How do you assess the state of Indo-Pak relations? Does it have any future?
One cannot deny that the relations between India and Pakistan are presently going through one of theperiodic phases of difficulty when creative activity in terms of culture, trade and economic or people topeople exchange is not in any active or growing mode.
However, if you look at the relations between the two countries over the past 50 years, there have beenseveral long phases of a similar nature. These have, from time to time, been interspersed with efforts toimprove understanding and deepen the exchange. Such periods were symbolised by our Prime Minister's visit toLahore in 1999 and also efforts through two Prime Ministerial visits from India in December 1988 and themiddle of 1989.
I remain optimistic, nevertheless, about the future of India-Pakistan relations. It is in the interest ofthe peoples of the two countries to have a cooperative relationship. Our repeated efforts have been aimed inthis direction. It was for this reason that the Prime Minister had visited Lahore by bus and in a verysymbolic step had visited the Minar-e-Pakistan and inscribed there and I quote:
"I wish to assure the people of Pakistan of my country's deep desire for lasting peace and friendship.I have said this before, and I say it again: a stable, secure and prosperous Pakistan is in India's interest.Let no one in Pakistan be in doubt about this. India sincerely wishes the people of Pakistan well."
Our intentions are clear. However, Pakistan must abandon its approach of compulsive hostility and use ofcross-border terrorism as an instrument of its policy.
Has Pakistan given up its policy of fomenting terrorism in India?
All evidence suggests that Pakistan is trying to maintain its option of calibrating terrorism in pursuit ofits political and strategic goals. You would recall that General Musharraf had on January 12, May 27 and June6 last year made commitments to permanently end infiltration, not allow the territory of Pakistan to be usedfor terrorism anywhere in the world, and not allow any organisation in Pakistan to indulge in terrorism in thename of Kashmir.
There had subsequently been temporary phases of decline in infiltration. However, in the context ofelections in Jammu & Kashmir, the infiltration levels rose in September and October last year and havebeen at monthly levels subsequently which followed the pattern of earlier years.
Most inputs and analysts also agree that General Musharraf - and the Pakistani establishment - has hardlytaken any action to dismantle the infrastructure of support to terrorism including the training camps,communication centres, launching stations, funding and indoctrination. Well known terrorist leaders HafizSaeed and Masood Azhar have been released.
There are also reports of support from Pakistan to Taliban remnants and Hikmatyar. Even the western medianow acknowledges that while Musharraf has given support on the Arab Al Qaeda elements, Pakistan is maintainingits links with the groups acting against Afghanistan and India.
So doesn't it make better sense to shut down the Pakistan embassy here?
There are many useful functions that Embassies and High Commissions perform. I, therefore, feel that thereis no need at all to shut down the Pakistani High Commission here. Some recent actions we have taken were inresponse to specific acts and were intended to send a clear signal that we will not countenance any activitiesin contravention of diplomatic norms.
Conversely, how relevant is our mission there?
For reasons that I have mentioned in response to the earlier question, our Mission in Islamabad is indeedvery relevant. Despite the oppressive surveillance that our officials are continuously subjected to, they dointeract with people, other diplomats and also carry out the routine official activity with the PakistanForeign Ministry and other Ministries and Departments.
Has there been any change in visa guidelines post-December 13, considering the number of visas issuedhas come down sharply?
The number of visas issued has certainly come down, particularly in view of disruption of direct road, railand air links. We have taken certain other measures such as prior reference requirement to make sure thatpossibility of misuse is reduced.
What's the government policy to promote people to people contact?
We have always supported the policy of promoting people to people contact. We believe that this is one ofthe ways of promoting understanding, especially when the establishment in Pakistan subjects its people tovirtually round the clock false propaganda about India, the situation here and our intentions. A look at thetext books used in various curricula, the discussions in official media are all pointers.
However, after December 13 we have had to take certain measures which have no doubt limited such contacts.These measures included the termination of the Lahore-Delhi bus service, Samjhauta Express and direct airlinks. Pakistan had to be made to understand the seriousness with which we viewed its sponsorship and supportto terrorism, and the fact that the government now had a zero-tolerance for such approaches.
The people of Pakistan must also understand and deal with the fact that their government, and particularlythe military regime and its related establishments, have been involved in policies that are leading to thecountry's increasing isolation, its continuing social and economic backwardness, and is posing as a threat tostability in other countries.
Has Pakistan increased anti-India activities in our neighbouring countries?
We have regular reports about Pakistan's continuing attempts to use the territory of some of our otherneighbouring countries to launch anti-India and terrorist activities.
Should Pakistan and terrorism become election issues?
Pakistan's sponsorship of terrorism directly affects the lives of our people in several parts of India. Itis a direct threat to India's security and integrity. It is difficult to imagine that issues as important asthese and the Government's handling of them would not be of concern to voters during an election. I would,therefore, think that to some extent Pakistan and terrorism becoming election issues is unavoidable.
Is there danger of Pakistan's nuclear assets slipping into wrong hands?
I would say that nuclear weapons in the hands of Pakistan are already in wrong hands.
Is it prudent for two nuclear powers to have such poor relations?
This is not the first time that two nuclear powers have had difficult relations. In any case, as Imentioned earlier, we believe in working for good relations with Pakistan. Pakistan must stop its sponsorshipof cross-border terrorism.
What could the United States have done to better persuade Pakistan to give up anti-India agenda?
It is for the United States to decide what kind of relationship it would like to have with Pakistan. At thesame time, I believe that there can be no double standards with respect to terrorism. Terrorist groups haveinter-linkages, they support each other, their agendas mutate. It would be incorrect to think that partialcooperation on terrorism will eliminate the potential of such threats. This is an area where obviously farmore needs to be done, the comprehensive inter-linkages of the problem recognised and available instruments ofleverage used.
(This is the full text of the interview excerpts of which appear in the print issue)
