'Inconclusive, Not A Failure'

Full text of Foreign Minister Abdul Sattar's statement:

"President Pervez Musharraf has returned from India optimistic about theprospects for better relations between Pakistan and India. Considerable progresswas made in summit level discussions and in evolving the text of a Declaration.It is unfortunate that the expected consummation did not materialize.Nevertheless, the President remains convinced that the existing goodwill on bothsides can and will achieve mutually desired results.

President Musharraf and Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee share a commonvision of peace, progress and prosperity for their people in the twenty-firstcentury. The President has complimented the Indian Prime Minister for thegracious initiative to invite him for the resumption of dialogue between the twocountries after a hiatus of nearly two years.

Cognizant of the benefits of peace and cooperation between the twoneighbouring countries, President Musharraf and Prime Minister Vajpayee heldwide-ranging discussions on Pakistan-India relations, particularly on Jammu andKashmir. They affirmed commitment to addressing each other's expressed concerns,creating an environment conducive to the establishment of peaceful, friendly andcooperative ties, for the welfare of the two peoples.

While in New Delhi, President Musharraf welcomed the opportunity to meet withthe leaders of the All-Party Hurriyat Conference. We hope India would accordthem travel documents to visit Pakistan for consultations.

Time did not permit substantive discussion on any specific issue. Butvaluable progress was made at Agra on evolving a structure for a sustaineddialogue process, that would take up Jammu & Kashmir, peace and security,and terrorism and drug trafficking at the political level. Economic andcommercial cooperation, Siachen, Wullar Barrage, Sir Creek and promotion offriendly exchanges in various levels would be addressed at the level of highofficials.

All these issues need to be addressed purposefully, constructively and in anintegrated manner, with a sense of urgency. Responding to Press questions, thePresident of Pakistan was forthcoming on the discussion of any issues of concernto India. He emphasized again and again that realism requires a focus, and thatprogress on the settlement of Jammu and Kashmir would be conducive tonormalization of bilateral relations.

Prime Minister Vajpayee has accepted our President's invitation for a returnvisit. The two leaders are expected to meet in New York in September andcontinue efforts to promote agreement. The goodwill between them is an asset forbetter relations between the two countries.

President Musharraf had a valuable opportunity to meet a large number ofprominent Indian leaders. His exchanges of views with intellectuals and medialuminaries will no doubt contribute to better mutual understanding. Enlightenedopinion in India is no less keen than that in Pakistan to extricate bilateralrelations from the time warp in which they have been trapped for 54 years.

Like the Indian Prime Minister, the Minister for External Affairs, Mr.Jaswant Singh, brought equal goodwill to the task of translating the convergenceof thoughts at the summit level into words.

The two sides came very close to bringing the Declaration close to adoptionand approval. In fact twice yesterday it appeared we had succeeded in arrivingat a mutually acceptable formulation. It is unfortunate that the fruition of theexercise was aborted.

The Agra Summit remained inconclusive but it did not fail. In fact, the twoleaders succeeded in covering a broad area of common ground in the draftDeclaration. That will provide a valuable foundation for the two leaders toreach full agreement at their next meeting.

Compliments are due also to intellectuals, media and the common people inIndia as in Pakistan for their contribution to building an environment ofopinion conducive to forward movement. Heartened by the prevalent goodwill,President Musharraf believes popular support will be an asset also to leaders inIndia who want to work for a future better than the past."

Excerpts from the Press conference:

The snag which did not allow a final declaration ofthe Agra Summit:

The snag related to the relationship between settlement of the Kashmirquestion and progress on normalization. We were very close to arrive at anagreement on that point also.

The basis of his optimism with regard to the AgraSummit when the fact remains that the Indian side was not prepared to discussKashmir at all:

 The basis of the confidence is first of all that the two leaders had ameeting of minds; secondly, that substantial progress was achieved intranslating their vision into words and thirdly, that both sides agreed that theprogress made at Agra should be a foundation for the continuation of dialogue inthe future.

If he agreed to the proposition that the Agra Summit failed, butPresident Musharraf has been successful in expressing his sincerity andcommitment  to the Kashmiris cause quite effectively:

I think what the President did in the course of the visit to New Delhiand then to Agra is very well known to all the people, who were following thecoverage of the Agra Summit, minute to minute and day to day. Thereason for our optimism is given in the statement that I have just read.Both sides are keen to use the progress that has been made as a foundationfor further discussions, hopefully leading to full agreement. This is thesense with which we have come back and we hope that this sense will bereciprocated and that we will continue the dialogue process.  

