Click to play videoTrust Pakistan but verify its actions: that was the gist of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s explanation of the joint statement he issued with his Pakistani counterpart in Sharm-el-Sheikh on July 16.
The joint statement de-links action on terror from the composite dialogue, but Singh told Parliament on Wednesday that would not ease pressure on Pakistan.
Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee, the Congress party’s ace troubleshooter, kept up the defence on Thursday. "Keeping channels open does not mean surrendering our position on terrorism," said Mukherjee.
The explanations haven’t convinced the Opposition, particularly the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The party calls the Sharm-el-Sheikh statement a shame and the mention of Pakistan’s restive Balochistan province in the document a unpardonable blunder.
The explanations also hide the unease about the joint statement in the Congress, too. It took Congress president Sonia Gandhi’s stern advice for the party to rally behind Manmohan Singh on the issue.
Did Singh give away too much to Pakistan in Sharm-el-Sheikh? Did the UPA misread the public mood on Indo-Pak peace?
Sagarika Ghose asked this on Face The Nation to Vinod Mehta, editor-in-Chief of Outlook, Chandan Mitra, BJP Rajya Sabha MP and editor of the Pioneer newspaper, Vinod Sharma, political editor of the Hindustan Times, and Lord Meghnad Desai, political analyst and columnist.
Sharma said he himself was not convinced by the joint statement but believed the Prime Minister must get a chance to deal with Pakistan. “Any Prime Minister is a very lonely person, and he takes a difficult political call all by himself,” he said.
Manmohan Singh has played a gamble, and the young people of India have put their trust in him, said Desai. “He wants to be the Prime Minister who will settle the India-Pakistan issue 60 years after Partition. The younger generation trust this man--they believe he is not stupid to sign that statement or weak.”
Dreams too big?
The Prime Minister has the right to dream of being a statesman but not to surrender the “tenets” of India’s foreign policy, said Mitra.
“Manmohan Singh has given away all the tenets of India’s foreign policy. Pakistan has managed to de-link terrorism from the normalization of relations. They will continue their proxy war against India and the PM is virtually inviting them to do so,” he said.
Mehta disagreed. He believed the joint statement was an ordinary document and only people in “Lutyen’s Delhi” were nitpicking it. “What matters is the larger picture--engagement with Pakistan is essential,” he said.
“Pakistan, in it dossier, has made extraordinary admissions. Pakistan said the Mumbai attacks were planned in its territory and were financed by its people--they have five people in jail,” said Mehta.
“Will we talk to Pakistan when the last perpetrator (of the Mumbai attacks) is hung up from the lamppost? We must talk to Pakistan but on our own terms.”
Should Pakistan’s detention of Mumbai terror suspects and admission that its nationals were involved in the attacks inspire trust?
No, said Mitra. “A leopard never changes its spots. Pakistan has been compelled to make some admissions because we managed to get hold of Kasab (the only Mumbai attacks terrorist captured alive). If Kasab had been killed Pakistan would have denied the whole thing.”
Mitra believed Pakistan had been forced to make “some admissions” under American pressure but they had got a good bargain for it. “They have extracted Balochistan for it. India says it has nothing to hide about Balochistan, but then why agree to include it in a joint statement.”
The nature of Pakistan
Pakistan is fighting the Taliban in its territory but has gone easy on taking action against Hafiz Saeed, the militant leader accused of plotting the Mumbai terror attacks.
It has detained militant leaders accused of involvement in the Mumbai carnage but refuses to go after terrorists suspected of the attack on the Indian embassy in Kabul.
How do we trust Pakistan then? Is the balance of power in Pakistan at the moment conducive to dialogue and peace?
“Nobody can answer that question,” said Sharma.
And as that cannot be answered, Mehta believed, dialogue is a must. “That is the nature of Pakistan we have to engage with. We can’t change the nature of Pakistan but international events can. Whether the leopard is changing its spots due to American pressure or from us as long as it is changing its spots,” said Mehta.
BJP leader A B Vajpayee tried for peace with Pakistan when he was Prime Minister and now Manmohan Singh deserved to be given a chance, said Sharma.
“What did Mr Vajpayee get when he engaged with General Musharraf in 2004 but for the assurance that (Pakistani) territory won’t be used for terrorism against India. Vajpayee trusted him--it is the same with Manmohan Singh,” he said.
- SMS poll on ‘did the UPA misread the public mood on Indo-Pak peace?’
- No: 73 percent, Yes: 27 percent
(For updates you can share with your friends, follow IBNLive on Facebook, Twitter, Google+ and Pinterest)
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
More on IBNLive Right Now
TOP NEWS
MOST SHARED
PHOTOGALLERY
