Fissures run deep but India,Pak agree to meet again

On the issue of “hate speeches” by Jamaat-ud-Dawa chief Hafiz Mohammad Saeed,Qureshi said both sides needed to refrain from negative speeches. But in the same breath,he said “on the eve of this dialogue,tell me to what extent” did the Indian Home Secretary’s remarks help — a reference to G K Pillai’s remarks at the Idea Exchange programme of The Indian Express this week,in which he blamed the ISI for “controlling and coordinating” the 26/11 terror attacks “from the beginning till the end”.

Qureshi said “we both agreed that it (Pillai’s remarks) was uncalled for”.

Until afternoon,both sides indicated that the talks,extended twice,were extremely positive. Officials were constantly talking of “good news” on the way. The joint statement was initially slotted for 2 pm but was delayed until 6 pm. But once the two leaders didn’t emerge,there was speculation of a deadlock.

Sources said the Indian side insisted on a specific and concrete assurance from Islamabad regarding action against the perpetrators of the Mumbai terror attack in light of the latest revelations made by Pakistani-American Lashkar-e-Toiba operative David Coleman Headley.

The Pakistani side,the sources said,didn’t go further than the promise to investigate the matter. India,on the other hand,refused to engage on Kashmir,as desired by Pakistan. The deadlock,sources said,was on the framework for a roadmap for future engagements. While India wanted a roadmap for further engagements,the Pakistani side insisted to include what they called substantive issues like the strategic restraint regime and Kashmir.

The opening remarks of both Krishna and Qureshi were optimistic,maintaining the atmospherics but lacking in content and making ambiguous references to restoration of confidence and bridging the trust deficit. Qureshi said “we looked at various options,various steps that would build and restore confidence and bridge the trust deficit”.

Krishna said India was committed to being a sincere partner to develop peaceful and cooperative relations with Pakistan. “An effective action (by Pakistan) against terrorism directed against India will go a long way in building trust and confidence,” Krishna said,quoting Pakistan Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani’s promise to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh that Pakistan would not allow its territory to be used for terror against India. “The Foreign minister of Pakistan assured me that Pakistan will do everything to fulfill this promise,” he said.

There were early hints that Pakistan,on India’s insistence,had agreed to move forward on the Mumbai terror attacks. “Pakistan will take the leads presented by Home Minister (P Chidambaram) very seriously because we want to move forward,” Qureshi said.

Krishna said he was going back to New Delhi with an assurance from the highest leadership that whatever the Home Minister had conveyed and whatever leads had been obtained through the interrogation of Headley would be investigated further.

The bonhomie,however,evaporated as soon as the question-answer session began. Krishna said he hoped that the investigation “would be pursued vigorously to unravel the conspiracy and bring all the perpetrators of this horrendous crime to justice — perhaps that could be the biggest confidence building measure for us”.

Qureshi replied that the judicial processes can’t be dated. “They (the courts) have their own procedures to follow. We have asked for what kind of help we need to take the process forward,” he said. “Ajmal Kasab was declared a proclaimed offender in Pakistan. To move on,we need the magistrate who recorded his statement to appear before the court.” He said the judiciary in Pakistan,like in India,was independent. It was India and not Pakistan which didn’t want a timeframe,he said.

On alleged rights violations in Kashmir,Krishna said J&K has an elected government and a legitimate Chief Minister and law and order is a state subject. “If they (state government) feel they are unable to maintain law and order or check human rights violations,they can seek help from the Central government,” he said. “There are a number of institutions… we have an institutional network to take care of human rights violations.”

To this,Qureshi said three Kashmir-based organizations had written to him on human rights violations — on the issue of curfew,use of Indian armed forces and loss of lives. He,however,said that the elected government of J&K had made a statement,favouring this Indo-Pak engagement. The Pakistani reporters objected to Qureshi’s reference to the J&K government as elected and for not using the prefix “occupied”.

On the issue of Balochistan,Qureshi said: “We raised the issue of destabilization of Balochistan and his (Indian Home Minister’s) response was encouraging. His reaction was that India was not interested.” Krishna said India had been waiting for “some evidence” from Pakistan to show Indian involvement. “There is not a shred of evidence,” he said.

Krishna raised the issue of the spurt in infiltration across the Line of Control,saying there had been a 40 per cent increase between 2008 and 2009. “These infiltrations are designed to create instability and restlessness in that part of India,” he said. Qureshi’s immediately responded: “I categorically reiterate the position of Pakistan. Infiltration is not a policy of Pakistan or any intelligence agency of Pakistan. But if there are individuals who have crossed over,deal with them firmly.”

This upset the Pakistani journalists and one of them even asked Qureshi why was he being so apologetic on “allegations levelled by India”. Qureshi said he was neither apologetic nor was there any reason for Pakistan to be apologetic.