G
Guest
Guest
India has walked more than the extra mile for Pakistan. At the end of crucial discussions between Prime Minister Manmohan Singh ,Pakistani PM Yousaf Raza Gilani, the two sides came out with a joint statement, which Pakistan can justifiably describe as being "satisfactory".
Even as India denied having made concessions or shifting of goalposts to Pakistan's benefit, the latter was gloating over the outcome.
There are three aspects of the joint statement where India has given ground to Pakistan. First, the formulation "action on terrorism should not be linked to the composite dialogue process and these should not be bracketed" suggests a climbdown by India which had consistently maintained that the talks could not take place till the 26/11 perpetrators were punished. Pakistan, which pressed for resumption of talks, has merely promised to do "everything in its power in this regard", seen as too general a commitment.
The PM was at pains to control the damage. He told journalists, "The composite dialogue process cannot resume unless and until terrorist acts, like the one which shook Mumbai, are properly accounted for and perpetrators of these heinous crimes are brought to book." Indian officials said the statement means Pakistan cannot ask for a resumption of composite dialogue by showing "action" against terrorism.
But that's not how the statement is being read. Pakistan for instance read it very differently. Gilani said, "All core issues that were pending under composite dialogue should be discussed... That should not be bracketed with this Mumbai incident."
The joint statement is silent on Pakistan's commitment of January 6, 2004 that that it will not allow its territory to be used for terrorism against India. In a sense Pakistan can feel freed from that promise. India's concession on this front comes even as intelligence and information mount of more and deadly terror attacks being planned against India from Pakistan-based and supported terror groups.
Singh later took a completely different line to cover up. He said, "Dialogue process cannot move forward even if it resumes so long as Pakistan's territory is used for terrorism directed against India."
But the area where India appears to have capitulated most is by agreeing to take Pakistan's Balochistan problem from being an internal affair of Pakistan to a bilateral issue, by allowing it to be placed in the joint statement. It's a big gain for Pakistan, because it legitimises Islamabad's contention that the Balochistan unrest was being fomented by India. When asked about this, the PM answered defensively, "India has nothing to be afraid about events in Balochistan. Our policies are an open book there. We are willing to discuss anything." But everybody is aware that India showed a chink that Pakistan will be quick to exploit.
Singh and Gilani promised to meet in September on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, and until then, the two foreign secretaries will "meet as often as necessary".
Even though top-level officials said India would only talk terrorism with Pakistan, the joint statement clearly says that the "entire gamut of bilateral relations" was considered. Pakistan has been asking for the dialogue to be more broad-based than mere terrorism.
On the Mumbai attacks, the statement said PM had reiterated the "need to bring the perpetrators of the Mumbai attacks to justice". "Prime Minister Gilani assured that Pakistan will do everything in its power in this regard. He said that Pakistan has provided an updated status dossier on the investigations of the Mumbai attacks and had sought additional information/evidence. Prime Minister Singh said that the dossier is being reviewed," the statement said.
Later PM told journalists, "We have begun a process. How successful we are in achieving our objectives, only time will tell. I cannot predict the outcome of what will follow the foreign secretary-level talks, what will be our assessment of the dossier that Pakistan side has given to us a few days ago," Singh said.
According to reports, foreign secretary Shiv Shankar Menon held several rounds of meetings with his counterpart Salman Bashir and even met Pak PM Gilani in a late night meeting in preparation for today's meeting. ""There is no way but dialogue to deal with issues either to take the relations forward or to address issues that divide us," Menon was quoted as saying. He added, "we have had difficult issues in the past and we still have difficult issues to address".
The statement concluded with high-sounding sentiments. "Both leaders agreed that the real challenge is development and the elimination of poverty. Both leaders are resolved to eliminate those factors which prevent our countries from realising their full potential. Both agreed to work to create an atmosphere of mutual trust and confidence."
Even as India denied having made concessions or shifting of goalposts to Pakistan's benefit, the latter was gloating over the outcome.
There are three aspects of the joint statement where India has given ground to Pakistan. First, the formulation "action on terrorism should not be linked to the composite dialogue process and these should not be bracketed" suggests a climbdown by India which had consistently maintained that the talks could not take place till the 26/11 perpetrators were punished. Pakistan, which pressed for resumption of talks, has merely promised to do "everything in its power in this regard", seen as too general a commitment.
The PM was at pains to control the damage. He told journalists, "The composite dialogue process cannot resume unless and until terrorist acts, like the one which shook Mumbai, are properly accounted for and perpetrators of these heinous crimes are brought to book." Indian officials said the statement means Pakistan cannot ask for a resumption of composite dialogue by showing "action" against terrorism.
But that's not how the statement is being read. Pakistan for instance read it very differently. Gilani said, "All core issues that were pending under composite dialogue should be discussed... That should not be bracketed with this Mumbai incident."
The joint statement is silent on Pakistan's commitment of January 6, 2004 that that it will not allow its territory to be used for terrorism against India. In a sense Pakistan can feel freed from that promise. India's concession on this front comes even as intelligence and information mount of more and deadly terror attacks being planned against India from Pakistan-based and supported terror groups.
Singh later took a completely different line to cover up. He said, "Dialogue process cannot move forward even if it resumes so long as Pakistan's territory is used for terrorism directed against India."
But the area where India appears to have capitulated most is by agreeing to take Pakistan's Balochistan problem from being an internal affair of Pakistan to a bilateral issue, by allowing it to be placed in the joint statement. It's a big gain for Pakistan, because it legitimises Islamabad's contention that the Balochistan unrest was being fomented by India. When asked about this, the PM answered defensively, "India has nothing to be afraid about events in Balochistan. Our policies are an open book there. We are willing to discuss anything." But everybody is aware that India showed a chink that Pakistan will be quick to exploit.
Singh and Gilani promised to meet in September on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, and until then, the two foreign secretaries will "meet as often as necessary".
Even though top-level officials said India would only talk terrorism with Pakistan, the joint statement clearly says that the "entire gamut of bilateral relations" was considered. Pakistan has been asking for the dialogue to be more broad-based than mere terrorism.
On the Mumbai attacks, the statement said PM had reiterated the "need to bring the perpetrators of the Mumbai attacks to justice". "Prime Minister Gilani assured that Pakistan will do everything in its power in this regard. He said that Pakistan has provided an updated status dossier on the investigations of the Mumbai attacks and had sought additional information/evidence. Prime Minister Singh said that the dossier is being reviewed," the statement said.
Later PM told journalists, "We have begun a process. How successful we are in achieving our objectives, only time will tell. I cannot predict the outcome of what will follow the foreign secretary-level talks, what will be our assessment of the dossier that Pakistan side has given to us a few days ago," Singh said.
According to reports, foreign secretary Shiv Shankar Menon held several rounds of meetings with his counterpart Salman Bashir and even met Pak PM Gilani in a late night meeting in preparation for today's meeting. ""There is no way but dialogue to deal with issues either to take the relations forward or to address issues that divide us," Menon was quoted as saying. He added, "we have had difficult issues in the past and we still have difficult issues to address".
The statement concluded with high-sounding sentiments. "Both leaders agreed that the real challenge is development and the elimination of poverty. Both leaders are resolved to eliminate those factors which prevent our countries from realising their full potential. Both agreed to work to create an atmosphere of mutual trust and confidence."
