Click to play videoNew Delhi: In a bitter attack on the leader of the Opposition L K Advani, Jaswant Singh - after his sacking from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) last week - had revealed that the former home minister's claim that he was unaware of Jaswant Singh accompanying three freed terrorists for securing the release of 160 hostages was not true.
The crisis within the BJP deepened on Thursday with former national security advisor Brajesh Mishra saying L K Advani was part of the decisions taken "unanimously" by a Cabinet Committee on Security meet in 1999 regarding the release of militants to save the hostages on the hijacked Indian Airlines plane. And he was not the only one. Continuing the tirade against L K Advani was senior BJP leader Yashwant Sinha, who reiterated what Brajesh Mishra said - that Advani was in the know of the swap.
Is it time for the BJP to admit that Advani made a mistake when he suggested he did not know anything about Jaswant Singh accompanying terrorists to Kandahar? BJP Spokesperson Chandan Mitra and Congress Spokesperson Abhishek Manu Singh joined CNN-IBN to try and answer the question on Talking Point.
CNN-IBN: It's been 10 years since Kandahar but the ghost returns to haunt BJP time and again. Is it time for the BJP to accept perhaps, that L K Advani made a mistake on the eve of the 2009 election campaign when he suggested that he had no idea of what happened in terms of Jaswant Singh accompanying terrorists to Kandahar? That's something which the BJP needs to clarify once and for all now.
Chandan Mitra: Look, I think Mr Advani clarified this point and in any case, this was the least controversial issue with regard to the Kandahar hijacking. The issue that really gripped the entire country was the question of 160 people being held captive inside a plane for seven days. The issue was that one of the people was killed and his body was thrown out.
CNN-IBN: Did the then home minister, Advani, mislead the country? Did he try and pass the blame on to someone else because he wanted to be the Loh Purush ahead of Lok Sabha elections, 2009?
Chandan Mitra: Not at all. If I can draw your attention to Mr Advani's book, pages 621 to 624, he pays fullsome tribute to Jaswant Singh for the manner in which he conducted himself in this crisis. In a television interview Mr Advani did say that he did not quite recall when the decision to send Jaswant Singh to Kandahar was taken, or whether he was present in the room when the decision was taken.
CNN-IBN: It was an important decision, a union minister was travelling with terrorists and making that exchange.
Chandan Mitra: You have to see the whole thing in perspective. How does it matter whether Jaswant Singh went or someone else went. Jaswant Singh volunteered to go after the negotiators in Kandahar said some senior leader should accompany them. He wanted to go, so he went. What is the issue here?
CNN-IBN: Abhishek Manu Singhvi, do you believe it is no big deal and that anyone could have gone? L K Advani had seemed to suggest that he wasn't quite sure whether Jaswant Singh was accompanying the terrorists. He has tried to clarify his position, but perhaps not too clearly. Do you believe it's a big deal?
Abhishek Manu Singhvi: It's a very big deal. It's a defining watershed moment. Some things here are completely being missed out. The whole issue is about the BJP's lack of straightforwardness with the nation and Mr Advani's deception and dishonesty. Now the point here is really that Kandahar and the image of the then foreign minister escorting terrorists was a psychological watershed in India. That is one part of the event. Mr Advani was the prime ministerial candidate of the BJP and in that position he tried to disown and disassociate himself from his own cabinet and his own party and there was a deliberate attempt to say 'I was not aware'. That was an inherently improbable argument as stated. Thereafter there were exposes after exposes, contradictions after contradictions from George Fernandes, Jaswant Singh, Brajesh Mishra - this is prevarication with the nation. In another democracy, Mr Bill Clinton was punished not so much for what he did, but for prevarication with the nation. This is dishonesty and deception which can only partially be cured by an apology unconditional to the nation.
CNN-IBN: Chandan Mitra respond to Abhishek Manu Singhvi.
Chandan Mitra: Firstly the Congress does not have the moral face to put out these holier than thou allegations which Mr Singhvi is making. They sent people outside 7 Race Course Road at that time with banners reading 'release Azhar Masood'. It was later proved that the people carrying the banners were not relatives of those on the hijacked IC814 but were Congress activists. They did that to embarrass the government of the day. Secondly, Mr Singhvi is saying this is deception. What deception? Mr Advani is saying again and again that very reluctantly, the then government - including himself - agreed to the release of the three terrorists. I don't know where is the deception, where is the misleading, what are they talking about? I just fail to understand.
CNN-IBN: Abhishek Manu Singhvi, where is the deception?
