Allies Against Terrorism?

There is an announcement, which I will read it out for you.

The Deputy High Commissioner of Pakistan was summoned to the Ministry ofExternal Affairs today, in the context of recent apprehension in Pakistan ofSheikh Omar Saeed in connection with the kidnapping of Wall Street journalistDaniel Pearl. It was pointed out to the Pakistani Deputy High Commissioner thatSheikh Omar Saeed would have information relevant to the hijacking of IndianAirlines aircraft IC-814 in December 1999 as well as the terrorist attacks onthe State Assembly in Srinagar in October 2001 and on the Parliament in NewDelhi in December 2001. The Government of Pakistan was requested to providerelevant information in this regard to the Government of India. Currentinternational law and widespread international consensus today mandates allstates to afford one another the greatest measure of assistance in connectionwith criminal investigations or criminal proceedings relating to terrorist actsincluding assistance in obtaining evidence in their possession.

Let me also add that the mandate we are referring to in this context is thespecific mandate of UN Security Council Resolution 1373 which is a Chapter VIIresolution and specifically mandates that such assistance should be provided.

What was the Deputy High Commissioner’s response?

He said he would convey it to his government and of course he referred to thefact that their spokesmen yesterday had refuted the claim made by Sheikh Omar,to which we have said that we have our own information about this individual’sinvolvement in various terrorist acts and that after his release in Kandahar weknow he had moved to Pakistan. His movement in Pakistan was facilitated byPakistani agencies. He interacted with the hijackers of IC-814 and we believe hewould have information on terrorist acts in India and in addition to this ofcourse there is information implicating him in the attacks on the SrinagarAssembly and our Parliament.

Is this based on the Pakistani media reports?

I said based on our own information. Of course media reports have introduced anadditional saliency in this case but we have our own information.

Anything on the list of 20 criminals was mentioned today?

No. What was focused on was the apprehension of Sheikh Omar.

Did we ask for his extradition?

No, we asked for information. The point of emphasis here is that internationallaw and international consensus especially in the context of UN Security CouncilResolution 1373 specifically mandates such cooperation between the states inorder to deal with international terrorism and to bring to justice perpetratorsof such terrorist acts.

Is this, the Government of India’s position that Sheikh Omar was involvedin these attacks?

There is information certainly to suggest his involvement.

In the past Pakistan has not been cooperating with India in such cases. Then howdo we expect that they will take action?

Well, does that mean we should give up on seeking responsive behavior fromPakistan or meaningful action from Pakistan? It certainly doesn’t mean that wehave given up on that.

Why wouldn’t Pakistan….

Aunohita, that’s a legal issue, I don’t want to get into that. But all Iwould say is that the point at issue here is cooperation between countries todeal with terrorism. There is a specific international legal context involvedhere and there are specific principles that have been outlined in the SecurityCouncil resolution on this matter and we believe that meaningful action to dealwith such issues is expected from all countries.

Any independent confirmation that US have sought Omar Sheikh extradition?

No. I don’t have any specific information on that.

Any comment on the new report on the Indus river treaty and that officialmeeting on the issue has been delayed?

Well the treaty continues to be in operation. There has been no change in thatsituation and such meetings of the sort which you are referring to between Indiaand Pakistan are always determined on the basis of mutual convenience.

Meeting of India and Bangladesh?

The Foreign Secretary of Bangladesh was here yesterday. Our Foreign Secretarymet him and also the External Affairs Minister. A Joint Press Statement wasissued following these meetings. Copies are being provided to you.

Has India provided any information on the involvement of Omar Sheikh’s inthese attacks?

No. We mentioned it to the Deputy High Commissioner of Pakistan. The informationabout the attack on our Parliament of December 13, that information we have beenproviding to Pakistan. It’s not that there is any absence of information orevidence on his involvement.

Was it specific on Omar Shiekh?

Not specifically on the involvement of Omar Sheikh. I don’t believe so. Ibelieve we referred to the recent press reports that have come out saying thathe has claimed knowledge of the acts and that we would like specific informationon that to be shared with us by the Pakistani authorities.

Is this specific press reports or we have our own information?

We have our own information.

On Indus river treaty?

The treaty continues to be in operation and meetings of the nature that you havereferred will to be decided on the basis of mutual convenience between the twogovernments. The annual meeting was held last May. They have an annual meetingand the annual meeting of this year has not taken place so far. Dates for thatwill be fixed only through diplomatic channels and would be based on mutualconvenience.

Aunohita coming back to your question. Here is somebody who was released at thetime of the hijack. He was in prison; he was implicated for certain terroristcrimes. They were certain special circumstances as you know which led to hisrelease and the fact is he disappeared from Kandahar and later resurfaced inPakistan and he was facilitated entry into Pakistan obviously with the knowledgeof the authorities and he has lived in Pakistan since then. Further more, thereis the involvement of Jaish-e-Mohammad in the terrorist attacks on the Jammu andKashmir State Assembly on October 1 2001 and the attack on our Parliament ofDecember 13. The involvement of this specific individual with the JeM is wellknown.

At the time hijack of IC-814 he was in prison? What kind of involvement doeshe have?

No, he was released at the time of hijack. He was a close associate of MasoodAzhar, the founder of JeM and he was trained in terrorist camps in Afghanistanbefore he came into India. He was working on behalf, he was certainly a leadinglight in the terrorist network that has links with Al-Qaida and was involved interrorist activities in India.

Does he have indirect involvement with the hijack?

I am not saying that. I am saying that terrorism is the issue here. Involvementin terrorism, complicity in terrorist attacks. That is the point at issue.

The attack on Jammu & Kashmir Assembly took place on October and the listof 20 criminals was given to Pakistan on December 31 2001. Any particular reasonwhy Omar Sheikh’ name was avoided?

I think I have mentioned this earlier also. The cases against him were withdrawnwhen he was released at the time of the hijack.

[inaudible question]

Well I will have to check on the specific circumstances, which were involved inthe identification of each person on that list. I will have to check on that.But that doesn’t exempt him from the distinct terrorist profile that hepossesses.