country that
their Prime Minister had to tender his resignation. They couldn’t work
together.
I am
saying this only to make the point that whatever efforts are being made are
being done with good intentions. At times, these succeed, at times, these
fail. Ceasefire was called many times. There was a general opinion that the
two neighbours should live as friends, and that a friendly atmosphere should
prevail in Jammu and Kashmir. But this wish could not be fulfilled. There were
differences among terrorists and they broke up into different groups. What is
their condition now? I don’t want to go into the details. It is now being said
that I had said that there would be no talks until cross-border terrorism
ends. Yes, I said that, because I want cross-border terrorism to end. That’s
our goal. To attain that goal we decided to work, and we worked so well that
the entire world, barring a few countries, said cross-border terrorism has to
end. We succeeded in taking global opinion on our side. We don’t want that
someone else should fight the war against terrorism. But we have got an
opportunity to come to a pact. A way has been found. The elections in Kashmir
are over. To my mind this is such a big event that a right assessment should
be made.
Mrs
Sonia Gandhi did not even refer to the elections in Jammu and Kashmir. The
polls in J&K is a big change, a new chapter. People braved bullets to cast
votes. All efforts of Pakistan were foiled. I saw huge crowds in Kashmir the
other day. I’ve been to Kashmir before and I’ve seen different sorts of
welcomes.
But
the meeting in Jammu and Kashmir after the elections when Mufti Saheb gave
support, we welcomed it. The scene at that meeting must have stunned the
neighbour. Even if it didn’t stun them, in our hearts it created an
enthusiasm. We are here because of these people and these people are with us.
The poison of communalism will not work, people want to live in peace. So many
people died in the elections, so many were injured, if you were to make a
count you’ll realise that the people of Jammu and Kashmir made a huge
sacrifice by endangering their lives.
That
day, I realised that it is time to take a new step. At the same time, an
international incident took place and I don’t want to go into its details. But
the manner in which Iraq was attacked, the United Nations left ineffective and
neutral, it struck me that it was time to think of the future of smaller
countries, developing countries, and non-aligned countries. I consider this a
change of direction. The American attack on Iraq and the victory of the people
in Jammu and Kashmir may appear to be separate incidents but these are
linked...(interruption)
Avtar Singh Bhadana:
The BJP was defeated in this...(interruption)
A.B. Vajpayee:
We are not discussing victory or defeats here. We are always prepared to lose.
Because we lose, we are sitting here and you’ve ended up there...(interruption)
Avtar Singh Bhadana:
There was a time when we used to sit there and you here. We will again make it
there.
A.B. Vajpayee:
It doesn’t matter. I don’t want to get into this. Mr Speaker, I realised that
day that I needed to start a new chapter. We can go on repeating like you
wanted to know whether terrorism has stopped. If I say terrorism has come
down, then you will say reduction means nothing, it has to stop totally.
Terrorists too are divided. There’s politics even amongst them. It will be a
serious matter if all terrorists were to emerge from one source. But the
reality is different. We even got signals that things are changing and the
people of Jammu and Kashmir have given a fractured verdict. We said this is
the time to extend a hand of friendship, provided Pakistan abandons
cross-border terrorism and dismantles the infra-structure in place there. The
talks haven’t begun yet, only the preparatory exercises are being done. When
Pakistan’s Prime Minister spoke to me over the telephone, he said let us
decide on playing a hockey match. I told him I know you play hockey very well,
that you have been a hockey captain yourself, that you used to select your own
players. I can understand why you are talking of hockey.
What
I cannot understand, Mr Jamali, is this — assuming that India and Pakistan are
playing a hockey match before huge crowds, and we get the news that terrorists
have attacked Jammu and killed over 50 innocent men, women and children. What
sort of a match will this be then? What will be the reaction to such a match?
Whatever you and I may think, can such a match foster friendship? That is why
I said terrorism has to stop. I do not want to repeat what he said. But he
told me that even his country is troubled by terrorism, a crime which they are
battling even there. He said let us battle terrorism together. After this, we
thought of interaction. I want to assure all honourablemembers who’ve sounded
a warning that we will definitely be alert.
Hum
bhi doodh ke jale hain, chaach ko phook phook kar piyenge (We’ve had our
experience, and we’ll be cautious). It doesn’t behove a great country like
India to become immobile, not to take any initiative, not to take any steps,
and to sit with our hands tied.
Everyone knows our commitment to peace. Pakistan’s terrorism has got no
support. Support lies with the people of Jammu and Kashmir. The foreigners who
went to witness the elections in Jammu and Kashmir came to the conclusion that
people had given their verdict, peacefully at that, despite the bullets.
We
should respect that. The world will respect that. At least we should give it
maximum importance. A new chapter has begun. Come, let us get together and
take it forward. Nobody wants that Jammu and Kashmir should go. I don’t
understand how Soniaji could say such a thing. Jammu and Kashmir will never
go. Who’s saying it will go? Whoever says it will go, can that person live
here? Nobody has said such a thing. I don’t know who...I don’t want to get
into this. It’s a fact that nobody can break Jammu and Kashmir. Jammu and
Kashmir has three parts, separate divisions. They have been living together
for generations. If there is a new arrangement, even there they’ll remain
together.
Mulayam Singh Yadav:
Please tell us what will be the new arrangement. Are you echoing the old Sangh
Parivar and American view of splitting the State into Ladakh, Kashmir and
Jammu?
A.B. Vajpayee:
What is he saying?
Mulayam Singh Yadav:
Do you want to divide the three in the new arrangement?
A.B. Vajpayee:
Mulayam Singhji, you never stop harping. Dr Lohia came up with the idea of a
confederation. The confederation didn’t take place then, nor will it take
place now.
Mulayam Singh Yadav:
If there’s no confederation, there will never be any friendship. Take this
down, I’m saying this in the House.
A.B. Vajpayee:
This is your view. Our view is different. Despite our different views, you and
I are still friends.
Mulayam Singh Yadav:
I am only welcoming you, giving you support.
A.B. Vajpayee:
Not just confederation, across the world countries are getting together to
form big unions.
Mulayam Singh Yadav:
Now tell us is this your last attempt or will this continue?
A.B. Vajpayee:
Entire Europe is becoming one. The erstwhile Communist countries too are
joined.
Mulayam Singh Yadav:
Is this your last attempt or will this continue?
A.B. Vajpayee:
This is the Dharm Yug. Countries should not get divided or split. Everyone
should get together and work towards economic development. It is very
important to have unity for this.
Somnath Chatterjee:
That’s right.
Ramdas Athwale:
We are with you.
A.B. Vajpayee:
Even the comrade is supporting me.
Somnath Chatterjee:
Do you not want my support?
Speaker:
Ramdas Athwale is with you. You don’t need the support of others.
Somnath Chatterjee:
As long as Athwale remains with you, people will remain with you.
A.B. Vajpayee:
Some more questions were raised. Pakistan has been talking of de-nuclearisation.
It wants to de-nuclearise South Asia. This is not acceptable to us. Pakistan’s
atomic programme is India specific. But ours is not Pakistan specific.
Pakistan is not our only concern. We have to look at the environment of
countries in the region. We’ve adopted a nuclear doctrine in which we have
said no first use. Pakistan has not made such a declaration. It has refused to
make such a declaration. Then what is the meaning of a no-war pact. Malhotraji
was right when he said there should be a no-proxy war pact. Mr Speaker, more
questions were raised. I don’t want to go into their details but I would like
to say that the world today is plagued with problems and if we don’t decide to
move in a definite direction, there will be problems.
To
search for peace is no crime. Whether we succeed or fail, it’s a different
matter. Who wants failure. But because we may fail, we decide not to do
anything is also wrong. A large country like India cannot decide like this.
Nor has independent India ever taken such a decision. We never opposed the
Simla Agreement. We didn’t oppose because we knew there was friendship there.
But we opposed, because despite the Simla Agreement, the problem of Jammu and
Kashmir was not resolved.
There can be different views, there can be differences, and these can be
expressed. But when the world looks at India, it expects us to speak in one
voice, whatever differences we may have should be sorted within. Mr Speaker, I
would like to thank everyone and hope that whatever consensus emerges will be
carried forward. Thank you.
The Indian express,
10 May 2003
Retrieved from
<http://www.indianexpress.com/archive_full_story.php?content_id=23562>
MPs Play Host to Pak Team, Talk Peace
New Delhi, May 9:
With
veteran CPI (M) parliamentarian Somnath Chatterjee’s sandesh (a Bengali sweet)
diplomacy marking the day, Parliament members and the 12-member delegation of
Pakistani senators, today vowed to isolate the fundamentalist elements on both
sides to carry forward the latest peace initiative.
The
five-course breakfast meeting at Chatterjee’s residence, initiated and
described by Nirmala Deshpande (of the Indo-Pak Forum fame) as ‘‘god
ordained’’, had the Pakistan delegation leader Ishaq Khan Khakwani saying that
the extremist elements on both sides of the border need to be isolated for the
peace initiative and good neighbourly relations to take off.
Khakwani is also said to have advised the Indian side to not only ‘‘not
trust’’ the fundamentalist elements but also to keep the bureaucrats on either
side of the table at arms length.
