Hairsplitting Or Hypocrisy?

Relevant excerpts of the press briefing by RichardBoucher, Spokesman, US Department of State
January 8, 2002

Question: Richard, do you have any comments or any agendatomorrow? The Home Minister of India, Mr. Advani, is coming here to meet with Mr. -- Imean, with the Secretary of State, and his main agenda actually of his to fight terrorismwith the United States combined. So what do we have on this?

Richard Boucher: We have an opportunity for the Secretary tocontinue his discussions with the Indian Government, discussions that he had when he wasin New Delhi. And he met at that time with the Home Minister in New Delhi. He hascontinued to be in very close touch, as you know, with Foreign Minister Singh all alongabout the situation, the fight against terrorism and also the situation between India andPakistan. So it's an opportunity to continue those discussions with the Home Ministertomorrow.

Question: So far, if Secretary has received anything in advance,because parliamentary attack took after Secretary's visit to India? So did he receiveanything in advance what this agenda will be all about when he comes and meets with himtomorrow?

Richard Boucher: I think given that we've had constant and ongoingdiscussions with the Indian Government, including our ambassador's discussions -- and hemeets with a variety of people in the Indian Government, including the Home Minister, on aregular basis -- the ball has been moving forward in terms of our cooperation, in terms ofour discussions of the situation between India and Pakistan. So we'll continue to moveforward in those discussions here.

Question: Go back quickly to India and Pakistan. An address thatGeneral Musharraf is supposed to make this week is being touted today as something thatcould help defuse the tensions very significantly. I believe the Secretary spoke withGeneral Musharraf this morning. Do you believe that this address -- do you expect thisaddress to really make a big difference in the situation?

Richard Boucher: We have been in frequent contact with PresidentMusharraf and his government. Our Ambassador to Pakistan is in very close touch with them.The Secretary spoke with President Musharraf again this morning. They continue to look atways to fight terrorism and ways to deescalate tensions between India and Pakistan. And sothey continue to discuss, as I said, the fight against terrorism, and ways to deescalatethe tensions between India and Pakistan.

The statement that President Musharraf has made in his joint press conference withPrime Minister Blair, and we attach some importance to -- he said Pakistan rejectsterrorism in all its forms and manifestations, period. We expect that they will continueto move against terrorist organizations because of the danger that these organizationspose to Pakistan and its neighbors, that we do understand that President Musharraf isplanning to make a speech in the coming days, in which he will elaborate his thoughts forthe Pakistani people on the course that their country needs to follow, and we look forwardto hearing from President Musharraf in that speech on the course that he believes thenation should follow.

Question: The Home Minister also is still carrying a list of those20 terrorists that he is going to ask Secretary of State tomorrow that the US must putpressure on Pakistan to hand over to India. So what -- where do we stand now today? Imean, the US Government.

Richard Boucher: Where we stand today is there is nothing newtoday, and the Home Minister is coming tomorrow.

Question: Richard, a question that -- well, first of all, I'm alittle confused as to why you didn't mention the phone call when you were asked aboutIndia in the first place. It seems --

Richard Boucher: Because the phone call was with the President ofPakistan.

Question: Yes, I know, but we should go alphabetically, maybe,through the list of every country every day to -- what did --

Richard Boucher: If you want to ask me about President Musharraf, I'lltell you the Secretary talked to him.

Question: Yes. Well, did -- you said that the issue of a verysenior US official traveling to the region might be raised with the Home Ministertomorrow. Might that also --

Richard Boucher: Might come up or be discussed.

Question: Yes. Well, did he speak with Musharraf, or was that asubject of the conversation this morning?

Richard Boucher: I don't actually know. You know, we havementioned it as a possibility. It's been certainly discussed with people in the region. Atthis point there are no decisions about it. But I don't know if it specifically came up intoday's phone call or not.

Question: Can you say anything, Richard, on what would be the tripwires of the decision process, how that decision would ultimately be made, and by when?

Richard Boucher: The Secretary would decide when he is good andready.

Question: : I think the Secretary said that the UnitedStates would be willing to help on the issue of Kashmir. Would that require a request byboth sides, or would the United States take the initiative on its own to get involved inthat?

Richard Boucher: I think the Secretary repeated what we saidbefore, which is we're willing to help out if we can in any way we can, in any way we canas the parties want us to. And that has always been our position. It's the position hestated to them when he traveled there last year, last fall, and it's always been theposition that we're willing to help out to the extent we can.

