| |
Q&A WITH ZAIN VERJEE
Aired January 11, 2002 - 11:30:00 ET
Indian Home Minister LK Advani sat down to talk to Q&A on Thursday.
I asked him, what's the minimum India wants to hear from the speech
Pakistan's president Pervez Musharraf will make this weekend.
LK ADVANI, HOME MINISTER, INDIA: It's not a question of minimum. It's
more a question of reassuring us -- and when I say us, I mean not only
the government of India, but also the people of India -- that Pakistan
has abandoned the use of terrorism as an instrument of state policy.
Whatever be the cause, basically nations have to agree, particularly
after the 11th of September, the 13th of December, that no nation, no
government, would use terrorism as an instrument of state policy.
VERJEE: But Pakistan has taken some tangible moves towards reassuring
India and the rest of the world of its commitment to fight terrorism. I
mean, the leaders of Jaish-e-Mohammed and Lashkar-e-Tayyiba were
arrested. Many other militants were also arrested, in the hundreds. And
offices were closed down, accounts were frozen.
Why isn't this enough?
ADVANI: These moves have been taken, and to the extent that they have
been taken, we official said it is a move in the right direction.
But, frankly, when we look at the entire approach of Pakistan, even
after September 11th, we do not feel convinced that these moves are
substantial. They are essentially tactical moves.
VERJEE: So what do you want Pakistan to do?
ADVANI: As put out yesterday in my press conference, firstly, I would
like Pakistan to abandon helping terrorists in either finance or in arms
or in enabling them to go across the line of control into India. All
these measures have to be taken, apart from handing over the 20
terrorists who have committed acts of terrorism in India and who have
been given asylum in Pakistan.
VERJEE: Well, first of all, it has to be said that Pakistan denies
financing and supporting these militant groups that cross the line of
control.
And as for the 20 militants that you're referring to, Pakistan says that
there is no extradition treaty between the two countries, so how can you
request these 20 militants in the first place?
ADVANI: So far as denial is concerned, I remember earlier Pakistani
leaders denying having anything to do with what all happened in India.
But lately, after Gen. Musharraf came into office, after that his public
stand has been, when he came to Agra (ph), or only recently when he
visited Katmandu for the SAARC meeting, his stand has been that what is
happening in Jammu and Kashmir is not at all terrorism, it is a freedom
struggle of the people of Jammu and Kashmir.
And so he has not denied assisting them. He's said that yes, it's my
duty to see that that struggle for independence...
VERJEE: Well, Pakistan's position has always been that of morally
supporting them. And that's it, they say.
ADVANI: Not morally supporting them. I can say that not a single person
can come across the line of control, but in the last years and in fact
even in the last three or four months, every months we have a couple of
hundred crossing across, because this is not possible without the
Pakistan government facilitating it.
And therefore, we have said that this must stop.
VERJEE: You're asking Pakistan for a lot. Isn't it about time the Indian
government started looking inwards and asking itself what it can do, and
whether it was prepared to address the grievances, for instances, of the
Kashmiri people, rather than blaming everything that happens in Kashmir
on Pakistan?
ADVANI: People should know that there was a time when it was people of
Jammu and Kashmir who used to go over to Pakistan, get training, get
arms, get finance, and come back here to indulge in all kinds of
activities. That's no longer so.
Nowadays, it is people from Pakistan, people from Afghanistan, people
from some other Islamic countries, drawn in by the appeal of jihad, who
come as mercenaries into Jammu and Kashmir.
VERJEE: No, hold on. My question, though, is, what is India prepared to
do to address the grievances of the Kashmiri people and bring them back
into the fold, rather than saying it's all Pakistan's fault?
ADVANI: So far as the Kashmiri people are concerned, in fact so far as
the people of India are concerned, it is the duty of every government to
see that their legitimate grievances are removed. And that continues as
an act of government. And I can say that the present government has been
consciously doing its duty in that regard.
Even in respect of Kashmir, we have appointed a senior official of the
cabinet rank, Shcasy Pundt (ph), to talk to various groups in Jammu and
Kashmir and to address the grievances that they have.
VERJEE: Consciously doing its duty, there are a lot of critics that
would differ with that. They talk about human rights abuses in Kashmir,
corruption in elections. The Kashmiri people being caught between the
cross-fire between the insurgence and the Indian security forces. I
mean, their lives, the average Kashmiri person, is no better because
India has been unimaginative in the way it has dealt with the Kashmiri
people, your critics would say.
