'Pakistan Is Not Going To Compromise'

Pakistan’s new ambassador to the United States, Jehangir Karamat, comes across as a soft-spoken retired general, stylishly polite and seemingly accessible. While learning to navigate the world of diplomacy after a lifetime in the army, he can still speak his mind. As a good army general should, he has a plan for Pakistan, with eyes firmly on the prize.

Karamat’s USP: he is the only chief of army staff to have resigned in Pakistan’s difficult history rather than going the traditional route of usurping power and declaring martial law. He had advised Nawaz Sharif to create a national security council and give the army a constitutional role. Sharif rebuffed him, Karamat resigned, Gen. Pervez Musharraf was promoted to army chief, Musharraf later mounted a coup and removed Sharif. Gen. Karamat is Musharraf’s ambassador.

He sits in the sprawling new embassy building sparkling with suitably Islamic architecture in Washington’s new diplomatic enclave with his "to do" list. The automatic gates and endless corridors may suit Pakistan’s new status as America’s prime ally, but even Pakistani diplomats say they miss the old building on Embassy Row whose halls were more suited to Ghulam Ali’s renditions and the wafting smells of food. This one is a bit antiseptic by comparison, although triple the size.

He recently spoke to Seema Sirohi in Washington. Excerpts from the interview:

Jehangir Karamat: It is a great honour to represent one’s country and contribute in every way. It is different from the military for sure. The environment is totally different but it is an exciting time to be here. I want to make US-Pakistan relations deeper, broader and wider and raise them to a higher strategic level.

I don’t expect any major changes in our part of the world in terms of US policy. No radical departures. The thrust lines will generally be the same from our point of view. The US is stabilizing Afghanistan which will continue. There is a pacification aspect to the policy, then there is the establishment of democracy and reconstruction of the country. There are gains to be made.

It is a very good and unambiguous relationship. It is comprehensive in its format and we hope to consolidate it further. Besides the cooperation in the war on terror, we want to move the relationship into trade and economic areas. The US is Pakistan’s biggest trading partner and we have created a good climate for investment in the country. All economic indicators are looking good and there is forward movement.

The US is concerned about drugs in Afghanistan which is an area for more work.

The Bush Administration is interested in conflict resolution and the India-Pakistan dialogue is facilitated by the US. We hope that will continue. There are ups and downs but the two countries remain in a dialogue situation. I see the momentum continuing but whether we reach a resolution is another matter. I see the ceasefire holding.

One thing is for sure, Pakistan is not going to compromise.

What about the recent firing on the border?

There are some incidents but we are able to take them in our stride. The one incident recently didn’t lead to any escalation and it was handled more maturely than before.

The US focus on Iran will continue. The rhetoric is strong and the message to Iran is clear. But the US is unlikely to resort to drastic steps like military action and Ms. Rice has stressed diplomacy while keeping all other options open.

Economic investment for Iran is very important and it is also important for Pakistan and India. A stronger economy is a strategic need in today’s environment. As Iraq stabilizes and Afghanistan stabilizes and Pakistan holds elections in 2007 -- all these events will be taking place around Iran. It will be watching carefully. Iran will have to look at the economic potential and weigh everything and decide. Iran has been saying its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes and it can satisfy the IAEA--that will help.

There is nothing new in the article. Everything has been said before and the newspapers are simply rehashing the old stuff and keeping the issue alive.

It is speculation. Let me tell you, as far as the proliferation issue is concerned, everything is accounted for and we have very strong custodial procedures. It is all speculation about war heads. There is no proof. The collaboration between the US and Pakistan is so good now, there is no scope for doubt. There is good custodial control. Pakistan is very clear and there is nothing missing.

AQ Khan is a Pakistani national. The urgency at that time demanded full disclosure and there was a plea bargain. He was pardoned. This is an issue on which we have cooperated with the US fully. Why focus on one man? There are other international aspects to this network which shouldn’t be ignored.

Yes. You know …

No one else in Pakistan was involved. And he wasn’t flying anywhere he wanted in military aircraft. Military aircraft flights are very carefully monitored. No one can fly around like that. Manifests are kept of all flights.

Wherever there are clandestine (nuclear) programmes, people with knowledge have acted on their own to share their knowledge. Saying that government or the military was involved is illogical. That means the Pakistani establishment was encouraging proliferation. The only reason it happened is because it was a clandestine operation. When you expect results, you give him certain liberty to operate and that’s where things could have gone wrong.

Now certain controls and audits have been brought in and there is a full range of procedures and I don’t think that such a situation can ever arise again.

Pakistan has bent over backwards that India should settle this issue bilaterally. It is only after bilateral discussions failed in January that Pakistan went to the World Bank. We are not upping the ante, only taking recourse to the treaty. As far as I know, both countries will be looking at the World Bank as a neutral party. There shouldn’t be any surprise or hype about going to the World Bank. It should not impact the dialogue process at all.

There is no question of anyone asking the World Bank to remove anyone. I have the deepest respect for Mr. Patel. I have met him several times. This is generated by the Indian media. There is no truth to it. As far I know there is no controversy about Mr. Patel. Only reports are in the Indian papers.

[For the record: The story was first reported in the Pakistani media. An article full of factual errors declaring that the World Bank had "removed its Indian-born official with an American for reviewing Pakistan’s complaint on Baglihar dam following objections raised by Pakistan government" first appeared in the Jang group of newspapers in pakistan. The article, published Feb.3, identified Acting Pakistan Commissioner for Indus Water Shiraz Jameel Memon as the source of the information at a meeting of the Hamdard Thinkers’ Forum in Lahore -- Seema Sirohi]

If India is acquiring weapon systems which drastically alter the balance of power in the region, Pakistan has every right to offset that. India is a bigger country and we don’t want to match it. But whether it is the F-16s or anything else, Pakistan will do its utmost to create a balance. There is no tussle in that. The US must be very clear where it wants to go. The US wouldn’t want to destabilise the region in a manner which shifts power to one side or another.

Pakistan is in ASEAN, it is SAARC and in OIC. It has trade and economic relations with Central Asian countries. Pakistan is not directed to one region to the exclusion of others. While the Middle East remains important for us, we have linkages with other regions. We will pursue our goals on all tracks.