'The Cross-Border Links'

Press Briefing by Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon on the conclusion of Foreign Secretary level talks between India and Pakistan

Navtej Sarna: Good afternoon. It gives me great pleasure to welcome the Foreign Secretary here. He is accompanied by High Commissioner Mr.Satyabrata Pal from Islamabad. The Foreign Secretary will brief you on the India-Pakistan talks. I must tell you that the Foreign Secretary has to leave for the airport straight after this. So, please keep your questions short and few.

Shivshankar Menon: Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. As you know, we have just been through two days of talks with the Pakistani Foreign Secretary. I believe he has just finished briefing you on the talks. You also have with you the Joint Press Statement which we issued at the end of the talks, which gives you an idea of the various decisions that we took. I thought what I'd do was briefly mention the context in which these decisions were taken. Then I will be happy to answer your questions on this.

As you know, these were the first round of official talks between the Foreign Secretaries after we postponed the July talks. They were postponed because of the Mumbai blasts, and because the links into Pakistan of those blasts had created a very strong sense of public opinion and a very strong opinion that we could not have held the talks at that time.

Subsequent to that, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh met with President Musharraf in Havana and it was decided that we would resume these conversations. In that sense this is an important round, a significant round, different from other rounds which were merely meant to review the progress in the Composite Dialogue that we have with Pakistan.

I am happy to tell you that we had a very useful and a constructive round where we not only addressed the various issues which we had been asked to address by the two leaders in the Joint Statement issued in Havana, but we also reviewed the third round of the Composite Dialogue and then discussed the way forward, the sort of actions that we can take and we should take to move this process forward.

Since this was the first formal meeting after the Mumbai blasts, as you have seen from the Joint Press Statement, we discussed and then agreed how to establish the anti-terror mechanism which our leaders had mandated in Havana. It is to be composed of three people from each side and would be headed by an Additional Secretary from the Foreign Ministry. We also discussed its task, which is to consider counter-terrorism measures including through the regular and timely sharing of information.

We shared some information at this round itself with Pakistan on some of the terrorist acts which we have suffered from in the recent past where we have already done our investigations and filed charge-sheets. We also reviewed the third round which had taken place in the earlier part of the year and which you would recall had made progress in several respects.

This was the round which saw the opening of the Poonch-Rawalakot bus service. It was also the round which saw the agreement in principle on cross-LoC trade which has not still been implemented. It was the round which also saw the agreement on a revised shipping protocol which would make it easier to carry cargo between the two countries. This was the round which also discussed the nuclear risk reduction agreement which, as you know, is now ready.

We also agreed in principle on quarterly flag meetings. Apart from that, we then looked at the way forward at how we could take the dialogue process forward and the relationship forward. Most of the results of what we have said are in the Joint Press Statement. So, I would not go over that again.

What we envisage is the fourth round of the Composite Dialogue next year, which we will start off when the two Foreign Secretaries meet in Islamabad in February. Thereafter we will try and make progress on the various issues which are in the agenda. They are listed in the first paragraph of the Joint Press Statement.

Our goal in this process of talks, negotiations, contacts, visits, is frankly to try and achieve a relationship with Pakistan, who is our neighbour, which could be described not just as normalized but actually as good neighbourly relations. We are a long way from this. We obviously have many many things to do in order to achieve that, but that is our goal through this process. It is a fact of geography that we are neighbours and our destinies are linked and we will keep working at this and try and improve the relationship.

I would be happy to answer any questions you have.

Question: The Pakistani Foreign Secretary has just told us that India has not presented … evidence on the Mumbai blasts nor have you in any way given any information or had any discussion on the Mumbai blasts. Can you say anything on this?