Describing the meeting as ‘‘a very good beginning’’, host-of-the-day
Chatterjee said: ‘‘The Pakistan delegation invited Indian parliamentarians to
visit their country later in the year — of course unofficially!’’
Chatterjee later said that the two sides felt there was no reason why peace,
friendship and mutual cooperation between India and Pakistan could not be
re-established. ‘‘But what was most needed was increased people-to-people
contact which was completely cut due to the unfortunate events of the past one
year,’’ he said.
Adding that they had an open and informal discussion on wide-ranging issues,
he said now the issue before them was how to create a conducive atmosphere in
both the countries for revival of trade, cultural and sporting ties.
Chatterjee regretted that it was just a beginning and won’t be an easy task as
neither the BJP nor the PM agreed to give the Pakistan delegation time for an
informal meeting.
RJD
MP Raghuvansh Prasad Singh said: ‘‘It was an extremely cordial meeting where
everyone expressed hope that the commercial-cultural relations will normalise
and the dialogue process would begin soon.’’
He
added in a rather excited tone: ‘‘We have been invited to Pakistan!’’
Samajwadi Party chief Mulayam Singh Yadav, who seemed more taken up with the
‘‘excellent quality’’ of the sandesh Chatterjee served, thankfully did not run
the famous India-Pakistan confederation theory at the meeting. However, the
quote of the day came from Pakistan Muslim League (Qaid-e-Azam) Shehnaz
Sheikh: ‘‘Let us not be arm-twisted, but be ready for a handshake.’’
The
Indian side was represented among others by former prime minister H.D. Deve
Gowda, Congress leaders Shivraj Patil and Saifuddin Soz (who lamented he could
not interact enough with the Pakistani side), and CPI(M) MPs Nilotpal Basu,
Rupchand Pal, Hannan Mollah and A.K. Premajam.
After the looch-aloo dam-cum-kabab breakfast, they went for a meeting with
Congress leader Mani Shankar Aiyar and former PM I.K. Gujral at the India
International Centre, followed by a dinner date at former Union minister Ram
Vilas Paswan’s residence.
The
Pakistani delegation which has come here ‘‘on an unofficial visit’’ with SAARC
visa will be touring three other cities — Kolkata, Mumbai and Hyderabad.
Santwana
Bhattacharya, The Indian Express, 10 May 2003
Retrieved from
<http://www.indianexpress.com/archive_full_story.php?content_id=23600>
Pakistan Seeks Composite Talks
KARACHI, May 10:
Foreign Minister Khurshid Mehmood Kasuri said on Saturday that Pakistan wanted
America to have a meaningful role in the resolution of disputes in South Asia
and President Musharraf, during his forthcoming visit to the US, would discuss
all aspects related to promoting peace and bilateral issues.
Mr Kasuri was speaking
at the Nazaria-i-Pakistan Foundation on the eve of a visit to the US. He said:
"We want the US to have a meaningful role in South Asia and the United States
is doing that for the resolution of disputes."
He told a questioner
that during his US visit President Musharraf would discuss the South Asian
issues so that the Kashmir question could be settled in accordance with the
wishes of the Kashmiris.
During his visit,
President Musharraf would also take up the question of enhancing Pakistan
exports quota to the US and multi-year financial assistance. The minister said
the US had adopted a liberal attitude towards Pakistan in dealing with the
immigration issue.
Mr Kasuri said that
Pakistan had emphasized that New Delhi should initiate a structured and
composite dialogue with Islamabad for resolving all outstanding issues,
including the core issue of Kashmir.
He told a questioner
that the current initiative for normalization of relations with India had the
full support of President Musharraf, the armed forces and opposition parties.
He felt no solution of
the Kashmir issue would be viable or long-lasting unless the wishes of
Kashmiris were taken into consideration.
He said the dialogue
between Pakistan and India would start from where it had ended at Agra in July
2001.
"The best we can do at
the moment is to develop a process of dialogue. If we start talking of a
solution now, vested interests might circumvent it. Start talking on all
issues and at the same time involve Kashmiris on both sides of the LoC because
they have the greatest stake in peace," Mr Kasuri said.
He said there was no
similarity between the situation in Iraq and occupied Kashmir. India was
violating UN Security Council resolutions on Kashmir, he said.
Mr Kasuri pointed out
that President Musharraf had given his word that there was no infiltration
across the LoC, and said Pakistan had urged the international community to
deploy neutral observers on both sides of LoC to verify the truth about
alleged infiltration….
Dawn, 11 May 2003,
Retrieved from <http://www.dawn.com/2003/05/11/top3.htm>
Armitage Urges End To Kashmir Violence
Says no
assurance on infiltration; US wants India, Pakistan to live side by side;
meets Indian leaders
NEW DELHI: US Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage on
Saturday called upon India and Pakistan to "live side by side" and find a way
to end violence in disputed Kashmir.
After spending most of Saturday in meetings with Indian leaders,
including Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, Armitage said he was
"cautiously optimistic" that both the neighbours were on the road to peace.
"We would like to see two great nations, India and Pakistan, live side by
side," he said and added "It's a long trip to get there, and I just hope we've
begun a process."
Armitage, who is travelling with Assistant Secretary of State
Christina Rocca, first held talks with External Affairs Minister Yashwant
Sinha before meeting with opposition leader Sonia Gandhi. During the 40-minute
meeting, they discussed wide-ranging bilateral, regional and international
issues, including the Indo-Pak developments and the situation in Afghanistan.
Sonia Gandhi told Armitage that there was a broad consensus among various
political parties on India's foreign policy and the Indo-Pak ties, said media
sources.
Armitage also met with Deputy Prime Minister L K Advani and extended an
invitation from Vice-President Dick Cheney to visit Washington next month.
Armitage said he spoke with Indian leaders about the aftermath of the Iraq
war, which had been criticised by New Delhi. "We talked generally about
reconstruction," he said, adding however: "We made no specific
requests."Foreign Ministry spokesman Navtej Sarna said the US envoy and Indian
leaders exchanged views on Iraq, China and North Korea. He said Armitage gave
an update on high-technology transfers and other bilateral programmes.
Sarna said Vajpayee's peace initiative was not a substitute for New Delhi's
demand that Islamabad halt the cross-border infiltration of militants. "The
PM's peace initiative is designed to create easier conditions for Pakistan to
respond favourably to India's demand of ending cross-border terrorism," he
said. "President Musharraf told me there is nothing happening across the Line
of Control," Armitage said, adding, and if the training camps are there, on
the Pakistani side of the LoC, they will be gone by tomorrow."
Sarna said India has heard it all before. "We've received these assurances
before and they have not been translated into reality. We judge Pakistan by
what they do and not by what they say," he said. Reporters asked Armitage
whether Washington could guarantee cross-border infiltration had been curbed.
"It is not my job to give assurances," he said, adding that Pakistan had been
a great ally in the US-led global war on terrorism. "The fact of the matter is
that people are dying, women and children," Armitage said of Kashmir.
"Whenever innocent non-combatants die for political purposes, we call it
terrorism. All the violence has got to end, the US leader added.
The News, 11 May,
2003 Retrieved from
<http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/may2003-daily/11-05-2003/main/main2.htm>
Peace Prospects In South Asia
Domestic compulsions,
external diplomatic pressures and Pakistan's refusal to be blackmailed by
India's 'pre-emption daydream' prompted Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee to
restore full diplomatic ties with Pakistan. Addressing the parliament on April
23, Vajpayee said, "We are committed to the improvement of relations with
Pakistan and are willing to grasp every opportunity for doing so."
He went on to add, "We
have repeatedly expressed the need to create a conducive atmosphere for a
sustained dialogue which necessarily requires an end to cross-border terrorism
and the dismantling of its infrastructure." India had earlier ruled out any
dialogue with Pakistan at any level unless the so-called cross-border
terrorism ended - an allegation that Pakistan firmly rejects.
India had unilaterally
downgraded its diplomatic ties and snapped rail, road and air links with
Pakistan following an attack on India's parliament in December 2001, the
causes of which are shrouded in mystery. The policy made Saarc a hostage to
its intransigence, prevented cricket matches with Pakistan, and sabotaged
Saarc games which were due some time ago in Islamabad.
In mid-April, Foreign
Minister Yashwant Sinha, discarding his thin veneer of diplomacy, threatened
that Pakistan was "a fit case" for pre-emptive strikes by India. This led
Foreign Minister Khursheed Mehmood Kasuri of Pakistan to announce that it was
India that was a more appropriate case for pre-emptive action for its
consistent violations of UN resolutions on Kashmir. The rhetoric exposed the
mindset of India's ruling junta.
New Delhi's decision to
restore full diplomatic ties with Islamabad may be a genuine strategic leap
away from the hostile past and promote friendship in the future. Given India's
past performance, many in Pakistan seriously doubt Vajpayee's ability to
change the course of history. A more plausible reason may be a tactical
necessity prompted by external and internal factors.
India is under
increasing pressure from the US and other countries for initiating meaningful
negotiations with Pakistan. Its domestic compulsions include ground realities
- political, economic, psychological, military and others. The latter
possibility rings the bell of truth because the political hawks that surround
Vajpayee had earlier turned the Agra summit from success to failure. Vajpayee
faces a credibility gap.
