|
India-Pakistan row over PM’s “limited mandate” |
 |
Without expressing its anguish and anger in public for fear of damaging the chances of resumption of peace dialogue, Pakistan is clearly ruing Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s remarks to President Zardari during the 40-minute meeting in Yekaterinburg, Russia. In full glare of the international media, Dr. Singh said: “I have a limited mandate to tell you that the territory of Pakistan should not be allowed to be used for terrorist acts against India.”
President Zardari was visibly embarrassed by Dr. Manmohan Singh’s remarks which have annoyed the civilian leadership as well as the Army in Pakistan. The pro-establishment Pak daily, THE NEWS described the remarks as “rude” though neither Pakistan Foreign Minister Qureshi nor the Foreign Ministry spokesman took exception to his remarks.
After their Yakaterinsburg tête-à-tête, the Pakistan presidential spokesman Farahtullah Babar announced that the two leaders would meet again in Egypt on the sidelines of the Non-Aligned summit. It was further announced that the Foreign Secretaries of the two countries will meet soon to discuss the issues coming in the way of resumption of talks and their assessment would be the basis of the meeting between Zardari and Manmohan Singh in Egypt in July.
However, after Zardari’s return to Islamabad, the Pakistan Foreign Office spokesman announced that Prime Minister Gilani, instead of President Zardari, would lead the Pakistani delegation to the NAM summit. In the past during the nine-year regime of General Musharraf, only the Pakistan President has been representing the country. Diplomatic and other sources said the move was definitely a reaction to Dr. Singh’s remarks.
Whatever the reason for President Zardari to skip the mid-July NAM summit, any decision to resume talks would depend on the talks between the Foreign Secretaries of the two countries. There is no change in New Delhi’s stand that any decision on formally resuming the dialogue hinged entirely on what action Pakistan takes against those who have committed crimes in India, including the perpetrators of the 26/11 Mumbai attacks. According to an official, “We would test Pakistan’s sincerity in dealing with terrorism only when it acts with determination against the groups launching attacks in India.”
It is understood that during his talks with Dr. Singh, Zardari tried to wriggle out of the corner into which he was pushed by talking about the “difficulties” that his government is facing in tackling the menace of terrorism and sought “sometime” to address India’s concerns. But Indian analysts are of the opinion that Pakistan’s record in this direction so far is not very encouraging. Pakistan has detained half a dozen suspects in the Mumbai terror attacks but no serious effort has been made to put them on trial. The Hafiz Saeed case was a litmus test for Pakistani sincerity. He was allowed to be released by a Bench of the Lahore High Court after the prosecution, as the judgement revealed, did not produce even a single document about his involvement in masterminding the Mumbai attacks in spite of a voluminous dossier provided by India. Pakistan assured agitated New Delhi that it will file an appeal against the release of Hafiz Saeed, but it is yet to challenge it in the Supreme Court. Significantly, Hafiz Saeed met the Hizbul Mujahideen chief, Syed Salahuddin on June 16 after his release and renewed the pledge to combat for Kashmir.
It is nobody’s case that India should shy away from talks. It needs to keep the bilateral window open and maintain regular contacts. But Pakistan should demonstrate its sincerity by seriously pursuing the cases against those identified to have planned and executed the Mumbai terror attacks.
US support to Pakistan both in terms of cash assistance, arms and political and diplomatic backing in return for fighting the Taliban has contributed to the complications in Indo - Pakistan ties. Pakistan is demanding its pound of flesh by asking the US to make India resume talks and pull back its troops from the border with Kashmir. Without wanting to be accused as pushing India hard, officials from the US have been lecturing New Delhi on the merits of opening talks and demobilization of forces from the border. At the same time, US is ignoring its own reports of Pakistan diverting military aid to target India, and clandestinely upgrading and expanding its nuclear weapons programme. Analysts conclude that this strengthens the belief that American interests in this part of the word do not necessarily factor in Indian concerns.
This impression was strengthened when US Under Secretary of State William Burns said during his visit to New Delhi earlier in the month that the views of the Kashmiri people will have to be taken into account in any final resolution of the Kashmir issue between India and Pakistan.
India, therefore, would have to be on its own rather than depend on the US to chart its bilateral course with Pakistan, though in the given circumstances, it will be all the more difficult to force Pakistan to give up its traditional policy of promoting India - centric terrorist outfits. Incidentally, Pakistan’s current fight against the Taliban has nothing to do with suppressing anti Indian outfits like the Lashkar e Taiba. These groups continue to receive support from the Pakistani establishments. For India the bottom line is that the present war on terror (Taliban) is not a war on India centric terror outfits.
|