[At a separate press conference, Pakistan Foreign Secretary Riaz Mohammad Khanhad said: "Finger-pointing at Pakistan within 15 minutes of the incident (Mumbai blasts) is nothing but levellingaccusations. We have resented the charge and we reject it". He also addedthat there is no such advanced technology in South Asia which can ascertain within minutes who is responsible for any such attack."For either country to destabilise the other is a dangerous folly". To persistent queries, he said the Indian side has not given any evidence on the Mumbai blasts. "Some material has been given to us...But it does not relate to the Mumbai blasts. It is about certain linkages of banned groups in India andPakistan" -- Ed]

Shivshankar Menon: Let me make this clear. We handed over some information and material in writing about those cases in the recent past where we have completed our part of the investigation and where we filed charge-sheets. That we gave in writing to the Pakistani side. That does not include Mumbai because they still have not filed charge-sheets.

However, we have discussed the Mumbai blasts with Pakistan at various occasions in the recent past in our various contacts with them. Because of our legal processes, we cannot today give them formal material or evidence, or make demands until we complete our own legal processes. Anything else would amount to contempt of our own courts and this we cannot do. That is why in a technical sense, yes, that is correct. However the fact that we postponed the talks because of the Mumbai blasts, because that we resumed the talks and in all these contacts naturally we have discussed the Mumbai blasts.

Let me also make this clear. I think there is terrorism in Pakistan: there is terrorism in India. It is for each of us as sovereign states to deal with it on our own territory. It is the cross-border links that we have raised with Pakistan. The anti-terrorism mechanism gives us a way of dealing with that. So, now that we have given some information, this mechanism we hope will meet soon, and we hope that it will take some action.

Question: So, Mumbai was not discussed at all.

Shivshankar Menon: I think I have just answered that.

Question: Pakistani Foreign Secretary says that Siachen was talked about and an agreement was possible. He said that if the desire is to authenticate or agree upon positions, it is alright. But if the desire is to endorse a claim, then there is … What exactly is …

[The Pakistani Foreign Secretary had said, "[If there is a desire for indication of the present positions, that in any agreement, if at all reached, would be possible to be accommodated. That concern can be met. But if the intention is to seek endorsement of certain claims, then it becomesdifficult".-- Ed]

Shivshankar Menon: We did have a discussion on Siachen. It is one of the subjects. We have a separate meeting only on Siachen between the Defence Secretaries in every round of the Composite Dialogue. We did that in the third round as well. We will do so in the fourth round. Even at this meeting we discussed Siachen. We both said what concerns us in Siachen. In that sense we both described what worries us. Our position is well-known. We would see the beginning of the process of this engagement as being prior authentication of present positions. I think what he was trying to say was what their position is on that same question. There is still a gap between our positions and let us be honest about this. It is something that we need to talk through and try and bridge. That is why we are still talking about this issue.

Question: Can you please clarify, Sir, when you said that you have given some information on other cases where charge-sheets have been filed, could you tell us a little more on that?

Shivshankar Menon: I think I would rather let the mechanism do its work. The whole point of giving the information was to let the mechanism do some work. Let us see what happens with that information, what the investigations into that information lead to. As I said, this is material relating to cross-border linkages to the terrorist cases in India in the recent past.

Question: Foreign Secretary, your counterpart also mentioned possible discussions on demilitarization. This is an idea that has been there. I think he also said that Pakistan, if India took some steps in Kashmir - the term used was heavy military presence - if India decides to withdraw them, they would also take some reciprocal steps. Was that discussed substantively at the meeting you have had over the last couple of days? What is our response to his comments?

Shivshankar Menon: Demilitarization is one of the concepts which has been mentioned recently - I think it is in the public discourse as well – on Jammu and Kashmir and how it should be dealt with. We have in fact removed some troops from Jammu and Kashmir last year. You would remember that there was some troop withdrawal. In our case the troop levels in Jammu and Kashmir are really related to the security situation, at least our appreciation of the security situation in Jammu and Kashmir. We have a responsibility to the citizens of our state to ensure peace and tranquility that they can live their lives free of violence. That is really what it is linked to. If there is an improvement in the situation, certainly it is possible to consider further troop withdrawals. But violence has to go down and the threats to ordinary people who try and lead peaceful lives, has to go down.