The ruling BJP is not
reconciled to the creation of Pakistan and dreams of converting South Asia
into Akhand Bharat under the guise of a confederation. Advani has made this
preposterous proposal more than once.
Subash Desai, general
secretary of Shiv Sena, says, "There is no use talking to Pakistan." Pravin
Togadiya, general secretary of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), emits venom
thus, "We want our military tanks in Lahore, missiles in Rawalpindi and the
saffron (Hindu) flag in Karachi."
It is for Vajpayee to
demonstrate if he has the vision for a better future and the political clout
to tame the forces of Hindu extremism in India to promote durable peace and
stability in South Asia based on the sovereign equality of all regional
countries. So far Hindu extremism has had a field day under his BJP-led
coalition rule.
Impartial observers had
reported that Hindu militants in Gujarat State were encouraged by the ruling
BJP government to play Holi with the blood of 3,000 slain Muslims to win over
Hindu votes in state elections. Prime Minister Vajpayee was not a helpless
spectator to the premeditated gory drama played out by Hindu chauvinists in
the home state of Mahatma Gandhi.
Notwithstanding such
grave doubts and misgivings, Pakistan has adopted a positive and constructive
approach to easing bilateral tension largely created from across the border.
Prime Minister Zafarullah Khan Jamali's telephone conversation with Vajpayee,
followed by a formal invitation to him to visit Pakistan for bilateral talks,
are appreciated across the globe. The Vajpayee-Jamali initiative is a move in
the right direction and every effort should be made to promote tranquillity
and peace.
The issues
in dispute are political in nature. They have to be settled by political
means. The bureaucrats should only play a subordinate role in this process.
The causes of tension should be removed. The people of Kashmir must get their
right of self-determination, particularly when such rights are increasingly
being given to all deprived people elsewhere in the world.
The 17-month long
military standoff caused by India's unilateral knee-jerk act hurt both
countries. But, for Pakistan, it was not without a gain or two. It gave
confidence to Pakistan in its crisis-management capacity and ability. It
showed that its national economy, still not robust, has the resilience to
withstand economic shocks and pressures.
The positive indicators
included the rising foreign exchange reserves, increasing exports, growing
foreign remittances, a low inflation rate, decreasing fiscal deficit,
reduction in debt-service liability and a reasonable recovery of bad debts and
bank loans.
On the whole, the
economic burden on the national exchequer remained within the ability of the
country to bear. While a lot more can and should be done in these fields, what
was achieved under difficult conditions had a healthy impact on people and
gave confidence to the planners of national economy.
On the political side,
democracy is in place and elections have resulted in the formation of
representative governments at the federal and provincial levels. Some teething
problems persist and a combined government-opposition committee is currently
at work to evolve a mutually acceptable solution.
The law and order
situation has improved, with many criminals and offenders brought to justice.
The Bugti complaints against Sui Northern Gas Pipeline Ltd. (SNGPL) led to
disruption of gas supplies to some parts of the country for a few days but the
contentious issue of payment of gas royalty was settled.
The national airliner,
PIA, performed well despite facing the twin burden of denial of India's
airspace and pressures caused by war in Iraq. The disruption of air flights
hurt India itself rather badly by increasing fuel costs and decreasing
business. Besides, Indian airlines could not directly fly to Afghanistan.
India is thus extremely overtly keen on the restoration of overflying rights.
The danger of military
confrontation brought the 55-year old Kashmir dispute under a sharp global
focus. India and Pakistan are being advised by all external powers to
negotiate a permanent settlement of this dispute by taking into consideration
the will of the people of the state. The Kashmir dispute can no longer be
relegated to the backburner. The global opinion favours a negotiated
settlement. US Secretary of State Colin Powell calls it the 'moment of
opportunity.' Both countries should seize it.
Vajpayee has his
domestic difficulties. Pakistan should firmly project its viewpoint without
resorting to political rhetoric. It must demonstrate national unity at this
time, start negotiations with cautious optimism and show to the world that,
without compromising its national interests, it will travel half-way for
promoting durable peace in South Asia.
In doing so, this
country will never compromise the rights of the people of Kashmir, nor
sacrifice its own national interests. Kashmir has strategic significance for
Pakistan. The river water flowing out of Kashmir into Pakistan constitutes its
lifeline. Pakistan is committed to peace but will never compromise either on
its national security or on the rights of the people of Kashmir.
India's coercive
diplomacy cannot browbeat this country. Peace and stability in South Asia is
in the mutual interest of both India and Pakistan. Their own prosperity and
that of the region are linked with this process. To live and let live as
sovereign independent countries is the only viable and sensible option for
India and Pakistan. Warmongering is harmful for both countries and should be
abjured. Let New Delhi and Islamabad shun hostilities and promote peace by
removing the basic causes of tension. This demands political vision and
firmness for reining in the forces of extremism on both sides.
Fools ignite fires of
hatred; the wise win the hearts of their friends and adversaries. Vajpayee and
Zafarullah are on trial. Their choice is clear. They can rise to the occasion
and leave their imprints on the sands of time. Or, they may fade away as
ordinary mortals and get dumped in the dustbin of history.
Khalid Mahmud Arif, Dawn, 12 May 2003
Retrieved from
<http://www.dawn.com/2003/05/12/op.htm#2>
A Foreign Office Press Conference, Addressed By The Foreign Office Spokesman
On 12 May 2003 (Extract)
Question-Answer Session
* When his attention was drawn to a news item appearing in a section
of the press that Pakistan had agreed to the freezing of the Kashmir issue and
was willing to restore normal trade and commerce relations with India; the
Spokesman said:
That
report is a total rubbish. Pakistan’s stand has been that Kashmir is the core
issue and it should be resolved in accordance with the wishes of the Kashmiri
people. It is unfortunate and irresponsible that such reports appear quoting
unnamed sources when quotable sources are available to give official position.
* When his attention was drawn to an interview of Indian Security
Adviser, Mr. Rajesh Mishra to a TV channel saying that India had a clear
road-map for negotiations with Pakistan on Kashmir and a similar claim by
Sheikh Rashid Ahmed, Federal Information Minister appearing in the local
press; could he share with the media the salient features of that road-map
which was reported to be ready with both the Governments – India and Pakistan;
the Spokesman said:
You
are very well aware of the Government’s policy. As far as Pakistan is
concerned, the Government’s policy is that Pakistan is ready for a composite
dialogue on all outstanding issues with India including the core issue of
Jammu and Kashmir. Once the dialogue starts we will proceed from thereon.
* When his attention was drawn to a statement of Indian Security
Adviser regarding New Delhi’s suggestion to form an axis of US, Israel and
India to fight terrorism; the Spokesman said:
As
far as fight against terrorism is concerned, Pakistan is an important member
of the coalition and has played in this regard a more important role than any
other country. The entire international community is well aware of the fact
and has praised Pakistan’s role on that account.
* Asked whether Pakistan and India had maintained some kind of
contacts after initial dialogue offers from both sides, and whether Pakistan
had decided the name of its High Commissioner to New Delhi; the Spokesman
said:
As
far as the contact is concerned, it is through normal diplomatic channels.
Both the countries - India and Pakistan - have their High Commissions in
place. But there has been not any specific movement forward with regard to
dialogue between the two countries. However, we hope that the dialogue process
would start very soon.
As
far as the second part of your question is concerned, as soon as a decision is
made by the Government of Pakistan, it will be made public.
* When his comments were sought on Mr. Vajpayee’s refusal to give up
India’s nuclear programme after a proposal from Pakistan; the Spokesman said:
Pakistan had always worked towards the establishment of South Asia as a
Nuclear Weapons Free Zone. That reality changed after the Indian nuclear tests
and Pakistan was forced to have its own nuclear tests and since then the
situation is as you see it. We have demonstrated that we will honour the new
responsibilities and the new status that we have. We will carry it out as a
fully responsible State. Our Command and Control structure in this regard is
impeccable and other countries have expressed satisfaction about that.
* When his comments were sought on a series of recent missile tests
by India; the Spokesman said:
India’s missile programme is very well known. Its ambitions to keep augmenting
and increasing its missiles programme is no secret.
* To a question about allowing India to over-fly Pakistani territory;
the Spokesman said:
It
is a subject between the Civil Aviation Authorities of the two countries. When
they meet the entire range of issues regarding flights etc., will be
discussed.
* To a supplementary question whether a political decision in that
regard had been taken by the two Governments; the Spokesman said:
So
far as Pakistan is concerned, we have announced the resumption of flights. Now
the two sides have to meet to work that out. Once they meet other subjects can
also be discussed….
* Asked whether there was any proposal that Pakistan should appeal to
the Kashmiri freedom fighters to stop their struggle during dialogue between
India and Pakistan; the Spokesman said:
The
Kashmir struggle is indigenous. It is for the Kashmiris to decide what they
wish to do. Pakistan has always given diplomatic and moral support to the
Kashmiris and it will continue to do the same.
* When his comments were sought on a reported statement by a former
Chief Minister of Indian held Kashmir Mr. Farooq Abdullah that the Kashmir
issue could not be resolved without involving the Kashmiris; the Spokesman
said:
The
Kashmir issue has to be resolved by the Kashmiri people principally. The whole
core point of the resolution of the Kashmir issue is that it should be
resolved in accordance with the wishes of the Kashmiri people and that has
been Pakistan’s stand point.
