Author:
Publication: The Indian Express
Date: June 15, 2003
URL: http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=25833
Introduction: Pakistan President
General Pervez Musharraf spoke to NDTV's Prannoy Roy about the latest Indo-Pak
peace moves, Kashmir and resumption of sports ties. Excerpts:
From an ordinary person like me,
we look at India and Pakistani leaders, like yourself, and they still seem
to choose the sublime or the ridiculous to discuss - impossible issues
like Kashmir or trivial issues like cricket. But the real issues like trade,
how we can help each other economically, those are tractable, solvable
problems. What happens if you say. Chalo, this is impossible, we won't
discuss it. The trivial too, we won't. Let's just get down and fix the
machinery here.
There is lack of trust. Because,
we don't trust, we don't trust the Indian government. We think you only
want to do that and sideline the main issue. Now, if there was trust that
we will... Has any leader in India ever said that, we want to resolve the
Kashmir dispute? Nobody says that. How can we trust you? We don't trust
you. We think your strategy is to put the dispute under the carpet, to
sideline it.
Q.: I have great, great respect
for the Pakistani media. One issue that all of them point to, and I don't
want to ask this from India's point of view, they all say, Kargil hurt
Pakistan's self-interest So from Pakistan's point of view - forget India
- was Kargil a mistake?
A.: No, I don't think so at all.
I think the main issue of whatever happened at Kargil, were the issue of
Kashmir which is in the limelight now, and it has brought to fore, one
major issue, that Pakistan and India cannot go to war, must not go to war.
Therefore, disputes need to be resolved, this is the international concern.
Q.: I didn't quite get that logic
- ''must not go to war'' - so Kargil war is good?
A.: No not at all. This was not
a decision, taken by us, but a decision taken by the Mujahideen, who were
there, and we got involved into it.
Q.: Again, this is a denial. You
were deeply involved there.
A.: We got deeply involved. We
did get involved because of the Mujahideen, the action of the Indian troops,
because of concentration, because of Indian aircraft intrusion into Pakistan.
We obviously did get deeply involved then. But this involvement is there
in Siachen. Why are we not talking of that? Every day it's happening.
Q.: A lot of people here believe
that Kargil was a mistake.
A.: There are differing views,
but I am not one of those. I am a strong believer, that before Kargil,
whatever happened there, Kashmir I think was a dead issue.
Q.: So you could have another Kargil?
A.: Depends on how we proceed on
the peace track, on how things develop. One can't say.
Q.: You are not ruling it out.
A.: Nobody can say yes, we will
have another Kargil, but certainly we need to resolve disputes.
Q.: Through violence?
A.: No we should resolve them peacefully.
It's only when peace fails, violence occurs in any form.
Q.: Two questions I asked you in
Agra. The world has changed since then. I want to ask the questions again,
and hopefully you don't remember the answers.
A.: Yes, I don't. Don't remember
the question.
Q.: One question was that, when
there is a woman and her four children standing at a bus-stop and somebody
guns them down, anywhere in the world, can you ever call that freedom fighting?
A.: Terrible. Yes. That's not freedom
fighting
Q.: Is that terrorism?
A.: Yes.
Q.: That's a slight change from
Agra..
A.: Did I say it's not terrorism
there?
Q.: You said that these things happen
in a struggle.
A.: I don't remember.
Q.: The other question I asked you
was that in 40 out of the 55 years in Pakistan, you did not have democracy.
But you are so bothered for these 40-50 years about the will of the people
of Kashmir, when you are not bothered about, the will of the people of
Pakistan. Isn't this a contradiction?
A.: We are finding the will of
the people of our country. I know how to manage things here. We know what
is good and bad here. I know what environment exists in Pakistan, and what
are the steps forward to having a democracy which suits us, and that's
what we are doing. But you can't equate this with the will of the people
in Kashmir, where there are 700,000 troops. How can you equate Pakistan,
and derive analogies from Kashmir and Pakistan?
Q.: You want elections and vote
and plebiscite in Kashmir, but you don't want voting in Pakistan.