Question: Mr. Menon, jab Pakistani Foreign Secretary ka dhyan is taraf kheencha gaya ki wahan ke National Assembly ke Member ke Lashkar-e-Tayyiba ke saath contacts hai - aur unhonne us baat pe phakr mahsoos kiya hai – to unka javab tha ki hamein Government ke policies par zor dena chahiye aur individuals aur groups pe dhyan nahin dena chahiye. Kya Pakistan aisa kah kar apne zimmedari se bachta hai? Doosra baat unhonne kaha ki Bharat me jab bhi koi attack hota hai to pandrah minute mein blame Pakistan pe jaata hai. Aur is tarah ki finger-pointing behad khatarnak ho sakta hai …

[Mr Menon, when the Pakistani Foreign Secretary's attention was drawn to thefact that some members of their National Assembly have contacts withLashkar-e-Toiba and they have expressed pride at this fact, he replied that weshould focus on the policies of the government and not pay attention toindividuals or groups. Does Pakistan escape from its responsibility by merelysaying this? Another thing which he pointed out was that whenever there is an anattack in India, within 15 minutes Pakistan is blamed for it and that suchfinger-pointing could be dangerous]

Shivshankar Menon: Mere yahan aate hi mujhe yeh kagaz pakda diya gaya hai jis mein likha hai ki unke Parliamentary Secretary, Maj Tanveer, jinhonne kaha hai ki ve Lashkar-e-Tayyiba ke member the pehle. Maine abhi dekha hai. Mujhe kaafi ashcharya laga jab maine yeh dekha. Lekin ab dekhte hain. Thodi pooch-taach karke phir aapko batayenge ki iske peeche kya hai. Doosra jo aap ne kaha hai ki Pakistan ke Foreign Secretary ne yeh kaha ki Pakistan pe ilzam nahin lagana chahiye aapko, ham ne Pakistan se yeh maanga ki jo dehshatgard groups hain unke yahan, ham ne yeh chaha hai ki jo groups Hindustan mein hamne ban kiye hain, aur jo Pakistan mein bhi ban hue hain, do teen jaise Laskhar-e-Tayyiba bhi ban hue hain, unki jo karravayi hai, usko agar voh band karen, khas tour pe Hindustan mein jo voh support kar rahen hain, gatividhiyan kar rahe hain, usko roken. Hamne yahi manga hai unse. Aur ham yahi chahte hain. Ab voh khud hamse kehte hain ki agar koi specific information ham unko dete hain to voh kuch na kuch karenge uske baare mein. Ab dekhte hain. Hamne information diya to hai. Ab dekhte hain. Hamne anti-terrorism mechansim haal hi mein to shuru kiya hai. To abhi kuch kehna … Thode din baad aapko bata denge jab ham dekhenge iska kya assar hotahai.

[As soon as I arrived here, I was handed over this piece of paper which saysthat their Parliamentary Secretary, Maj Tanveer has said that he was earlier amember of the Lashkar-e-Toiba. I have just seen that. I was quite surprised whenI saw that. But let us now first find out a bit about it before we can sayanything about what is behind it. 

Secondly, what you said about Pakistan Foreign Secretary's remarks thatPakistan should not be blamed. We have only asked this of Pakistan that thoseterrorist groups based in their territory which have been banned by India -- andwhich are also banned in Pakistan -- like, for example, Lashkar-e-Toiba is alsobanned in Pakistan -- should be stopped, particularly their activities in India,which have their support, should be stopped. That is what we have asked of them.And that's what we want. Now they themselves tell us that if we give them anyspecific information, they would definitely do something or the other about it.Now let's see, for we have given specific information. Let's see now. Afterall,we have started the joint anti-terror mechanism only recently, so it would notbe right to say anything now... After a few days we would be able to tell youafter we see what effect it has had ]

Question: What he says is that within fifteen minutes how can you finger point?

Shivshankar Menon: I do not think he accused the Government of India of doing that.