If it was true that the Indian authorities refused tofacilitate President Musharraf to address the media in Agra before hisdeparture and if 90-minute notice was necessary for such a conference asclaimed by the Foreign Minister of India in his press conference thatmorning, and if it were the security people who declined clearance for thePresident's meeting with the Press, and what about the expression by amember of Pakistan's official team that some invisible hands devastated thesummit: 

Before we left for the visit to India, we, the Ministry of ForeignAffairs, conveyed a request to the Ministry of External Affairs of theGovernment of India for arrangement of a press conference by the Presidentof Pakistan at the conclusion of the summit. As you know, the summit wasexpected to conclude by midday on 16 July, and the President was due todepart for Ajmer Sharif at about 2.30 p.m. For reasons that are implicit inwhat I have stated, namely the necessity of continuing further discussionson the text of the declaration, we were not able to depart at the indicatedtime. Later in the evening when it became clear that a final text could notbe worked out, our side renewed the request for an opportunity for thePresident to address the press conference. For reasons best known to Indiathat press conference was not arranged.  As for your second question it is not possible for me to see what wasinvisible.  

Who was responsible for the failure of the summit and ifPrime Minister Vajpayee would be coming to Islamabad, responding PresidentMusharraf's invitation: 

There is no purpose to be served by engaging in pinpointingresponsibility and fault-seeking. It is a fact that fruition of our hopeswas aborted. I have said we hope and believe that both sides desire tobuild on what was achieved in terms of understanding at Agra. Therefore, weare optimistic. The President of Pakistan extended an invitation to thePrime Minister of India and we hope that there will be an early opportunityfor the two leaders to meet and that will lead to further discussions andhopefully to an agreement. Let me also add, that while in Agra I extendedan invitation to the distinguished Foreign Minister of the Government ofIndia to visit Pakistan. I hope that he will find an early opportunity toaccept the invitation and visit our country.  

When his attention was drawn to Indian Foreign Minister's pressconference that morning that there was disagreement between the two sideson the question of cross border terrorism which, in fact, blocked the wayto a joint statement; and secondly, if trade matters were also discussedduring the visit: 

The draft text of the declaration that was under discussion, and on whichwe achieved to a large extent the meeting of minds, referred to the subjectof terrorism and narcotic trafficking as one in the catalogue of thoseissues that need to be further addressed. Now you have used a term "crossborder" this is a matter that relates to the border between Pakistan andIndia. If there are any concerns on other side with regard to terrorismacross the border, surely this matter can be raised in future meetings. Asyou know in Jammu and Kashmir, there is no international border but a Lineof Control, resulting from the cease-fire of December 1971. No referencehas been made to any cross LoC terrorism in the course of the draft of thedeclaration.  About the trade policy we did not discuss any specific issue insubstance. Economic relations are one of the subjects that is to be takenup at the level of high officials when the dialogue between the twocountries resumes.  

To a comment that as per ground realities the resolution of theKashmir dispute seemed to be a long-drawn process: 

A process for the settlement of Jammu and Kashmir and any other issuebetween the two countries need not be protracted. That depends on theexistence of a sense of realism and of goodwill and purposefulness inaddressing the issues. And given that approach it need not take an endlessperiod of time.  

Why necessary preparation was not done for the Indo-Paksummit and the snags which emerged during the course of summit were notremoved at the official level meetings between the two countries:  

The question whether the summit should be preceded by official levelmeetings etc. has been under debate and discussion at various levels. Thefact is that the Prime Minister of India took the initiative to invite ourPresident and we accepted the invitation. We also thought that thegeneration of goodwill and the injection of the vision, the perception andthe commitment of the leaders to building a future better than the past,would be in the best interest of the both sides. I think this assumptionhas been vindicated as for the drafting exercise. One will agree that ifthere was more time the residual paragraph could have also been worked outto the mutual satisfaction of the two sides. It appears that more time isneeded for clarifying concepts and approaches and it is only right thattime should be given in order to evolve a salutary mutually acceptableformulation. That is the present situation and we hope that we will haveanother opportunity to address this issue.  

How he felt about the assumption that India would never allowpeaceful resolution of the Kashmir dispute and eventually the militarysolution would be the only option:  

The answer to this question will be given by time. It is our perceptionthat the goodwill expressed in the media, in discussions, in seminars willcontribute to the building of pressures for a solution sooner rather thanlater. I do not think whatever has happened at Agra will strengthen thehands of negative elements. On the contrary, the goodwill that was manifestshould encourage those leaders in both countries, who look to a betterfuture.