ADVANI: Which country in the world, particularly in the developing
world, doesn't have problems of this kind? And we address them as
honestly and sincerely as we can.
But that cannot be a justification for the killing of innocent people,
as happens when terrorists come across the line and start bombing
people, start derailing trains, and do all kinds of things.
And things reach a point which I describe as crossing the
(UNINTELLIGIBLE), crossing the threshold where even Indian parliament is
attacked by these people. And it is this 13th of December incident that
has made India think in terms of a different response than it has until
now.
VERJEE: And it's that 13th of December incident that has also ratcheted
up the rhetoric in India and the concern that you could become a victim
of your own rhetoric.
For instance, you know, saying one more time, if this happens, we're
going to have to do something about it, and if something does happen,
the onus is on you, or there is immense pressure on the Indian
government, to do something about it, which is an enormously dangerous
position to put yourself in.
ADVANI: I'm sorry if anyone describes this as rhetoric, and the Prime
Minister Vajpayee has not at all used rhetoric. He is a person who has
been patiently seeing all that has been happening, and he is a person
who had to say after the 13th of December that now our patience has been
exhausted.
VERJEE: OK, but what happens if there is another attack? What happens if
an outraged Kashmir peasant picks up a Kalashnikov and shoots an Indian
politician? Are you going to blame it on Pakistan or -- I mean, that's
Pakistan's concern, that anything that's going to happen now, India is
going to jump on it and point the finger immediately at Pakistan.
Can you reassure the Pakistani government that that's not the case?
ADVANI: Zain, these are hypothetical questions. Lately, I haven't seen
Indian people belonging to Jammu and Kashmir, or to any part of India,
indulging in this kind of activity. It is people who have been either
sent from across the border of activated by different motives who have
been doing it.
It is significant that all of the five terrorists who attacked
Parliament House, all were Pakistanis.
VERJEE: Is the real reason that India is, as has been described in many
editorials, sabre-rattling and building up troops on the Pakistani
border really to gain favor in advance of a very important election that
will be coming up, the Uttar Pradesh state elections, and you need those
votes, and this could be one way of getting them.
ADVANI: I'm a person who is a member of the government, and I would
describe any government which thinks in terms of elections while
deciding momentous issues of this kind as an irresponsible government.
And I can tell you that thinking of how to deal with terrorism, as for
example to have a law like (UNINTELLIGIBLE); we thought of it 1 1/2
years back, even that is attributed to the Utti (ph) elections. It is
unfortunately.
And therefore, all I can say is elections do not figure in every single
decision that we have been taking in respect of terrorism.
VERJEE: You've poignantly made your arguments and criticisms of
Pakistan, but I really want to know from you, Mr. Advani, rather than
throwing the ball in Pakistan's court, what is the Indian government
going to do itself?
ADVANI: Whatever we need to do to address the legitimate grievances of
Jammu and Kashmir, we are doing and we are determined to pursue that
path.
VERJEE: But, do what? Be specific. This is just broad stuff. Give me
specifics.
ADVANI: Including holding free and fair elections in Jammu and Kashmir.
VERJEE: Are you willing to pull out 6,000 or 7,000 security forces in
Kashmir that tighten the noose, so to speak, around Pakistan? Why don't
you pull them out? That could be one way of diffusing things.
ADVANI: Pull out the security forces? In this situation?
VERJEE: Pull out some of them.
ADVANI: In a situation where the people in Gurdaspur (ph), the people in
Rajouri, the people in Punj are repeating again and again that we send
our paramilitary forces for their protection.
VERJEE: You're building up troops, building the security forces, putting
pressure on Pakistan that, if you push Musharraf too hard, there's a
concern that he could be toppled and then India will have another
problem to deal with.
ADVANI: I do not think that these apprehensions are correct, basically
because when Gen. Musharraf decided to join hands with the United States
in its fight against international terrorism, the first and foremost
pressure that came upon him was to abandon the Taliban. And which I feel
was the most difficult task entrusted to him. And he did it, and has
nevertheless survived thereafter.
I do not see why, in his fight against terrorism, he should see
terrorism only on the West, not on the East. Terrorism is terrorism, and
one terrorism is not good terrorism, because it is in Jammu and Kashmir,
and another terrorism is bad because it is in Taliban.
|