* To a question with regard to applicability of UNSC resolutions on
Kashmir in the existing scenario; the Spokesman said:
As
far as UNSC resolutions are concerned, they ask for a UN supervised plebiscite
in Kashmir for the Kashmiri people to express their wishes. We have always
asked for the implementation of the UNSC resolutions, so that the Kashmiri
people, in an independent plebiscite, can express their wish i.e. whether they
want to join Pakistan or India. This has been a very clear stand point and no
two opinions about it.
* When his attention was drawn to APHC leader Ali Gilani’s remarks a
couple of days ago saying that ‘Pakistan first’ slogan was tantamount to
getting rid of Kashmir; the Spokesman said:
As
far as ‘Pakistan first’ policy is concerned, it relates to Pakistan. As far as
Pakistan’s standpoint about the Kashmir issue is concerned there has never
been any change, any dilution; or any doubt. The Kashmir issue will be
resolved and should be resolved in accordance with the wishes of the Kashmiri
people and the UNSC resolutions. This has been Pakistan’s position for the
last over five decades.
* When asked about the holding of the SAARC Summit and new dates if
fixed; the Spokesman said:
We
are going to propose certain dates to the SAARC’ Secretary General who will
consult all the member States and then come back to us. We hope to be
submitting new dates to the SAARC Secretariat very soon. We hope that every
country would respond positively so that the Summit which has been delayed for
too long is held.
* Asked if there was any pressure on Pakistan and India for
resumption of dialogue;
the
Spokesman recalled recent remarks of US Deputy Secretary of State Richard
Armitage that his country was not exerting any pressure on either country.
* On the oft-repeated Indian allegation of cross-border terrorism;
the Spokesman reiterated Pakistan’s position of stationing neutral observers
along the Line of Control.
He
said it was a very reasonable proposal and could be tried to verify the
veracity of Indian allegations.
* Asked as to why the Government was not calling back the ‘exiled’
leaders to get benefit from their wisdom with regard to the ensuing dialogue
with India;
The
Spokesman said that the Prime Minister Mir Zafarullah Khan Jamali had already
taken all the opposition and allied parties into confidence on that account.
* About the proposed visit of President General Pervez Musharraf to
the United States;
The
Spokesman said that dates had not yet been finalized. He said all matters of
bilateral interests as well as regional and international concern, including
Pakistan-Indian relations and Kashmir would come under discussion during the
visit.
Ministry of Foreign
Affairs Pakistan, 12 May 2003
Retrieved from
<http://www.forisb.org/briefings/FOS03-16.htm>
Pakistan to Free Prisoners
ISLAMABAD, MAY 13. The
process set in motion for normalisation of Indo-Pakistan relations by the
Prime Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee, with his April 17 statement at a public
rally is beginning to take off with the first small steps promised by both
sides taking a concrete shape.
As India formally
announced the appointment of Shiv Shankar Menon as the new envoy to Pakistan,
Islamabad formally communicated to New Delhi its decision to release three
separate categories of prisoners lodged in different parts of Pakistan. In
response to the initiatives announced by Mr. Vajpayee, the Pakistan Prime
Minister, Mir Zafarullah Khan Jamali, announced last Tuesday that Islamabad
had decided to release all Indian prisoners. These included 16 crewmembers of
the cargo ship, "Raj Lakshmi" that sank off the Karachi coast, 22 Sikh youths
who were pushed into Pakistan from Iran and 200 fishermen who had strayed into
the Pakistani territorial waters while fishing.
B. Muralidhar Reddy,
14 May 2003, Retrieved from <http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/2003/05/14/stories/2003051405030100.htm>
Terrorism Must End For Talks: Indian PM
Maintaining that India
was not setting any conditions, the Prime Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee,
today said it was necessary that terrorist infrastructure across the border be
dismantled and terrorism ended for a conducive atmosphere to be created for a
dialogue with Pakistan.
"Terrorism should end.
Terrorist camps and infrastructure across the border should be dismantled.
That will open the door for talks," he told reporters here on arrival for a
six-day holiday here. Asked if an end to cross-border was a pre-condition for
talks, Mr. Vajpayee said "it is not a condition... it is necessary. We are not
calling it a pre-condition. But without that (end to cross-border terrorism)
how can a conducive atmosphere be created?"
To a question about
Pakistan's stand that talks should be unconditional, he said, "(the talk of)
unconditional (talks) has no meaning".. — PTI
The Hindu, 14 May 2003, Retrieved from
<http://www.Hinduonnet.Com/Thehindu/2003/05/14/stories/2003051405010100.htm>
No Preconditions For Talks: Delhi
NEW DELHI, May 13: Indian Prime Minister
Atal Behari Vajpayee said on Tuesday that cross-border terrorism should end to
create a conducive atmosphere for talks with Pakistan, but stressed that this
was no precondition for the peace process he initiated recently.
Mr Vajpayee's remarks,
made to reporters in Manali, were welcomed promptly by a visiting delegation
of Pakistani parliamentarians who described him as a man of peace.
"Terrorism should end.
Terrorist camps and infrastructure across the border should be dismantled.
That will open the door for talks," Mr Vajpayee said.
According to the Press
Trust of India, he was asked if an end to what New Delhi calls cross-border
terrorism was a pre-condition for talks with Pakistan. It quoted Mr Vajpayee
as responding: "It is not a condition, it is necessary. We are not calling it
a pre-condition. But without that (end to cross-border terrorism) how can a
conducive atmosphere be created?"
Three members of the
12-member parliamentary delegation from Pakistan, who were in Kolkata on
Tuesday, said Mr Vajpayee was the best person to negotiate peace between the
two countries.
"I have no doubt that
Mr Vajpayee is the best person to solve Indo-Pak hostilities as he is a man of
peace and a strong leader," said PML-Q's Ishaq Khan Khakwani at a
meet-the-press programme.
The meeting was
organized under the auspices of the Pakistan- India Peoples' Forum for Peace
and Democracy. "For peace you need a strong leader and we think that Mr
Vajpayee is a strong leader. So is our Prime Minister Zafarullah Khan Jamali
and President Pervez Musharraf," Mr Khakwani said with the concurrence of his
own party colleague M.P. Bhandara and PPP member Shakila Rashid, United News
of India reported.
The three MPs
criticized the role of Lashkar-i-Taiba and said Pakistan was as much against
terrorism as India. "The Lashkar is under heavy scrutiny in our country. It
has killed our men too. How can we support it?" asked Mr Bhandara. "It is not
the two governments who are responsible for the killings but terrorism. People
and governments of both countries want peace and friendship but terrorism is
the real enemy," he said.
A second group of the
Pakistani MPs, in Mumbai on Tuesday, suggested a union between India, Pakistan
and Bangladesh on the lines of the European Union to develop trade. "This is
just a suggestion but it is ultimately for the governments to chalk out
modalities for such an initiative," leader of the delegation in Mumbai, Saleem
Jan Mazari, clarified at an interactive session organized by the Indian
Merchants' Chamber.
Mr Vajpayee, responding
to a question about Pakistan's stand that talks should be unconditional,
appeared dismissive; saying the word unconditional could be understood
differently.
Asked what would happen
if terrorism did not end, the prime minister shot back, saying: "It should
end". He said he had extended the hand of friendship to Pakistan. "Let us see
what is their response."
Jawed Naqvi, Dawn, 14 May 2003
Retrieved from < http://www.dawn.com/2003/05/14/top11.htm>
New
Delhi offers '97 format for talks: Security and Kashmir top Agenda
NEW DELHI, May 14:
Indian Foreign Minister Yashwant Sinha has proposed a "six-plus-two" format
for talks with Pakistan in which confidence-building measures and Kashmir will
be discussed by foreign secretaries and the political leadership, leaving six
other key issues for technical committees, reports and analysts said on
Wednesday
Mr Sinha, in remarks to
the Asian Age newspaper, warned that failure of talks between the two
countries could have serious consequences but declined to say what these
consequences might be.
The paper quoted Mr
Sinha as saying that the dialogue should be "based on the six-plus-two-point
agenda prepared by the respective foreign secretaries in 1997 with additions,
if necessary."
Analysts told Dawn that
the format though rooted in the pre-nuclear agenda between the two countries
was given new validity when Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee and
then Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif "operationalized" the structure following
their meeting in New York in September 1998.
Diplomatic sources said
it was significant that the first point in the format spelt out by Mr Sinha
focused on confidence building-measures dealing with nuclear and conventional
security.
The second point kept
for discussion by the foreign secretaries and the higher political leadership
is the issue of Jammu and Kashmir.
The format was agreed
upon in November 1997 by Indian and Pakistan foreign secretaries Salman Haider
and Shamshad Ahmed, respectively, under the guidance of then prime ministers
Inder Kumar Gujral and Nawaz Sharif, when Mr Haider had visited Islamabad.
The remaining six
points in the composite dialogue, to be addressed by technical committees
comprising officials, are: Wullar barrage, Siachen, Sir Creek, drug
trafficking and terrorism, economic and commercial cooperation, and promotion
of friendly exchanges in various fields.
