Author: Pranab Dhal Samanta
Publication: The Indian Express
Date: February 7, 2010
URL: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/difference-of-agenda-terror-for-india-composite-dialogue-for-pakistan/576595/0
Introduction: Countries differ on the purpose of FS-level talks, New Delhi
conveys' grave concerns' over recent Hafiz Saeed speeches
Differences have already come to the fore
between India and Pakistan on the purpose of the Foreign Secretary-level talks,
with Islamabad insisting that this must lead to resumption of the composite
dialogue. It is keen to start from where the dialogue had halted after 26/11.
Pakistan's High Commissioner Shahid Malik,
sources said, conveyed this to Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao on Friday but
the Indian side too was equally clear that there was a good reason to pause
the dialogue process and to start it straightaway would convey the impression
that Indian concerns had been adequately addressed.
Rather, the Indian side is learnt to have
expressed "grave concerns" to the Pakistani delegation over the
emboldening activities of the Jamaat-ud-Dawa and its leader Hafiz Mohammed
Saeed. Though the UN banned JuD after 26/11, India remains concerned by the
manner in which Saeed is whipping up anti-India sentiments, and the fact that
none of this has drawn corrective action from Pakistan.
National Security Adviser Shivshankar Menon
is in Munich for the Munich Security Conference this weekend, where Pakistan's
Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi is slated to be present. Though Menon
is accompanying his predecessor M K Narayanan, the informal setting will provide
an opportunity for him to have a quiet exchange with Qureshi on the sidelines.
It was Qureshi who had suggested FS-level talks as the first step towards
normalisation last September.
There was no response then from India. But
this time Rao called up her Pakistani counterpart Salman Bashir on January
28 and extended the Indian invitation. Within the next couple of days, the
Pakistan High Commission sought a meeting with Rao. However, she was leaving
for Iran and it was felt that it would be better to schedule the meeting on
her return. The invitation was also formally handed over subsequently by the
Indian High Commission in Islamabad .
For India, sources said, there is no emotion
involved in the decision to invite Pakistan for official talks. While it has
been a terror-free period for India after 26/11, sources said, the increasing
number of threats make it necessary for New Delhi to engage Islamabad on the
issue. Like all Western countries, which look to address threats emanating
from Pak-based terrorists through bilateral channels with Islamabad, South
Block felt that the time had come for India to also explore such a dialogue.
For this reason, India is clear that it wants to keep terrorism as the centrepiece
of the talks.
At the same time, India is also willing to
discuss issues important to Pakistan. In fact, sources pointed out that Pakistan's
exaggerated concerns and misgivings about Indian presence in Afghanistan could
be somewhat cleared through such deliberations. More so, the advice India
has been getting from other stakeholders involved in the AfPak theatre is
to engage Pakistan on these issues, or else tensions may needlessly escalate.
Pakistan, on the other hand, is more keen
to get on with the composite dialogue which provides the avenue for talks
on the Kashmir issue. While India may not be averse to discussing any issue,
it would want the process of engagement to be incremental rather than follow
a "start where you stopped" approach.
These are exactly the modalities which Pakistan
is keen to work out before the talks. But with India having made its stand
clear, Islamabad is likely to let the two foreign secretaries discuss the
matter when they meet rather than complicate issues at the start.
As for the contentious issues or for that
matter even the resumption of the composite dialogue, New Delhi is also keen
to test the resolve of the civilian government on addressing Indian concerns
which have often not met with success because of the Pakistan military's overriding
influence.