Certainly, we're making efforts right now to see what can be done to deescalate thetensions. Whether they would want us in some further effort remains to be seen.

Question: But just to pin that down, it would require consent or a request fromboth India and Pakistan for the United States to get involved in Kashmir?

Richard Boucher: I don't know of any situation in the world wherewe can help out, help the parties, without the parties wanting us to help.

Question: One more on India-Pakistan. You've made it clear whatyou expect the Pakistanis to do, but is there anything that the Indians could be doing,irrespective of Pakistan, to calm things in Kashmir? For example, opening negotiations onautonomy with local authorities.

Richard Boucher: We're getting back to where I think we've beenfor the last couple of days, and that's to explain that there is an immediate situationthat remains dangerous that we believe we all need to look for ways to deescalate thatsituation. We're talking to both of the governments about that, about what they can do todeescalate the situation.

Second of all, there is the broader issue in Pakistan of President Musharraf's moveagainst violence and extremism, and that's a process that we have certainly supported,that we welcome, and we think that remains a key to defusing the tensions of the situationwith India, but also to the future of Pakistan itself.

And then, third of all, there are the issues of Kashmir. And we have encouraged directcontact between the two parties over those issues. And we continue to encourage that.

Question: Yes, but irrespective of Pakistan, couldn't the Indiansdo something unilaterally to defuse the situation, and make the Kashmiris feel morecomfortable about Indian rule?

Richard Boucher: I suppose so, but I don't really have a list foryou at this point.

Relevant excerpts of the press briefing by RichardBoucher, Spokesman, US Department of State
January 7, 2002

Question: New subject? India and Pakistan. Some comments out of theIndian Government today saying that Pakistan has not taken credible steps,credible counter-terrorism steps, and that there is no chance for dialogue untilthey show that they are serious about this.

The US, on the other hand, has commended President Musharraf for some ofthese steps. Do we disagree that there have been credible steps? Do we disagreewith India?

Richard Boucher: I don't know what the Indian criteria are. I would saythat, first of all, we do believe that President Musharraf, the government ofPakistan, has continued to take steps against militant groups over the weekend.We believe that President Musharraf is committed to dismantling these groupswhich threaten Pakistan as well as its neighbors. We note that there have beenmore arrests over the weekend, for example, and that we understand thatPresident Musharraf intends to continue to speak out against extremism andterrorism, and to try to set Pakistan on a course of moderation.

We are concerned about firing along the line of control in Kashmir. We haveseen conflicting claims about this drone aircraft being shot down, but I don'thave anything to offer on that matter. We do think it's vital for both sides inKashmir to exercise restraint and reduce violence, and we encourage the leadersof India and Pakistan to continue to avoid any outbreak of conflict.

The summit in Kathmandu over the weekend did provide an opportunity forIndian and Pakistani foreign ministers to have some discussions. While nobreakthroughs were made, we are pleased that they took the opportunity to gettogether and meet and talk. We continue to urge a resumption of dialogue inorder to reduce tensions and promote cooperation between India and Pakistanagainst terrorism. We note that all of the countries attending the summit signeda declaration condemning terrorism.

Finally, I guess I would note that Prime Minister Blair has been in theregion. He has been encouraging a reduction of terrorism, a reduction oftension, in his meetings with Prime Minister Vajpayee and President Musharraf,and obviously we fully support those efforts.

Question: Well, are you concerned then that India seems to be making lessof Musharraf's moves than the United States is?

Richard Boucher: I don't know that I could try to characterize the Indianreaction one way or the other. We think it's important that both partiescontinue to keep the focus on fighting terrorism, and we do note that PresidentMusharraf has been taking steps in that regard.

I will leave it to the Indians to characterize how they see it, but I thinkit's clear to us that President Musharraf has been moving forward and intends tocontinue to move forward against militants.

Question: Anything new on an emissary from Washington today?

Richard Boucher: Again, I dispute the use of the word"emissary" or "envoy."

Question: I was trying to avoid "envoy."

Richard Boucher: You were trying to avoid "envoy," but"emissary" is equivalent. Let's just call it a visit to the region bya senior US official is still a matter under consideration. It remains apossibility. We do want to continue to find ways to urge a reduction of tensionsand improve cooperation against terrorism. At this point, there are no finaldecisions.