"It is not just a
question of starting the dialogue but taking. it to a conclusion, it has to be
sustained over a period of time," Mr Sinha told the Asian Age.
Mr Sinha spoke of "a
timeframe on implementing the confidence-building measures". The re-posting of
high commissioners and restoration of air links are to be the first of these.
He made it clear that the dialogue would have meaning only if it was
sustained.
"I hope that everyone
realizes the seriousness and sincerity of the prime minister's offer of peace
and the risks involved if we fail," Mr Sinha said.
Asked to define the
risks, Mr Sinha said: "I will leave these undefined for the moment." He said
the CBMs suggested by the prime minister should be put in place to build a
level of trust before the talks, and "we should work on these steps in a
timeframe."
He said he could not
specify the timeframe as "it takes two to tango" and much would depend on
adequate responses from Pakistan. Both countries should adopt a "step-by-step
approach," he said.
In reply to a question
on Mr Vajpayee's "lessons to be learnt from Iraq", Mr Sinha said: "There is a
new reality after Iraq, forcefully brought home to all countries. The
developing countries, the weaker countries at this point of time have to make
a realistic assessment."
Asked did this mean
taking a position out of fear, he said: "It is not a position out of fear but
out of realistic assessment".
He said there was no
need to abandon the agenda drawn up by the foreign secretaries earlier and to
draw up a new list of items to be discussed. If any side wanted to make any
additions it could discuss the matter and do so. He said India was not adding
anything at this point of time.
Mr Sinha was
"categorical" that Pakistan must stop "cross- border terrorism and dismantle
its terrorist infrastructure" if it was serious about talks. Asked if he had
received any indicators that Pakistan was doing anything on this front, Mr
Sinha said: "We have not received any positive assurance on this from anyone".
He rejected the
suggestion that talks would help in reducing terrorism, describing this as a
"very curious statement." He explained his point thus: "If they say nothing is
happening, then how can the nothing come down with talks."
Mr. Sinha said talks
and cross-border terrorism "cannot go together, it is not practical or morally
right."
Jawed Naqvi, The Dawn, 15 May 2003
Retrieved from <http://www.dawn.com/2003/05/15/Top7.htm
>
US Road Map Focuses on Speeding Up Dialogue
Despite its denials, Washington does seem to have a very
specific roadmap for facilitating peace in the Indian subcontinent.In
the second part of an exclusive series based on official mission papers
prepared by the American embassy in Islamabad, we look at Washington's
time-specific agenda for securing peace on the subcontinent.
If things go according to the American
plan, India and Pakistan should resume a formal dialogue this year even as the
two sides further reduce their forces on the border. The last formal dialogue
between Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf and Prime Minister Atal Bihari
Vajpayee collapsed in Agra in July 2001. India is therefore averse to a
high-profile summit as demanded by Pakistan until the groundwork is done. The
American papers propose two basic measures to speed up the process of
dialogue: one, to stress the 'futility and unacceptability of major military
conflict as a means to redress bilateral disputes'; two, to promote 'tension
management mechanisms' and confidence-building measures. This year, Washington
also hopes to broaden the 'frequency and scope' of military-to-military
contacts between India and Pakistan, which are limited at the moment to a
hotline conversation between the directors general of military operations of
the two countries every Tuesday and contacts along the border in case of
exigencies like handing over of corpses. In 2004, India and Pakistan should be
nudged to develop 'diplomatic and political alternatives to military pressure'
to address 'bilateral disputes', and negotiate new confidence-building
measures, or CBMs. Finally, in 2005, when these CBMs are implemented, the US
hopes to see 'diplomatic and political solutions used successfully to address
bilateral issues'. This is when a framework for the 'eventual political
resolution of Kashmir' will be laid out. 'Indo-Pakistani stability is critical
for Pakistan to move forward in key areas. Bilateral conflict has harmed both
India and Pakistan, economically, socially and politically, for years; the
current standoff has drained GOP [Government
of Pakistan] of funds
that are urgently needed in the social and economic sectors,' say the
embassy's papers.
According to the papers,
Indo-Pak détente is essential to 'regional stability; until the two nuclear
countries commit to political and diplomatic solutions, the threat of nuclear
war, intentional or triggered by an accident, casts a shadow over all of South
Asia'. At present, 'the two countries are locked in a dangerous diplomatic and
military stalemate that could lead to open conflict. We will continue to make
aggressive diplomatic efforts to defuse these tensions and set the two
countries on a path toward cooperation rather than confrontation. This is an
enormous task, with tremendous benefits if we succeed, and potentially
disastrous consequences if we do not. High-level US diplomatic engagement with
both countries must be sustained. The US mission believes the 'restoration of
democratic rule and further progress in curbing Pakistani support for
extremist activities' would lead to 'fundamentally better Pakistani relations
with India'. And for that, the mission has a detailed map as well.
Josy Joseph, 16 May 2003
Retrieved from <http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/may/16spec.htm>
Islamabad Names HC To New Delhi: Track-2 Diplomacy From
June 12
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan on
Saturday named its ambassador to China, Riaz Mohammad Khan, to be its high
commissioner in New Delhi, four days after a similar move by India.
Prime Minister
Zafarullah Khan Jamali announced his choice of Riaz Mohammad Khan in an
interview with India's state-run Doordarshan television on Saturday, an
official at the Prime Minister's Secretariat said.
Both countries have
pulled out their envoys from China to be high commissioners at each other's
capitals in what will be a restoration of ambassador-level relations between
them after a 17-month hiatus. But while the interview was still to be
telecast, it was not immediately clear whether Islamabad had received New
Delhi's consent to its proposal for Mr Khan's appointment.
A foreign ministry
statement about the appointment, which should follow such a consent, is
awaited.
Only four days ago,
India had named its envoy in China, Shiv Shanker Menon, to be its high
commissioner in Islamabad.
There was no immediate
information about when the two career diplomats will take charge of their new
assignments that have remained vacant for varied periods as a consequence of
intense military and diplomatic tensions between the two countries since a Dec
13, 2001 attack on Indian parliament that New Delhi blamed on Pakistan-based
militants fighting its rule in Kashmir.
Mr Khan will succeed
Jehangir Ashraf Kazi who was expelled by India last year at the height of
tensions, which were marked by a military standoff in which both countries
brought about one million troops on their borders. Mr Kazi is now Pakistan's
ambassador to the United States.
Mr Menon will replace
Vijay K. Nambiar, who was withdrawn by New Delhi from Islamabad soon after the
Dec 13 attack, and he is now his country's permanent representative at the UN.
However, a foreign
office spokesman, according to APP, said late Saturday night that the prime
minister had not been quoted correctly. The final decision regarding the
appointment of high commissioner to New Delhi had not been taken as yet, he
added.
Meanwhile, Pakistan and India will establish a fresh informal contact at
Kathmandu on June 12 under track-2 diplomacy, adds Ihtasham ul Haque.
Sources told Dawn that
former foreign secretary Niaz A. Naik would lead a four-member Pakistani
delegation at the talks while the vice-chancellor of Aligarh University, Prof
Khusro, would head the Indian team.
The sources said both
teams enjoyed the support of their respective prime ministers and were
expected to meet them before meeting in Kathmandu. The Pakistani side will
include Gen (retd) K. M. Arif, Asma Jehangir, Talat Wazarat of Karachi
University and Lt-Gen (retd) Jahangir Karamat. The Indian side will have
former minister of state for external affairs Salman Haider, Mani Shankar and
a couple of other people.
Mr Naik confirmed to
this correspondent that he would lead a delegation for Kathmandu. "I think we
can try once again to bring the two countries closer so that they can live in
peace and harmony, concentrating more on removing poverty from South Asia,"
said Mr Naik, who also once served as Pakistan's permanent representative at
the UN.
This will be the 23rd
informal contact between the two sides, the last one having taken place in
2001. Kashmir, Siachen and issues relating to exchange of cultural
delegations, trade and easing visa restrictions will be discussed.
Raja Asghar, Dawn, 18 May 2003
Retrieved form
<http://www.dawn.com/2003/05/18/top5.htm>
India-Pakistan Peace Initiative
News
India's
External Affairs Minister Yashwant Sinha has stated that "every step [of the
peace process] is clear in our mind." An Indian government official stated
that Pakistan will need to take "several specific steps" before "meaningful
talks" is possible. US Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, who
recently visited India and Pakistan, is "cautiously optimistic" about the
prospects of peace between the two neighbors but warned that "a lot of work"
remains to be done. Replying to questions on Indo-Pak ties in the Lok Sabha
(lower house of the Parliament), Prime Minister A.B. Vajpayee indicated, among
other things, that the US war on Iraq contributed towards his decision to
extend a 'hand of friendship' to Pakistan. Both India and Pakistan have named
their High Commissioners for each other's country. A number of Pakistani
members of the Parliament visited India. Some Indian prisoners have also been
released from Pakistani jails.
Indian and Pakistan
newspapers had different understanding of Vajpayee's statement that
elimination of cross-border infiltration is "not a condition... it is
necessary." Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf has assured the US that any
terrorist camps in Pakistan controlled Kashmir ''would be gone tomorrow,''
though at the same time he claimed there were no such camps.
Both India and Pakistan
have stated their preference for 'composite' talks though with different
emphasis on the centrality of the Kashmir dispute. A US based Indian newspaper
reported that the US has its own road map for the peace process.