A.: With 700,000 people there killing
people daily, that is how you want the voting to be done? With 700,000
troops killing them daily, burning their houses, this is how they should
go for vote?
Q.: Well they certainly did.
A.: Ridiculous.
Q.: Do you regret things?
A.: I do regret, if I take any
wrong decisions.
Q.: Give us an example.
A.: The political scenario here
in Pakistan, I thought it will emerge as something better, and it has not.
Q.: So you regret the elections?
A.: No no, I don't regret. In fact,
that was a very big positive. Everyone in Pakistan knows me to be a person
who stands by his word. I don't regret the elections at all. I do regret
that unfortunately the result is such, that we have this kind of hung parliament,
and also....
Q.: But that's unfair because you
are regretting something you didn't have control of. I am saying, do you
regret something that you have done. That's an outcome of an election -
you can regret - it's at a distance from yourself. Self-regret?
A.: Self-regret, has been that
in these three years we haven't been able to evolve a democracy which is
functional, which functions. We have tried to do that but unfortunately...
Q.: Will it happen? Will it come
to Pakistan? A functional democracy?
A.: Yes it can, yes absolutely
it can.
Q.: The Prime minister of India,
Vajpayee, recently said that this is his last try, third and last try,
in Indo-Pak peace talks. You must have heard that. After that he is retiring
from this process. What's your reaction to that?
A.: I would say, the second one
was a genuine try. The first one was not a try. I don't accept that as
a try at all: if he made a bus journey to Lahore, if he visited Pakistan.
That is not a try towards peace. When he is not prepared to address the
core issues, so that was not a try.
Q.: You don't think that was a huge
step to come to Lahore? You didn't actually welcome him at that time.
A.: No no. That's absolutely wrong.
Total misperception. I welcomed him. I was the first man to shake his hands,
when he landed in a helicopter.
Q.: You were not there at the border.
A.: I didn't go to Wagah. I thought,
in uniform, standing there and all that wouldn't be...
Q.: You have often said, there is
a chemistry between you and Vajpayee. Has that helped in this whole process?
A.: I feel that in Agra, yes I
got an impression that he is a man of peace, because we drafted the declaration
- really - the Agra declaration, was drafted by him and me and the two
foreign ministers and, so I believe that he is a man of peace. So I think
that way our thoughts are similar. If he really, genuinely is for peace,
now also.
Q.: You have said that (Mir Zafarullah)
Jamali, the Prime Minister, will lead these talks. Very often Vajpayee
says, when I next meet Musharraf, General Musharraf - If he wants you to
be part of the talks, will you be a part of it?
A.: More than glad. I'd be more
than glad.
Q.: To lead the talks?
A.: I feel, I really feel, that
since that after Agra declaration, there was such a campaign, maligning
me and the government, my government, that one thought that maybe.
Q.: Let's not go back to that.
A.: The Prime Minister maybe a
better person to meet him, but if he is willing to meet me I am more than
happy.
Q.: Is Osama Bin Laden still alive,
if so where is he?
A.: Yes, this is a million-dollar
question which I've answered so many times I now feel that he is alive.
Previously I used to think maybe he's dead. Now I feel that he is alive.
But the question of where he is... I think most likely he is in Afghanistan.
Q.: Was Pakistan's getting involved
with Taliban a mistake for Pakistan?
A.: No, I think it was a dictate
of the environment a dictate of the situation. In a country where 90 percent
of Afghanistan was occupied by the Taliban, and the Taliban being the only
Pakhtoons, at that time, with having obviously ethnic links with Pakistan.
Q.: But it's not the kind of ideology
you agree with. Many people see you as a major leader of the Islamic World
who is not a fundamentalist. But now you have one area of Pakistan, the
North-West Frontier Province, which has just voted in the Sharia law. Does
this worry you?
A.: Well, it is a little worrisome,
I am for a moderate, progressive and a dynamic Islamic state. I very much
differentiate between a theocratic state and an Islamic state. We do not
want a theocratic state.