Relevant excerpts of the press briefing by RichardBoucher, Spokesman, US Department of State
January 4, 2002
Question: Well, we're all so keen on India and Pakistan because of the Secretary'sinterview with the BBC. He cited --stated --

Richard BoucherI hope you're being keen on it because of the obvious importance of thesituation to the fate of the world.

QuestionThat, too. That, too.And when you get the Secretary speaking on a subject, of course thatfocuses your attention. He spoke ofboth sides making positive moves.

And Iwondered if you could elaborate on that, so far as what India has done.Has it pulled back sufficiently for the US?

Richard BoucherI think, without getting into what we know or don't know about particularmilitary movements, you have seen statements from the Indian side, includingfrom Prime Minister Vajpayee and others, that they were looking for a politicaland diplomatic solution to the crisis, that they preferred that, that they didnot wish to engage in military confrontation.At the same time, we know they have mobilized.They have made some statements about not putting troops on the frontlines, but rather keeping them in assembly areas.I will leave it to them to talk about their military status in variousplaces.

Obviously,we keep a very close eye on this situation.Our ambassadors in the region have been working very hard on it.The Secretary has been working hard on it, and others as well.As you know, Prime Minister Blair is there.We keep in close touch with the British.So I think it's clear the international community wants to see a peacefuland political resolution of these issues, and of the crisis.And many of us are working hard toward that goal.

QuestionCould I ask something that may sound almost ingenuous?But after 50 years, does the US really believe there is a solution to theKashmir conflict that will satisfy both sides?Isn't that one of these things that will be with us forever?Generation unto generation?

Richard BoucherNothing is with us forever. Thereis clearly --

QuestionThe Arab-Israeli conflict is with us forever.

Richard BoucherI have worked on crises that you can trace back 2,000 years.But it doesn't mean that France and Germany have to perennially go to warwith each other, to put it bluntly. Butthat's not the Question.

The Questionis sort of where -- how does one address this issue?How does one address this issue? Firstand foremost, you address it by trying to keep these two countries from enteringinto armed conflict with each other over this terrible bombing and the attacksthat have occurred.

Second ofall, you try to get at the sources of violence and the sources of terrorism.Each of these countries has a role in the fight against terrorism, and wehave seen them step up to the plate and take steps against the terrorismgenerally. And we have seenPresident Musharraf take steps to take actions against militant groups andagainst the sources of -- the violence expression of political views.

And so heis taking steps against extremism, taking steps against militant groups, and heis committed to dismantling those groups, which threaten the stability ofPakistan, as well as of the neighbors.

And then,third of all, yes, there is a fundamental issue over Kashmir and we have alwaysencouraged the parties to engage in direct dialogue on the subject and to try toresolve the political issues in a political manner.

So Iwould say the approach we have taken has been on those sort of three differentlevels. And obviously the level ofending the rush toward confrontation is the first and foremost now, and endingthe violent activity of extremist groups is obviously the key to defusing thatand getting a political process between the two countries, eventually.

QuestionHow does the Secretary stand now on the possibility of sending an envoyto the region and what does he think that would accomplish?

Richard BoucherI wouldn't couch this in terms of an "envoy" towards theregion. We have people out thereworking it. The Secretary has beenworking it by phone. We may,indeed, send someone from Washington to continue our activity, to continueworking on the situation. I am notsure I would describe that as a special envoy.It may be one of the officials in Washington who is responsible for thecrisis.

Question"Envoy" with a little N is just somebody going over?

Richard BoucherIt's a little "e" but, yes.(Laughter.)

QuestionLittle "e". Howembarrassing.

Richard BoucherYou're right. And a little"n," too.

QuestionRichard, just to follow up, Indian ambassador (inaudible) thinks that inWashington that the clouds of war are not over yet until Pakistan meets thedemand of -- list of 20 demands by India, that those 20 people should be handedover to India. And what -- do youhave any comments on that list India presented to Pakistan, because they are notsatisfied yet, whatever Musharraf had done before?They are saying whatever he has done so far is under US pressure, not hisown will.

Richard BoucherI would say a couple of things on that.But first, let me say I don't think I am going to try to address aspecific list or a specific action requested by one government or another thatdoesn't involve us directly. Butlet me say a couple things.

First ofall, we've seen I think clear statements from President Musharraf that heintends to move against extremism. Heintends to move against the sources -- those who would engage in violence.This has been a subject of discussion with him since September 11th, asubject that he has discussed, that we discussed with him, for example, duringthe Secretary's visit in October. Secondof all, he has taken concrete action to back up the very firm statements that hehas made.