The annual
meeting of the Indus Water Commissioners of Pakistan and India has been
convened by the Indian Commissioner in New Delhi. The Daily Times (Pakistan)
gives a brief account of the treaty.
Opinions
and Analysis
General Aslam Beg -
Pakistan's former Chief of Army Staff - believes that "India-Pakistan
stand-off 2002 and America's War on Iraq have contributed to peace initiative
on Kashmir." Khalid Mahmud Arif - retired general of the Pakistan army –
states that "domestic compulsions, external diplomatic pressures and
Pakistan's refusal to be blackmailed by India's 'pre-emption daydream'
prompted Prime Minister to initiate peace talks with Pakistan. Lt. Gen VR
Raghavan - former Director General Military Operations for the Indian army -
feels that "neither India nor Pakistan is willing or in a position to
undertake a substantive set of initiatives towards resolving the Jammu and
Kashmir issue." Karl F. Inderfurth - former US Assistant Secretary of State
for South Asian Affairs - stresses that India and Pakistan need to "formulate
a longer-term path to resolving the [Kashmir] dispute."A quick resolution of
disputes over the treaty will help the peace process.
Articles by Pervez
Hoodbhoy, M.P. Bhandara and Zubeida Mustafa urge the Pakistani government to
realize that there are no military solutions to the Kashmir dispute and to
rethink its Kashmir policy. Ahmad Faruqui (Daily Times, Pakistan) notes that
changing his Kashmir's policy will be "formidable task" for General Musharraf
who had stated earlier this year that "Kashmir runs in our blood."
Rajesh Rajagopalan
(Hindu, India) argues, "far from stabilising the India-Pakistan relationship,
the dynamic of the triangular relationship between India, Pakistan and the
U.S. will only damage these relations." Bharat Bhustan (editor of the daily
Telegraph, India, and a regular contributor to Daily Times, Pakistan) believes
that "only the US can push the essentially military establishment in Pakistan
to settle its outstanding disputes with India."
Ifthikhar Gillani,
18 May 2003
Retrieved from <http://www.nautilus.org/sand >
Transcript Of The Press Conference Addressed By The Foreign Office Spokesman
(Extract)
Question-Answer Session
* When his attention was drawn to a recent statement by Indian Prime
Minister Vajpayee that dialogue with Pakistan could not be started without a
complete end to alleged cross LoC infiltration; the Spokesman said:
Pakistan has always claimed that it wants a sustainable composite dialogue in
which all issues between the two countries can be discussed and we are ready
for that any time. As far as cross LoC infiltration is concerned, our position
remains that there is a verification mechanism. We are ready for it. India
should also accept it so that we could get over with this particular
misperception.
* When his comments were sought on various kind of rumors and
speculations in the media with regard to appointment of Pakistan’s High
Commissioner to New Delhi, and as to why there was a confusion despite the
fact that the Prime Minister had already tipped a name in that regard; the
Spokesman said:
I
think the Prime Minister was not quoted accurately and that is why we had to
say what we did say; no decision as yet has been taken in this regard. Once it
is taken we will make it public. There is nothing to conceal about it. In
fact, there is certain protocol which has to be observed for the appointment
of an Ambassador or a High Commissioner for that matter. Normal diplomatic
procedure is that after the Head of the Government has taken a decision, it is
communicated for the agreement of the host government and once that
appointment has been agreed, “Agre’ment” as it is called, a simultaneous
announcement is made. Before that if any thing appears in the press it would
be purely speculative. I would request that we should eschew this kind of
conclusions and speculations.
* When his attention was drawn to a cease-fire appeal made by the
APHC to both the Mujahideens and the Indian troops engaged in IOK, so that a
dialogue should resume between Pakistan and India; the Spokesman stated:
APHC
is a true representative of the Kashmiri people. We respect their sentiments.
They speak about the sentiments of the Kashmiris. As far as Pakistan is
concerned, we have called for a dialogue and we are ready for that as soon as
possible….
* When his comments were sought on a recent statement by the Prime
Minster of AJK that the Kashmir issue would be resolved on the basis of ‘give
and take’ and naturally in the light thereof Kashmir would have to be divided;
the Spokesman observed:
As
far as Pakistan’s official position is concerned, of which I had spoken very
categorically last time also; let me repeat it again very categorically that
the Jammu and Kashmir issue should be decided peacefully through negotiations
keeping in view the wishes of the Kashmiri people, which have in any case been
integrated in a process, which as far as we are concerned has been very
clearly defined in the UNSC resolutions. Once the dialogue process starts the
modalities to ascertain the wishes of the Kashmiri people will have to be
worked out. These are matters of detail which I do not want to speculate on or
conjecture about it….
* When asked about India’s response to confidence building measures (CBM)
recently announced by Prime Minister Jamali for resumption of a sustainable
and composite dialogue with India;
The
Spokesman said that Pakistan hoped to receive a positive response from India
in this regard. “We hope India’s response will be forthcoming to Pakistan’s
confidence building measures, which would quicken resumption of dialogue”, he
added.
* Asked whether Pakistan and India were in-touch with each others
against the back-drop of Prime Minister Jamali’s confidence building measures;
the Spokesman said:
Pakistan and India are diplomatically in-touch with each others. However,
India has yet to come up with a formal response to CBMs put forward by
Pakistan.
* To a query about the lifting of ban on air-links between India and
Pakistan;
the
Spokesman said that Civil Aviation Authorities of the two countries needed to
discuss the technical details in this regard before resumption of air links.
Ministry of Foreign
Affairs Pakistan, 19 May 2003
Retrieved from
<http://www.forisb.org/briefings/FOS03-17.htm>
What Prospects Dialogue?
In an interview to an
Indian daily, India’s foreign minister Yashwant Sinha has outlined the format
of a “composite dialogue” between Pakistan and India. According to him, the
nuclear issue and matters concerning security will be the priority items on
the agenda for defusing tensions in the region.
However, in recent
weeks New Delhi has been making an unusual display of its achievements in the
nuclear field. It has test-fired its 700-kilometre range Agni missile and a
supersonic Brahmos cruise missile.
While celebrating the
fifth anniversary of the 1998 nuclear explosions on May 11, Indian Prime
Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee, otherwise known for his moderate stance, also
spoke in a somewhat boastful manner as he gave awards to the scientists and
technicians connected with the 1998 nuclear tests. He declared that India was
the master of its own destiny and could make its own decisions about its
sovereign interests and security concerns.
One may recall here
that writing on the subject on the first anniversary of the nuclear bombing of
Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, the father of the Indian nation, Mahatma
Gandhi, had declared that nuclear weapons “represent the most sinful and
diabolical use” of science. He called the “atom bomb mentality” immoral,
unethical and addictive and warned that only “evil could come out of it.”
However, it appears that today, 57 years later, the Indian leadership has
divested itself of the meaning and import of the wise words of the father of
the nation.
India carried out its
first nuclear explosion some three decades ago, in 1974, and called it a
‘peaceful’ explosion. The then Indian prime minister at the time, Mrs Indira
Gandhi, wrote to Pakistan’s prime minister, the late Zulfikar Ali Bhutto,
stressing that it was strictly in the context of scientific development that
“our scientists have launched this experiment... There are no political or
foreign policy implications of this test.”
However, the Indian
nuclear explosion gave rise to a strong and influential nuclear lobby in
Pakistan, including Mr. Bhutto himself, which called for a tit-for-tat
response to India’s action. Both India and Pakistan have since developed their
respective nuclear capabilities. A nuclear clash between the two countries
appeared ominously real last year when the Indian and Pakistani forces were
engaged in an eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation along the common border.
It is vitally important
that Pakistan and India develop a basis for defusing the tensions arising out
of a mad race for arms and the nuclearization of the region. According to the
Stockholm Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), between 1985 to 1989 India was the
biggest Third World buyer of arms, spending about 17,345 million dollars.
Pakistan in the same
period, despite its weaker economy, spent 2,919 million dollars on arms. Not
surprisingly, Indian foreign minister, Mr Yashwant Sinha, says that the first
point to be negotiated by India and Pakistan would be nuclear and
security-related issues.
In the context of the
forthcoming India-Pakistan talks, as and when they take place it has to be
recognized that success will depend largely on the environment of trust and
mutual confidence that the two sides are able to establish and sustain.
Judging from the acrimonious tone and content of the spate of statements and
counter-statements being issued by both sides these days, the outlook for the
present does not appear to be very bright.
No date for the first
round of talks has been fixed yet and all that Mr. Sinha said the other day,
in a TV interview, was that “the thawing has already begun.” An early
beginning of talks is surely in the best interest of peace and normalization.
The format of “six-plus
two composite talks” suggested by the Indian foreign minister in his press
interview is of course not new. According to an Indian official publication, a
formal agreement on the format was announced, after a meeting of the two
foreign secretaries in New York as early as in September 1998.
Talks on peace and
security and confidence-building measures (CBMs) were to be held at the level
of foreign secretaries while other officials were to deal with the other
outstanding issues. However, it is plain that an agreement on substantive
issues can only be worked at the level of political leadership. Normalization
between India and Pakistan can take place only when there is the necessary
political will to achieve that end.
