'Three Is A Crowd'

Full-text of the prepared statement handed over to the press

"At the invitation of Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, PakistanPresident Pervez Musharraf visited India between 14-16 July, 2001.

In keeping with his abiding vision of good neighbourly relations betweenIndia and Pakistan, the prime minister had invited President Musharraf to walkthe high road of peace and reconciliation. Our commitment to that nobleobjective, upon the attainment of which rests the welfare of many, is nottransitory. It is that commitment that was demonstrated at Simla and Lahore andrecently during President Musharraf's visit.

Significant confidence building measures that were announced prior toPresident Musharraf's visit would be fully implemented on our part. It is ourconviction that, when put in place, they will make an important contribution toour relations.

During his visit, the president of Pakistan had extensive discussions withour entire leadership. These included three rounds of one-to-one meetings withthe prime minister, and an hour-long farewell call prior to his departure onMonday night. There were also detailed discussions during delegation leveltalks. All these meetings were marked by cordiality and candour. They providedand invaluable opportunity to both sides to understand each other's viewpoints,concerns and compulsions.

Our negotiations for an agreed text of document were seriously pursued. Therewere long hours of discussions at official and political levels. During thesenegotiations India did not shy away from any issue. In keeping with theconfidentiality, which is necessary for these negotiations and maintenance ofwhich is necessary for the future bilateral relations themselves, it would notbe proper to go into details. However, it needs assertion that, during thenegotiating process, India fully respected all established international norms.As a responsible and mature democracy, we negotiate to improve bilateralrelations with our neighbours, not to indulge in public relations

We are, of course, disappointed that the two sides could not arrive at anagreed text. It will not be a breach of confidentiality to clarify that this wason an account of the difficulty of reconciling our basic approaches to bilateralrelations. India is convinced that narrow, segmented or unifocal approaches willsimply not work. Our focus has to remain on the totality of the relationship;our endeavour to build trust and confidence, and a mutually beneficialrelationship even as we address and move forward on all outstanding issues,including Jammu and Kashmir; building upon the existing compacts of Simla andLahore.

It was also made abundantly clear to the Pakistan side during the visit, thatthe promotion of cross-border terrorism and violence are unacceptable and mustcease. Let there be no illusion on this score: India has the will and theresolve to defeat all such challenges.

We will pick up threads from the visit of the president of Pakistan. We willunceasingly endeavour to realise our vision of a relationship of peace,friendship and cooperation with Pakistan."

Edited Excerpts from the Press Conference:

Draft Declaration sabotaged by a hidden hand as alleged by Pakspokesperson?

It would not be fitting for me to engage in any kind of rebuttal, or war ofwords, with the official spokesman concerned. I wish however to aver that therehas always been complete unanimity among the members of Prime Minister AtalBihari Vajpayee's Cabinet, and among the members of the official delegation thatparticipated in the Agra Summit on India's behalf

This kind of rumour is best ignored. There is no need to lend credency with arebuttal. Whatever has been said by the spokseperson will be dealt with by thespokesperson. I do not want to engage in this never-ending exercise.

How close were they to an agreement and what exactly happened? 

I am not going to engage in a game of who backed out from what. I don't wantto say how close we were or how far we were. 

Did the breakfast meet destroy the summit?

On this much debated question, I will merely say that when we are in complexnegotiations, the objective being lasting peace and amity between India andPakistan, we cannot negotiate through the media.

Sushma Swaraj - spoke out of turn?

I have heard reports that my colleague, Minister for Information andBroadcasting Sushma Swaraj, spoke out of turn, when she was not supposed to. Imust point out that she is the Minister for Information, as such she speaks withall the authority of the government of India. There is no question of eitherher, or any other minister, speaking out of turn.

On Pakistani allegations of a difference in the ministerial delegation

This is a canard. To say that we are working at cross purposes is to belittlethe efforts made collectively by my distinguished colleagues in such importanttalks.

Since the LoC has been relatively quiet as vouched for by General Padmanabhan too, how is India's claim of cross-border terrorismvalid?