Question: Yeh jo religious protocol ki list hai, usmein kaunse naye religious shrines ko include karne ki baat chal rahi hai? Doosra, hamare Videsh Mantri Pranab Mukherjee ke Pakistan trip …

[Which new religious shrines are being considered for inclusion in the listof religious protocols? Secondly, our external affairs minister's Pakistantrip...]

Shivshankar Menon: Maaf keejiye, main list abhi nahin laya hoon. Na to yeh list tay hua hai kyon ki unke taraf se har ek shrine ka javab nahin aaya hai. Kucch shrines hain, (jiske liye) jo voh bhi raazi hain. Unhonne kaha hai ki ham add kar sakte hain protocol mein. Lekin abhi list kaafi lambi hai. Agar aap chahte hain, to zaroor baadme de sakte hain. Abhi list hai nahin mere pass. Doosra jo saval poocha hain aapne, date tay nahin hua hai lekin voh jaayenge zaroor. Kab jayenge, yeh abhi ham baat kar rahen hain unse. Dekhte hain, jo dates unko suit karenge uspe tay karenge. Lekin jaayenge zaroor.

[I am sorry, I am not carrying this list with me right now, nor is this listfinalised as yet because Pakistan has still not responded to each shrine, butthere are some shrines on which we have an agreement and they have said thosecan be added to the protocol. But the list is quite long right now. If you want,it can always be provided later, because it is not with me right now. As foryour second question, the date has not been finalised as yet but he woulddefinitely be visiting. We are not yet talking to them about when this visitwould take place. Let's see, it will be decided on dates that are suitable tothem, but he would go for sure.]

Question: Sir, Major Tanveer Hassan vaali saval pe, joh visit hui unki Parliamentary Secretary level par hai. Unke bayanom se kya sarkar khudko bilkul alag kar sakti hai? Kya uske liye koi zimmedari nahin banti? Doosra jo mechanism hai kaafi sara discussion hua hai aaj, will it start work from only jo aajke discussions hain?Ya phir jo pehle list Bharat ne saumpi hai jisme Dawood aur Salahuddin ke naam hain, voh bhi iske working dayare meinaayenge?

[Sir, on the question of Major Tanveer Hassan... his visit is at the Parliamentary Secretary level.Can the government dissociate itself completely from his statements? Can noresponsibility be assigned for this? Secondly, on the [joint anti-terror]mechanism, a lot has been discussed today. Will it operate only on the basis oftoday's discussions? Or will it also cover in its ambit the earlier list handedover by India which includes the names of Dawood and Salahuddin?]

Shivshankar Menon: Yeh jo pehla aapka sawal hai, yeh Pakistan Foreign Secretary se poochiye, mujh se kyon pooch rahen hain aap? Lekin jo doosra sawal hai yeh, hamne jo unko apni information di hai, yeh aaj ka to information nahin hai. Yeh pichhle saal bhar jo chal raha hai us ke baare mein hamne information diya hai. Ab dekhenge, pehle to jo yeh diya hai ispe kya hoga dekhte hain. Dheere dheere jab yeh mechanism kaam karne lagega, December mein milenge shayad, phir ham dekhenge kya kya kar sakte hain.

[Your first question should be addressed not to me but to the PakistanForeign Secretary. Why ask me? As for your second question, the informationhanded over to them is not just today's information. We have given theminformation on all that's been happening for the last one year or so. Now itremains to be seen what they do with what we have handed over so far. Gradually,as this mechanism starts working, we shall see what can be done when we perhapsmeet next in December...]

Question: Does India believe that it is the Pakistan state actors that are involved in the recent terrorist attacks against India across the border? If so, are these state actors under the control of PresidentMusharraf?

Shivshankar Menon: What we say is that there are elements in Pakistan, and we do not qualify this, there are elements in Pakistan which have been involved in not just assisting but inciting terrorism in India. Who controls, how much control, that is not for us to say. It would be very difficult for us to make categorical statements about that.