At present it is not
quite clear whether the talks at the level of foreign secretaries will be held
at the same time as the rest of the official-level talks. Issues like travel,
visa, trade and cultural exchanges also need to be taken up without any undue
delay as they concern the common citizens of the two countries. Also,
normalization in these spheres will go a long way in building up the necessary
trust and confidence for coming to grips with issues like Kashmir and nuclear
de-escalation or restraint. Prime Minister Vajpayee’s observations, while
talking to journalists in Minali last week, made it clear that no
preconditions were attached to resumption of talks with Pakistan. However, he
hoped that Pakistan would put an end to cross-border infiltration and that the
infrastructure in Pakistan or Azad Kashmir for training of “militants” would
be dismantled.
However, Mr. Murli
Manohar Joshi, Speaker of the India’s Lok Sabha, struck a different note
saying that Pakistan had not so far put an end to cross-border infiltration.
He also ruled out the possibility of a delegation of Indian parliamentarians
visiting Pakistan in response to the recent visit of a group of Pakistani
lawmakers to India.
Significantly, a report
from New Delhi carried by the Khaleej Times has claimed that in their recent
meeting with the US deputy secretary of state, Richard Armitage, the Indian
leaders left little doubt that the offer of resumption of talks to Pakistan
was “conditional on an end to infiltration from across the border”, saying
that “no nation could talk to an antagonist with a gun held to its head.”
According to the
Khaleej Times report, Mr. Armitage’s reaction to all that was to read out to
the Indian prime minister the English translation of the lines from one of Mr.
Vajpayee’s Hindi poems: hum jang na honey dengay.
There is every
indication that the prospects of an early resumption of contacts between India
and Pakistan have been welcomed by the people on both sides, although there
are certain vested interests who would not favor the possibility. However it
would be extremely disappointing if after all the hope that has been built up
the resumption of talks does not materialize.
It has to be realized
that the estrangement between the two neighbors is exploited by the religious
extremists on both sides to pursue their respective agendas of encouraging
extremism and mistrust. For the extremists in Pakistan, the unresolved Kashmir
problem is the reason why Islamabad should not pursue a path of peace and
normalization with India.
For the Hindutva
fanatics in India, Pakistan is a favorite whipping boy because of its
perceived interference in Kashmir. Religious extremism and militancy on one
side has been sustained by a similar phenomenon on the other. The growth and
intensity of fanaticism in both countries can be arrested by a return to
normality in the relations between the two countries.
M.H. Askari,
Pakistan Link, 30 May 2003
Retrieved form <http://www.pakistanlink.com/Letters/2003/May/30/06.html
>
Workshop on “The Challenge Of Confidence Building In 21st Century:
Problems and Prospects For South Asia”
Held under the program
on peace studies and conflict resolution, Department of International
relations, University of Karachi.
Main points emerging
from the deliberations of the workshop
-
CBMs are also relevant and applicable
in case of countries with normal and better relations. These are not only
applicable between or among adversaries but have general relevance.
-
Although CBMs are considered as a Western concept but one
cannot undermine its significance but these are a reality in building
minimum trust and goodwill.
-
A major achievement of CBMs is that countries can avoid war.
-
South Asia does not have a structure to implement CBMs, which
is a fundamental challenge to the application of this concept.
-
India's hegemonic position should be matched by Pakistan's
arms buildup.
-
There is a need to bridge gap in theory and practice of CBMs
by rationalizing the process of confidence building in South Asia. There is
a need to move from rhetoric to rationality in formulating state policies.
-
Lack of proper interaction among people of India and Pakistan
at the grassroots level is a major obstacle to the process of
confidence-building in South Asia.
-
CBMs possess an image problem, which is
a major impediment to build basic trust between adversaries. There exists
mistrust in some circles about the concept of confidence-building measures.
-
CBMs is a Western concept, which is not
relevant in developing world.
-
Concept of CBMs is as old as man.
-
Deterrence is a negative concept and CBMs a positive concept.
-
CBMs could be a process of facilitator
to help resolve a conflict.
-
Fundamental question raised? We are afraid of peace. Are we
afraid of war?
-
We should become a responsible enemy so as to help build
minimum trust.
-
CBMs a process to avoid conflicts.
-
Atmosphere of dialogue in civil society essential to build
confidence.
-
Main hurdle in the process of CBMs is the role of
intelligence agencies.
-
South Asia could be regarded as a new frontier of U.S. policy
and a fundamental American interest is to stop regional tension from
escalating.
-
The U.S. must encourage people to people contacts and should
deal with India and Pakistan on the basis of ground realities.
-
Ruling elites of South Asia are not encouraging the process
of CBMs because of their vested interests and states are highly
interventionist in their policies. Such a situation has created obstacles to
building trust and confidence between and among South Asian countries.
-
Today South Asia is in the grip of negative nationalism,
which is an obstacle to the CBM process.
-
Real peace process in Sri Lanka will come from within,
although Norway, European Union, U.S. and India are playing a role in the
Sri Lankan peace process.
-
Nuclearization of South Asia is not
good for small states of the region. Small states of South Asia can play an
important role in diffusing tension between India and Pakistan.
-
Nepal can be a bridge between India and Pakistan for the
resolution of their conflicts.
-
India and Pakistan need to encourage a balanced approach in
South Asia after the nuclear tests..
-
Lahore declaration was a model for Indo-Pakistan confidence
building but was shattered because of the Kargil episode.
-
India's strategic objectives are not confined to South Asia
but extends to other parts of Asia, including China.
-
Overplay of nuclear card by India and Pakistan.
-
Pakistan is using its nuclear option to compensate its
conventional inferiority with India.
-
Overseas community of South Asians can play a meaningful role
for influencing the CBM process in South Asia.
-
Role of violence in South Asia is a biggest hurdle in the
process of confidence building and is now in the process of being
institutionalized, particularly in Pakistani society.
-
Because of their hard line approach vis-ŕ-vis the peace
process, Jehadi forces are a major impediment against the CBM process. The
only alternate to deal with the forces of extremism is to reduce the
influence of Jehadi culture by establishing a democratic culture in South
Asia.
-
Common enemy of the people of South Asia is poverty,
illiteracy and unemployment etc.
-
Four capacities must be taken into account by India and
Pakistan to build confidence viz:
a.
Reality b. Patience c. Balance. d. Responsibility.
-
Peace between India and Pakistan since 1971 could be regarded
as a situation of "ugly stability."
-
Interaction between NGOs of South Asia essential to build
confidence in the region.
-
Democratic character of state and society and balance between
the two is required in order to promote the CBM process in South Asia.
-
Nehru's secularism and Gandhi's non-violence was turned into
Hindu chauvinism in the 1980s.
-
Proper application of non-military CBMs will lead to better
formation and execution of military CBMs. The problem of non-military CBMs
is at the implementation level.
-
As compared to India and Pakistan, Sino-Indo CBMs are
functioning more effectively.
-
SAPTA must be made more functional and
SAARC can play an effective role for water sharing arrangements in South
Asia.
-
Technology can be useful in building confidence in South
Asia.
-
Media's ineffective role in building confidence in South Asia
is because of weak role of intelligentsia.
-
The CBM process is in transition.
Recommendations
-
Institutionalising and structuring the process of CBMs at the
state and society levels required.
-
To promote viable, assertive, positive and meaningful role of
education, media and civil society required to support the process of
confidence building in South Asia.
-
To bridge the gap in theory and practice of CBMs.
-
To bridge the gap between military and non-military CBMs in
South Asia.
-
Role of violence be reduced so as to help the CBM process in
South Asia.
-
Viable role of Non-Governmental Organizations required so as
to facilitate people to people contacts and also to encourage exchange of
professionals of India and Pakistan.
-
The catastrophic aspect of nuclear arms race between India
and Pakistan needs to be stressed at the popular level.
-
Coherent strategy to deal with the phenomenon of negative
nationalism required so as to create positive environment for
confidence-building in South Asia.
-
To develop the expertise in promoting dialogue for
confidence-building in South Asia.
-
Scope of CBMs should be broadened by bringing social issues.
-
Need to institutionalize Indo-Pak cooperation in the nuclear
field, particularly in the area of nuclear energy. Holding of nuclear
dialogue between New Delhi and Islamabad for establishing a nuclear
restraint regime in South Asia is essential for peace and stability in the
region.
-
Meaningful and effective trade and economic cooperation
between India and Pakistan in particular and South Asian region in general
is needed.
-
To effectively use technology for managing and reducing
conflicts in South Asia.
-
Positive reporting of media about conflicts in South Asia,
particularly between India and Pakistan is the need of hour for building
confidence in the region.
-
To establish media channel in South Asia.
-
To promote greater interaction between media, civil society
and academia for building confidence in South Asia.
2 June 2003
Retrieved from
<http://www.kuird.org/html/summary recomendations.html >
A
Lot Needs To Be Done By India, Pakistan: Armitage
HONG KONG: There has been
progress in India-Pakistan ties but a lot still needs to be done to lower
temperatures between them, US Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage said
on Tuesday, on the eve of his South Asia trip, AFP reported. Mr Armitage told
BBC that all credit went to the leaders of the countries for recent moves to
ease tensions, which have kept the subcontinent on a knife-edge for 17
months.