As far as incidents on the border go, I have said earlier that there has beenrelative peace along the Line of Control, but I did not say there is totalpeace. Incidents have happened, they continue to happen, it is regrettable. Wewill deal with them as they arise.

Will the CBMs remain in place?

We are committed to the confidence building measures we have announced, andwill ensure that they are fulfilled. I cannot speak for Pakistan, or speculatewhether they are as committed to those measures.

Has Vajpayee turned down the invitation to visit Pakistan?

An invitation was extended by His Excellency the President of Pakistan. Itwas accepted by the Prime Minister of India, and the invitation and itsacceptance both stand. The timing of the visit is now a matter of diplomaticarrangement, and it will be dealt with in due time.

If you call Pakistan's approach unifocal, isn't India doing the same withcross-border terrorism?

Just as Pakistan is fixated on the issue of Jammu and Kashmir, it issuggested that we are fixated on cross-border terrorism as the only issue. Imust correct this. As far as we are concerned, Kashmir is only one of theissues, though it is an important issue. Similarly, as far as we are concerned,cross-border terrorism is only one of the issues, though it is an importantissue. India believes in the totality of relationship between the two countries,we believe that all issues should be simultaneously addressed. We furtherbelieve that as we progress with increasing confidence and trust, there will bemovement on the issue of Jammu and Kashmir as well.

His expectations of the summit

As far as expectations are concerned, the invitation to President Musharrafwas inspired by the expectation that there would be accomodation, understandingand movement forward.

Given the belligerent tones of statements from Pakistan and Indianresponse, wasn't the summit held prematurely?

So far as the first part of the question is concerned, I must refute thesuggestion that I was belligerent. As to the interviews President Musharrafchose to give prior to visiting India, surely that is his choice, hisdetermination, and we do not wish to comment on that except to say that when itcomes to discussions on bilateral international issues, particularly when itinvolves heads of governments and officials of countries, we do not and cannotnegotiate through the media, that is our commitment.

I was very severly reprimanded by friends in the media who pointed out thatwhereas from the Pakistan side there were two or three media events each day,Prime Minister Vajpayee did not grant a single interview and neither did I. Iwas silent because it was not proper for me to talk of the ongoing discussionsbetween two heads of state, that is not how diplomacy is concerned. When I choseto speak, as I am speaking now, it is to clarify issues of importance to India.

As far as preparations are concerned, we did suggest that there should be anexchange of officials prior to the Summit, we volunteered to send officials ofthe Ministry of External Affairs to Islamabad for prior preparation, as iscustomary in such engagements. Consistently, however, we received from Pakistanthe response that such a visit and such prior preparation was not necessary,they did not want our officials to visit Islamabad, they did not wish to fix anagenda in advance, and they believed that fixing of the agenda was best left tothe two leaders.

Will there be better preparation ahead of the Prime Minister's reciprocalvisit to Pakistan? 

I must share with you that the officials of my ministry had begun to despairof the constant demands made on them by way of preparation. The variousministries were not lacking in preparation. We were all fully prepared, alldelegation members were fully briefed, the documentation was prepared weeks inadvance and extensively discussed by all members of the delegation.

When India suggested a prior meeting between the two sides to prepare workingdocuments to arrive at a possible agenda, we found sadly that Pakistan did notwant it in that manner. As hosts, we can only suggest and we did suggest, almostto the last day, that prior preparations might be in order. We cannot dictate,we can only request.

What are we left with in terms of Indo-Pak engagements over the next sixmonths?

To use the phrase 'what are we left with?' suggests that everything hascollapsed. That is not so. Ours is an ancient relationship, Pakistan is ourneighbour, India remains committed to working towards lasting peace andcooperation with Pakistan, and this will continue to be our policy.

In practical terms, the invitation to the Prime Minister of India byPresident Musharraf is in position, it has been accepted, a due date will befixed through diplomatic channels, and I am sure that there will be otheropportunities, at other levels, to continue the interaction between the twocountries.

Was there at any stage an acceptance of the centrality of the Kashmirissue? What could be the basis for future engagements?

Jammu and Kashmir is an issue that needs to be addressed -- we recognise itand have spelt it out in so many words, even as far back as the Shimla Accord.India remains committed to that, India's position remains constant onrecognising that it is an issue, and that we are committed to addressing it.