Abhishek Manu Singhvi: I will tell you where the deception is. This is rank dishonesty. You tell the country three times - as home minister of India, later deputy prime minister of India - that 'I was not aware of a decision with Kandahar, which afflicted India'. The then Cabinet Committee on Security met apparently without the then home minister of India. What kind of government was the NDA running? And Mr Advani was then contradicted by then defence minister George Fernandes, then foreign minister Jaswant Singh and then national security advisor Brajesh Mishra. These are not just the internal headaches of the BJP which they need to sort out themselves, these are headaches for the country because Kandahar is a national issue. It is not a BJP issue.
CNN-IBN: Chandan Mitra, the centre of this is perhaps that all of us need more clarity from the BJP as to what really happened in that Cabinet Committee on Security meet in 1999. Jaswant Singh has come out very clearly saying that he decided in the meet that he would go, whereas L K Advani also came out very clearly saying that he did not know of this decision. The least the country expects is some clarity.
Chandan Mitra: No he did not recall. I am sorry to correct you but Mr Advani said that he did not recall. He did not say that he was not aware.
CNN-IBN: Chandan Mitra was there not a feeling that because L K Advani was the prime ministerial candidate and he wanted to project himself as a mazboot neta (strong politician) that he would not bow down to terror tactics. Wasn't this a deliberate strategy?
Chandan Mitra: How is it of any consequence?
CNN-IBN: You don't think its of any consequence?
Chandan Mitra: Mr Singhvi is free to make political capital of it which is what they have always done - played with the nation's security and made political capital out of it. But the fact is that this is the least consequential of issues. The issue was whether the terrorists should be released and the hostages brought back on the millennium eve. The cabinet collectively decided to bring them back. Who goes with the terrorists is not of any consequence.
b>CNN-IBN: You don't think L K Advani owes clarity to the nation? Congress is suggesting that he owes the nation an apology but maybe he first owes the nation some clarity for saying that he was not aware of what happened in the Cabinet Committee on Security meet.
Chandan Mitra: Mr Brajesh Mishra and others have said he knew about it, Mr Advani says he doesn't recall so now it is for the people to judge. Maybe as Jaswant Singh himself said, Mr Advani may have forgotten. That is all what Mr Advani said himself too. What is the big deal.
CNN-IBN: Abhishek Manu Singhvi respond to this.
Abhishek Manu Singhvi: Let's not play semantics. Let's come to the bone of the matter. Three constitution holders at that time - national security advisor, foreign minister and defence minister - have called their leader a person who prevaricates on a national security issue. For much less than that, Bill Clinton was sought to be impeached.
CNN-IBN: Chandan Mitra it's not just about Kandahar. On Thursday Brajesh Mishra told CNN-IBN is that Vajpayee would have handled the Jaswant Singh issue differently and would have not banned his Jinnah book. Are you seeing there a distinction that is being drawn both in terms of character with L K Advani and Vajpayee and in terms of leadership between L K Advani and Vajpayee. Isn't that also the crux - what kind of a leader a political should have, a statesman like Brajesh Mishra called Vajpayee or an organiser like he described Advani?
Chandan Mitra: Mr Brajesh Mishra is not a politician, he is not a political leader of the BJP. These are his opinions and they are hypothetical opinions. How Mr Vajpayee would have handled the situation we don't know but Mr Mishra is free and entitled to his opinion. I have no comment to make on that.
CNN-IBN: Are you saying that you don't see the Vajpayee shadow still lurking somewhere over the BJP, especially when Vajpayee's closest aide told CNN-IBN in an interview that Vajpayee would not have expelled Jaswant Singh or banned his Jinnah book?
Chandan Mitra: Mr Vajpayee remains the tallest leader in the party. It is very unfortunate that his health does not permit him to be active in politics. Even today he is revered in the party. There is no question of not respecting him.
CNN-IBN: Chandan Mitra over the past some time, we have seen a lot of attacks on the party - whether it's groupism or factionism. Brajesh Mishra has brought the entire Vajpayee-Advani relationship into focus saying they both had different strengths but perhaps Vajpayaee had more acceptability.
Chandan Mitra: These are Mr Mishra's opinions and Mr Vajpayee's acceptability is tremendous and there is no issue about it. He is the greatest leader the BJP has ever had. Mr Mishra is a very respected bureaucrat, not a political leader and he is entitled to his own opinion. I have no further comment to make on that.
(For updates you can share with your friends, follow IBNLive on Facebook, Twitter and Google+)
displayed with permission. Use of the CNN name and/or logo on or as part of CNN-IBN does not derogate from the intellectual property rights of Cable News Network in respect of them.