Pakistan’s offer on Monday to get rid of its nuclear arsenal if
rival India agreed to do likewise was a “good gesture and that would be a
great sign of enormous progress... but I think we have to keep our appetites
under control.”
“I think we have got a lot of work to do to
continue to lower the temperatures for two great countries India and Pakistan
to be able to live in peace and stability with each other.” He said President
Musharraf had been able to curb the infiltration of Muslim militants from
Pakistan into the Indian side of disputed Kashmir as he had pledged last year,
adding the US regarded him as a man of his word. “He has been able put
pressure on to lower the cross-border violence, we expect he’ll continue to do
this...” Mr Armitage said, “in the war against terrorism President Musharraf
and his colleagues in Islamabad have been absolutely spectacular in breaking
up terrorist cells, most recently one directed against our consul in Karachi,
for which we are enormously grateful.”
Asked if President Musharraf had done enough to
stop the operation of militant groups, he said: “As long as we have one person
intent on doing harm to innocent civilians, then none of us are doing enough.”
Armitage meets Mishra: Mr Armitage met national
security adviser Brajesh Mishra in London, just a day after talks with ISI
chief Ehsanul Haq in Washington, the Times of India reported on Tuesday.
Officials described the London meeting as “deftly scheduled”, “covering a
gamut of issues” and “wide-ranging”. Few details are being released about the
Armitage-Mishra talks, which were one-on-one. British officials did not take
part this time round.
Daily Times, 3 June
2003
Retrieved from
<http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_7-5-2003_pg1_2>
Kasuri lauds Vajpayee's peace moves
Pakistan Foreign
Minister Khurshid Mehmood Kasuri on Tuesday lauded Prime Minister Atal Bihari
Vajpayee's
peace initiative
on Kashmir and said the Indian prime minister has 'demonstrated real
leadership' by taking the bold step."
He has shown much strength in the background of very provocative statements
from his ministers. I am quite happy with Vajpayee. His heart is in the right
place," Kasuri said in an interview to Karan Thapar in Islamabad for SAB TV.
He said a series of statements from India demanding that Pakistan put a
complete stop to cross-border terrorism have not ruffled Pakistan. "We
politicians talk to different audiences, it happens all the time. We have to
learn to live with each other. We cannot chose interlocutors. We have to deal
with whosoever is in power in both the countries," Kasuri said. On Pakistan's
perception that Deputy Prime Minister Lal Kishenchand Advani is a hardliner,
he said that just as Indians need to stop demonising President Pervez
Musharraf, the Pakistanis too should stop demonising Advani.
Though the
Agra summit
achieved little, Kasuri considers it successful. "Both Vajpayee
and Musharraf behaved very responsibly in Agra. Both of them were denied a
Nobel Peace Prize in the last minute. They had agreed to a draft. I know it
and you know it," he said.
Denyig the existence of militants' training camps in
Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir, Kasuri said Pakistan has prevented nine out of ten
militants from crossing over to Jammu and Kashmir.
Replying to persistent questions about reports on the presence of 120 militant
camps in PoK, he said: "These are allegations. The number you mention is
staggering, unless they are referring to refugee camps. There are no training
camps. There are no terrorist training camps. These are refugee camps.
"We
try to seal the borders, which we have done by the way. If the infiltration is
taking place, it is despite the efforts of the government of Pakistan. We are
trying to stop it. But we do not have Alladdin's lamp," he said. "We are
seriously interested in dialogue. We have to address mutual concerns. Pakistan
has to address India's concerns and India has to address Pakistan's concerns,"
he said. When reminded about his statements in April this year about the
closure of camps, Kasuri said he only referred to camps to collect funds, not
terrorist training camps. "Those references to camps I made was for collection
of funds. Lot of money was collected over the years and President Musharraf
himself said money was not properly used."Asked whether he could say with
confidence that there are no militant camps in PoK, he said: "I am the foreign
minister for six months. I know that there are no training camps. The camps I
had in my mind were the ones President Musharraf ordered to close down."
Kasuri admitted Pakistan was not in a position to stop infiltration even if it
wanted to, "because people are in suicide missions." Asked if this amounted to
an admission that the Pakistan army has failed to prevent infiltration, he
said the Indian Army deployed 600,000 troops on the LoC, which amounted to
placing a soldier every three meters, and still failed to prevent
infiltration. On why Pakistan failed to return even one wanted terrorist to
India even though it handed over some 500 to the United States, Kasuri said
Pakistan and the US have been close allies for over 50 years. "We were allies
since Korean war. Also, there was a great deal of interaction between ISI and
CIA over the years whereas India and Pakistan fought three wars. It
is unrealistic to expect cooperation between [Indian and Pakistani]
intelligence agencies," he said and hoped the day would come when such
cooperation would be possible.
Kasuri denied he is a 'puppet' in Pakistan's military-dominated political
set-up. "I have resigned from Parliament due to differences with Prime
Minister Nawaz Sharif. If I disagree with President Musharraf, I would not
stay in the cabinet," he said and added that Jamali and Musharraf have given
him a free hand.
He
also denied that the Pakistani army exerts pressure on politicians. "Pakistan
army is not a Nazi or Mussolini army. It operates within a framework. It
understands democracy. If you think Pakistan army orders and others execute,
you are sadly mistaken. "Asked whether the Jamali government would last till
July and if he would continue to be the foreign minister, Kasuri said: "It
looks like that, yes. I will be the foreign minister."
K J M Varma, 3 June 2003
Retrieved from
<http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/jun/03kasuri.htm>
Musharraf To Propose 'Composite Dialogue' With India
By Our
Correspondent
WASHINGTON, June 15:
President Pervez Musharraf is coming to the United States with a proposal for
"composite dialogue" with India, diplomatic sources told Dawn on Sunday. He
is also expected to sign two major agreements - the trade and investment
framework agreement (TIFA) and another on science and technology - during his
stay in the US. While the Indian and Pakistan media are focusing on the impact
of the visit on the ongoing peace process - particularly on the search for a
possible solution in Kashmir - official and diplomatic sources say the talks
will focus on economic issues. They describe the expected signing of the trade
and investment framework agreement as a major achievement. They point out that
TIFA will ultimately lead to a free trade agreement, which is more useful than
any strategic alliance. They say strategic pacts are based on specific issues,
when the issue is resolved the pact also becomes ineffective. Pakistan
experienced this twice, first during the Cold War and then during the Afghan
war.
On the other hand, the
sources say, a commercial alliance lasts longer and develops interest groups
that work to promote the interests of the allied nation because they benefit
from it too. Besides TIFA, President Musharraf is also expected to sign an
agreement on science and technology, which will allow Pakistani nationals to
come to the US for training. Washington will also provide some assistance for
the development of science and technology in Pakistan. Diplomatic sources say
while the ongoing efforts for resuming Pakistan-India dialogue will be high on
the agenda of the Musharraf-Bush talks, it would be wrong to expect a
breakthrough, especially in resolving the Kashmir dispute. "The talks will be
about resuming bilateral dialogue between India and Pakistan and President
Bush will see it as a major achievement if he succeeds in bringing the two
sides to the table," said a senior diplomat. "He realizes that disputes like
Kashmir are not so easy to resolve."
According to these
sources, President Musharraf is coming to Washington with a proposal for
"composite dialogue" with India. The concept of "composite dialogue" goes
beyond Pakistan's traditional stance that Kashmir should be settled first
before other issues are discussed. Instead, Pakistan is now proposing
"simultaneous talks on all issues," said a senior South Asian diplomat. "What
Pakistan is saying now is that India and Pakistan can discuss bilateral trade,
Sir Creek, boundary disputes, people-to-people contacts and other issues along
with the Kashmir dispute. They do not have to finish Kashmir first."
After their initial
contacts with Indian and Pakistani officials on these issues, US officials
have indicated that they see a genuine desire for talks on both sides. "We can
hope for a real improvement in the environment," said a US official. But he
said on the Kashmir issue, both sides were still staying close to their
traditional stance: Pakistan says there has to be a plebiscite to determine
Kashmir's future and India insists that the talks should focus on returning
Azad Kashmir to New Delhi. "These are, of course, extreme positions and we
expect them to soften their stances when the talks begin," he added.
Meanwhile, both Indian and Pakistani diplomats are urging their journalists
not to expect a breakthrough on Kashmir. At least not yet.
"Right now, we are
talking about talks, i.e., how and when to start the dialogue. Once the talks
start, we will discuss the modalities and the less difficult issues first and
then we move on to Kashmir," said another senior South Asian diplomat. “The
Kashmir talks are going to be very difficult and we should not expect a
breakthrough in one, two or even several sessions. It will be a long process,"
he said." It will already be a major success if we agree to talk," he added.
The Indian and Pakistani diplomats also rule out the possibility of bus visits
like the one that brought Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee to Lahore
in 1999.
They believe this time
issues will be worked out at lower levels and it will be sometime before the
leaders of the two countries can meet. The Bush administration is also being
careful and is trying not to raise expectations. During the past one week, the
State Department scheduled three briefings on the India-Pakistan situation,
only to cancel them at the eleventh hour.
Dawn, 16 June 2003
Retrieved from <http://www.dawn.com/2003/06/16/top2.htm>
|