Yes, we have conceptual differences with Pakistan, we recognise it as anissue, but we do not recognise it as the only issue, the core issue, or anyother such designations.

As far as the summit is concerned, I would not treat this as the end of theexercise. Our commitment to peace and amity remains constant, the caravan ofpeace will continue to roll on and I have no doubt that on some auspicious day,it will reach its destination.

Insights into the Pakistani regime?

Without going into specifics, I must say that our understanding has certainlyimproved, and that improvement is true for both sides. Such talks are alwayshelpful in understanding each other's personalities, their thought processes,their concerns.

Time for third party mediation?

No to a third party mediation -- we believe that two are more than adequate,three is a crowd.

Did Pakistan attempt to bring in a third party into the dispute?

A certain confidentiality has to be preserved in case of such high levelmeetings and if I were to answer your question, I would be teetering close tobreaching that confidentiality. But I will repeat that no, no third party isrequired, India and Pakistan are by themselves enough to deal withIndia-Pakistan issues.

Is there space to take the relations forward given the conceptualdifferences?

Yes there are conceptual differences, but I believe that India and Pakistan'srelations should not be denied by differences, we should be able to transcendthem for the sake of the welfare of the two countries. I interpret my personalresponsibility as one of constant endeavour to bridge the gaps of understandingand to reconcile differences.

Summit -- a failure? Was an attempt made till the last moment for a joint statement? Wouldn't it have been better than complete silence?

I don't characterise the summit as a failure, I merely term it as anotherstep towards finding lasting peace and amity. I do not wish to speculate onwhether a joint statement would or would not have been better, that is now therealm of the past.

Prisoners of War

It is a cause of concern. India has been relentlessly raising this question,it was raised even in Lahore. There was some understanding then, butunfortunately the government changed and the decisions taken then did notfructify into action. Now, President Musharraf has said that he will personallylook into it and release any PoWs that may exist, I certainly hope he does that.

Can we do business with this man?

I have just done business with him. I have to deal with the world as it is,not as it ought to be.

What are the implications of the Summit on the SAARC process?

As far as SAARC is concerned, even before the Summit began, Foreign SecretaryChokila Iyer was due to go for a special meeting of foreign secretaries tointiate the SAARC process all over again. It was then that the sad and tragicevents invaded Nepal, the host country, and caused that visit to be postponed. Iam sure the foreign secretary would have got fresh dates, and she will mostdefinitely be attending.

The mood at the time of Musharraf departure

It was marked by disappointment. But keeping in mind the totality of therelationship between India and Pakistan I am not disheartened.

Did India prevent the General's press conference as alleged by the Pakistan spokesperson?

"So far as denying an opportunity to meet the press is concerned, the question simply does not arise .... We have never stopped the President or anyone from meeting the press.

Earlier, the understanding was that after a joint statement had been agreen upon, a joint press conference would be held. When that did not materialise and for want of time ...It had been made clear that a 90-minute notice was required for necessary security arrangements and for want of it, an impromptu briefing could not be arranged.

As directed by the security and practicality considerations, it was not possible for him to hold a press conference.

Did India prevent Musharraf from visiting Ajmer?

Kamaal hai, Meri kya Aukaat ki main unhe Garib Nawaazke pass jaane se rokun. Kehte hain ki jab tak Garib Nawaaz ka hukum nahin hootakoi vahan nahin jaa sakta 

(Strange. Who am I to stop him (Musharraf) fromvisiting the dargah. It is said that nobody can visit the place without a callfrom the Sufi Saint).

On the Pakistani media behaviour with MEAspokesperson Nirupama Rao last night

Tthis is regrettable and condemnable. I am responsiblefor the security of my officials.... It is very uncivilised. They are from yourfraternity. I don't want to tell the media how to behave.
 
On releasing Vajpayee's opening statement solate

India does not believe that discussions or negotiations between two heads ofGovernment can be conducted through public or press. We abided by that. Howeverwhen we found that Pakistan was engaging with the media, we felt that theessentials should be made known to all.

Was the summit an exercise in futility?

No