Q.: So if in the end the NWFP, they
don't allow women to be educated, then they don't allow them to work, will
you intervene in some way?
A.: Yes, indeed, I will. There
is no doubt about it. But they are not doing that, and this is a misperception.
Q.: But, isn't this NWFP a spillover
of these policies genuinely, seriously?
A.: Musharraf: To an extent. No
it's not a spillover only of Afghanistan, lot is happening in the Islamic
world. It's a spillover of also Iraq and Palestine.
Q.: You have 10,000 US troops here.
Is that a worry for you? Not from the mere existence...
A.: Who gave you these figures?
Q.: You don't have 10,000 troops?
A.: Ridiculous.
Q.: How many do you have?
A.: I don't know, But certainly
not even a thousand.
Q.: So say, you've got a thousand
in bases here...
A.: Much lesser. There is an American
troop presence fighting here. They are here after 9/11. The agreement that
we reached on fighting terrorism and being part of the coalition. The use
of all the Pakistan air-space and the use one of our bases, for logistical
support and rescue missions were allowed and is being allowed.
Q.: But do you think it reinforces
the fundamentalists and the extremists you are so distant from?
A.: No this has not been an issue.
Q.: I remember seeing huge demonstrations
on it, but anyway.
A.: Yes, initially yes. I do agree
American presence here is not liked. But sooner or later, once the Afghan
issue is settled I think they should leave. .
Q.: Is Pakistan part of the global
war against terror?
A.: Yes.
Q.: Will you for example send Pakistani
troops to Iraq?
A.: We've been asked to, but we
need to see certain parameters.
Q.: You may?
A.: Yes we may. Yes we would like
it.
Q.: Are you hopeful that next time
things are going to be better ?
A.: Slightly optimistic.
Q.: Why is that?
A.: As I said, if we think as you
are thinking that we are only talking of kashmir and we are going for other
areas like sports and ignoring trade and economy, then I am afraid that
if we go ahead with trade and economic ties without addressing the core
issue of Kashmir, then again we will fail.
Q.: So, how are you optimistic?
A.: I thought maybe there has been
a change in heart on the other side.
Q.: There's no change in heart on
your side.
A.: Not at all.
Q.: Chance hi nahin hain?
A.: Kashmir cannot be brushed under
the carpet. No change whatever.
Q.: So, we will play cricket and
little else?
A.: Cricket has nothing to do with
the larger issue. I feel, in fact, cricket is a trivial issue. We have
given significance to triviality. We've got involved, India has got involved,
for not playing cricket with us, not playing sports with us.
Q.: I have one suggestion.
A.: And I'd like to add that it's
only cricket, and not hockey or other games. Why, because they were scared
to be defeated by Pakistan.
Q.: But you lost in the World Cup?
A.: Yes.
Q.: I have a suggestion since we
are on trivialities. Why don't we play a first match as a joint Indo-Pak
team versus the Australians. Then, we all start by cheering the same side.
And then we play each other. Would you support that?
A.: Well, you've introduced something,
having a joint team is all right. But having that as first match, one needs
to give it a second thought.
Q.: You are not scared of the Australians.
Are you?
A.: No, not at all, but that is
not the issue. The issue is that cricket has not been played. It has been
denied by the Indians, by your government that you've not played us. Why
should we then play? The sentiment of the people, the cricketers is that
we don't want to play them. Our cricketers have told me we should never
play them. This is the sentiment.
Q.: Maybe they are scared of losing?
A.: No, our boys are never scared.
Q.: You don't want cricket also
now.
A.: We do want cricket, we want
all games. I know what the president of the cricket board thinks. But even
now, your government keeps coming up with contradictory statements.
Q.: Forget that, what do you want,
do you want cricket to be played or not?
A.: Yes, yes, indeed. But as a
starter a joint team...
Q.: And at some point, a joint team?
A.: Yes, I don't mind that.
Q.: And who would be the opening
batsman?
A.: Tendulkar is a good batsman.
He's world class. I enjoy watching him.
(Concluded)