In response to a question that Mujahideen groups had held pressconferences in Lahore and Rawalpindi, reiterating their resolve to continuearmed struggle:

As you know the President of Pakistan had very wide-ranging consultationsbefore he embarked upon his visit to India. It is manifest from theopinions that he heard that the people of Pakistan want to see a forwardmovement in relations between the two countries. Now there is an objectivesituation in Kashmir which needs to be taken into account. On one of theinternational TV networks there was an interview telecast today with one ofthe Kashmiri leaders who said that it was repression of human rights inIndia held Kashmir that drove the peaceful political freedom struggleunderground into channels of militancy. So you can see also from theobjective reality that the people of Kashmir need to have a channel for theexpression of their views. (The interview under reference was by Kashmirileader Yaseen Malik on BBC's Hard Talk).  

With regard to the APHC visit to Pakistan and themechanism for the structured Pak-India dialogue:  

In the context of the President's meeting with the leaders of the APHC heexpressed the hope that India would permit and provide travel documents tothe Hurriyet leaders to visit Pakistan for consultations. In someconversations, not at the summit level, this subject was mentioned but ithas not been raised officially in the context of the negotiations on thedraft declaration.

To what extent President Musharraf's breakfast meeting wasresponsible for the derailment of the summit meeting, specially when NewDelhi understands that it was an unofficial engagement:  

In contemporary diplomacy it is impossible to segregate official talksand interaction with media. What President Musharraf said in the course ofhis meeting with the Indian media luminaries was telecast on Indian mediaand media in Pakistan. It was not a secret approach behind the back of anybody and I think that objective opinion will recognize both the necessityand the value of such a dialogue between the President and the leaders ofIndian media. There was nothing he said in that meeting which he had notearlier said in the course of his meetings with Indian editors, who visitedPakistan and specially in the course of his discussions with the Indianside. In this regard you may recall the President's banquet speech hostedin his honour by his Indian counterpart. So he has been very up front inthe course of his conversations and most people we met during our stay inAgra expressed appreciation for the candid approach of the President todiscussion of India-Pakistan issues.  

His comments were sought on Indian Foreign Minister's pressconference that morning that India would continue with its efforts forconfidence-building measures and whether Pakistan would reciprocate and ifPOWs issue was also raised during the summit:  

The view of the Government of Pakistan on the statement of the ExternalMinistry of India with regard to travel facilities etc. were expressedbefore we left for New Delhi. This subject did not come under discussion inthe course of the dialogue in New Delhi or Agra and there is nothing morethat I need to add to the views that we have previously expressed.  The question of POWs was raised with the President and he said that as asoldier he would wish to do everything that is possible to assuage thegrief of the parents who believe that some Indians POWs were still held inPakistani jails. Let me say that the President on his return has alreadylaunched the administrative action to re-ascertain whether there is any POWwho is still held in any Pakistani jail. Let me also say that the sameinvestigations were conducted earlier some 20 years ago and at that timethe Government of Pakistan checked with the prison authorities in all theprovinces and received the reply that there was no Indian POW held inPakistan. It is the President's humanitarian response to the anguish of theparents to reassure them that we will check again. I would like only to addthat please see what advantage would any country gain by holding a soliderfor 30 long years in its jail.  

If the Agra Summit was a total disaster and if the Agradeclaration was to have a mention of a no-war pact and of third party mediation:  

The commentators that consider the Agra Summit a total disaster are quiteclearly at 180 degree from our assessment of the achievements of the AgraSummit. We hope we are right and such commentators are wrong. As to theother subjects that you have mentioned namely the no-war pact and the thirdparty mediation, these were not discussed at all at Agra.  When his attention was drawn to manhandling of some Pakistan journalistsin India last night, the Foreign Minister said:  We have taken due notice of this incident and our High Commissioner willpromptly draw the attention of the Government of India to this incident.Let me say that in our assessment this was an isolated incident that incontrast with that, the vast majority of India media persons were cognizantof the importance of the occasion and wanted to play a role that ispositive and beneficial to the prospects of better relations between thetwo countries.  

When his attention was drawn to the fact that the Government of Indiahad referred to the cross border terrorism but there was no reference tothe cross LoC terrorism: