EAM : Prime Minister arrived this afternoon and since arrival, he has had meetings with the Prime Minister of Nepal. Shortly after this Press Conference, I have to accompany the Prime Minister when he makes a call on HM the King. I have, of course, since I arrived yesterday, had meetings with my distinguished counterparts and the host Prime Minister and with Shri R.S. Mahat, who is standing in for the Foreign Minister, my distinguished counterparts from Maldives, Sri Lanka and from Bhutan.

I have pleasure in announcing, after meeting this evening with PM Deuba and our Prime Minister, Mr. Vajpayee and I am authorised by both the Prime Ministers to say so, and announce a social sector assistance by India to Nepal of 800 million Nepali Rupees, spread over two years and this assistance will be identified for projects, particularly in education, rural development, etc. After this PM will be calling on HM the King.

Qn (AP). In the last few days, officials from Pakistan, one of them being Mr. Sattar, said that the ice is melting between India and Pakistan and has described this meeting as the positive sign of better relations between the two countries. Can you please respond to that whether the ice is melting and how do you describe the atmosphere between two countries?

EAM. SAARC is not a bilateral affair. I am astonished at your question. I am not here to discuss Indo-Pak relations. It is an organization of seven countries and it is a convention of the SAARC not to attend to or address contentious bilateral political issues and that is the position India has adopted.

Qn (Aaj Tak). Before your and honorable Prime Minister’s departure for Kathmandu, several statements have come from Mr. Sattar and General Musharaff that they want to meet their Indian counterparts. Have they made formal requests to the Indian authorities or the High Commission that they want to meet you?

EAM. No, we have not received any such requests or information.

Qn (Zee News). Reports have came that the other SAARC countries that because the relations between India and Pakistan are not very good at the moment and it is certainly affecting the SAARC Summit and that at least after the SAARC Summit the relationship should improve. How does India react on this?

EAM. I have met the Foreign Ministers of the SAARC Countries, I cannot go by rumours, but the Foreign Ministers whom I have met, they did not express such feelings to me. Therefore, I cannot react on the rumors. Being the External Affairs Minister, it is better for me not to react to your question, based onrumors.

Qn (DD). As you have said that SAARC is not a bilateral forum, but you have had bilateral talks with Foreign Ministers of the SAARC Countries. So, there was also a possibility of having a bilateral talk with Pakistan. Keeping the possibility aside, there are reports in the international media that the main thrust of the SAARC Summit in Kathmandu is now India-Pakistan talks.

EAM. As I have already mentioned, we have not received any request from Pakistan to have bilateral talks.

Qn (HT). Pakistan continues to demand the evidence from India while at the same time taking action on terrorist and sealing their Bank accounts. How do you see these two contradictions. Secondly, Indian Prime Minister in Lucknow said that he would seek information because whatever information he is getting that he is getting from media. Has there been any formal communication from Pakistan to India. If a country is taking steps against terrorists on the request of the other country, is it not required that the country should inform this formally. Whereas the PM has said that he is getting all the information through media.

EAM. I would have really preferred that this had not turned into a press conference on India-Pak relations, but these are questions that you have asked and therefore I am obliged to respond to them. There are two questions, one relates to evidence and other relates to the information on the action that Pakistan has taken. We have received no formal communication from Pakistan as to whether what action they have taken or not taken. Whatever news that they have given to the international community has been through the media. On the question of evidence about crimes committed against India, I always held the view that this is an untenable and completely unacceptable demand. It is like equating the victim of the crime, with the committer of the crime, having committed the crime, and thereafter ask what evidence do you have that the crime was committed. But nevertheless just to inform all of you to refresh your memory and through you to inform the international community, I had asked my office to prepare what we have shared as evidence with Pakistan in the decade about acts or crime or terror against India. I now very briefly share the evidence with you. This has been shared with Pakistan officially, as evidence for all most ten years and if thereafter they continue to deceive the or hear the same kind of refrain, it is, to the least, to my mind, misleading. The crime that has been committed against India on 13 Dec is not just an attack on a stone structure, if the people are sovereign then it is on the seat of sovereignty of the people. In March 1993, we handed over the names of six people along with their passport details of their involvement in the Bombay blast case, and who had subsequently flown from Dubai to Karachi on 17th March 1993. On 27th March, photographs of Memon family were then handed over to Pakistan. Similarly, at the end of March 1993, our High Commission in Islamabad gave the details of ten persons whose passports had been revoked by GOI and were then in Pakistan. Eighteen sheets on the 30th of March, containing detailed evidence and information pertaining to six wanted Indian persons and information about their involvement in the Bombay blast case conspiracy was handed over to Pakistan. Likewise, in the month of September 1993, yet again additional information about the accused and their involvement, these included copies of Pakistan International Air Lines manifests from Dubai to Karachi, also the details of flights undertaken by 20 persons recruited by Ibrahim Abdul Razak Memon for training in camps in Pakistan and for travelling to Pakistan for obtaining the training, photographs relating to the grenades as well as the empty cans of explosives, which were of Pakistan origin. Thereafter, again in 1994 our High Commission in Islamabad handed over an aide-memoir to the Pakistan Foreign Office seeking extradition and deportation of 24 Indian nationals accused of being involved in the very same crime. Thereafter in 1994, a second aide-memoire reminding Pakistan to do the needful, was handed over. On the hijacking of flight IC-814 in Jan 2000, a note verbale was given to Pakistan forwarding a report on the hijacking of the flight and requiring them to apprehend the hijackers and their accomplices, who were in Pakistan. For that suitable evidence was made available to them. Pakistan responded to this demarche. In their reply (Pakistan) , which was of 24 January 2000, denying the presence of these hijackers in Pakistan subsequently again confirmed and in fact terming the demarche as provocative and baseless. This was repeated again in April 2001 by a note verbale. I had also then made available in April 2001 a list of documents which were provided with the note verbale which included red corner notices as issued by the Interpol requesting that the accomplices and the hijackers be arrested. Through copies of affidavits from captains, attested photographs of the hijackers, in June 2001 Pakistan was reminded to take its expeditious action in this regard. Then in December 2001 evidence was provided and handed over for the extradition of Ranjit Singh alias Neeta as the terrorist for the terrorist activities in Jammu. About demarches made in respect of other cases in 1990, 12 fugitives from law were handed over by the Foreign Secretary to the Pakistan Foreign Secretary. In 1998, during the composite dialogue that we had started after Lahore Declaration between the Home Secretaries, on Terrorism and Narcotics, a document containing names of 32 terrorist fugitives from law and underworld elements sheltering in Pakistan, was handed over to Pakistan. The document also contained full evidence and material establishing Pakistan’s use of terrorism against India, in this case. Again on 31 December 2001, evidence containing 20 fugitives from law, currently in Pakistan, was handed to the Deputy High Commissioner of Pakistan and Pakistan was requested to take action against them. I have cited these examples only to illustrate that the current subterfuge of seeking evidence to take action is really not expected. It is not only ‘not acceptable’ but also this amounts to moral and diplomatic support to terrorism. The Security Council Resolution in this regard is explicit, direct and unambiguous; it speaks of active or passive support, and if moral and diplomatic support to terrorism does not fall into that category then I do not know what will. I am unable to understand how moral support can be provided to an immoral activity like terrorism.

Qn (Asian Age). There are statements from US State Department officials and even President Bush about the SAARC meeting, hoping that India and Pakistan will use this opportunity to de-escalate. Also Nepal, which is the host for the SAARC meeting, senior leaders from there have been quoted in newspapers hoping that there will be peace in the end. Are there going to be concrete steps to de-escalate the tension?

EAM. I have answered this question and at length. I have met the Prime Minister of Nepal twice and also Senior Ministers of Nepal. No such suggestion as referred by you having appeared attributable to Nepal, was mentioned to me. I have also read a Press Statement attributed to President Bush. India is not interested in escalating anything. I hope that Pakistan will work seriously towards what they themselves have announced as their intent, and if their intent is to act against terrorism, then that must be in deed and not just simply in word and it will not do to say that to act against terrorists, we need evidence. Very briefly, without wanting to convert it into any kind of legal slanging exercise. I shared with all of you as to what evidence has already been provided. It is our hope still that what Pakistan says it will do, and what it does actually do, the gap between that will be eliminated.

Qn (Amar Ujala). Pakistan President has clearly told that if India will provide evidence, then it will take action against them as per the laws existing there and they will not, under any condition, hand over them to India. How does India take this statement?

EAM. If I keep on explaining every statement, then it will only take more of our time. I don’t feel it necessary to explain each and every statement of General Musharraf. Now General Musharraf says that give us the evidence and we will hand over them to you. So before the evidence, he has announced the decision. I have already told you about the evidence and cited some examples before you that we have already given the evidence. Please forgive me, but asking for an evidence is like covering the whole issue.

Qn (Economic Times). The question is related to the trade and economic aspects. It is about the expectations from the Summit, from the South Asian Region regarding the trade and economic cooperation [ EAM: I am glad] and what steps have been taken till now have not produced much result and it is said that the whole initiative rests with India. So, would you like to present some of your views now?

EAM. Certainly I would, because SAARC is really a South Asian Group, essentially focussed on economic development. We have addressed ourselves during the preparations of documents as to whether SAARC fulfilled its dream as it, or what it has achieved in terms of its objective of economic cooperation. I am afraid not; that is the reality. It has not yet achieved it. As the largest member of SAARC, of course India has a role to play in this regard. We continue to play that role. We are committed to playing that role positively and purposefully. We have, in any case a Free Trade Agreement with Sri Lanka; we have a Free Trade Agreement with Nepal; we have a Free Trade Agreement with Bhutan and we are working with Bangladesh to facilitate trading matters.

We have despite all this continued to extend MFN status to Pakistan. Pakistan as a good western neighbour has not found fit to treat India in the MFN capacity. That is their look out. We are committed to doing that. It is really, as yet, a matter ofunfulfilled promises.

Qn (NYT) You talked about the arrests of leaders of Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaishe Mohammad were steps in the right direction. In an interview yeaterday, the Defence Minister told me that he saw no signs of progress on the ground in terms of combating terrorism and the arrests don’t mean much, as the leaders of the organisations are replaced and organisations renamed. Is there substantial progress by Pakistan in combating terrorism against India ?, Do you believe that Pakistan has shut down the branch of ISI that deals with these groups?

EAM. I think the second part about shutting down such wings or divisions of branches of the ISI as having dealing with promoting terrorist activities in the Indian State of Jammu & Kashmir. I can scarcely expect the formal announcement in this regard, from Pakistan, because such a formal announcement tantamounts to admitting that that is what ISI was engaged in all these years, something that we have constantly said and have had evidence in this regard. This is a newspaper report that has appeared in the New York Times. We have taken note of this report and I believe the Joint Secretary has already reacted to this matter on a question asked earlier. I had said and I repeat that the steps taken against Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad are welcome steps in the right direction. These need to be pursued and we need to act much more in this direction because the dimensions of the problem are immense and they are a creation within Pakistan of more than 20 years. I can understand that it would take a little time for Pakistan to address itself to its internal difficulties and to dismantle all these edifices of terrorism that they have either permitted or constructed over the last two decades. What is our expectation is that much more purposeful and much more forthright declaration against terrorism would be forthcoming and we certainly expect the action by Pakistan on the list that we have given of proven terrorists, proven criminals, narcotics traders all kinds of, the entire repertoire of crimes against humanity that you can think of, is what these 20 have done. Why should they find shelter in Pakistan and why should Pakistan be interested in providing them the shelter? I am simply unable to understand.

Qn (HT). Short while ago, while you were meeting with your counterparts of at least three member States, your Spokesperson had told us that the focus of the discussion or much period of discussion were mostly on the threat posed by the terrorism to the sub-continent, and also that the SAARC agenda, because of this threat posed by terrorism, is also under threat for instance, the economic union economic union that you are seeking in the sub-continent or the development that that you will in this sub-continent would not be possible till the issue of terrorism is fully addressed. Against this background, I want to ask you that while you were discussing this problem with other member countries, you are not taking it up directly with Pakistan. Why are we talking to each other through the media, through third countries; why are we not squarely addressing the issue at this forum because the objective of this forum is itself threatened by this issue.

EAM. Thank you for your views. I appreciate your concern. The SAARC as a collective organization is addressing itself to terrorism and when you see the documents that SAARC comes out with, it will have reflected the SAARC’s collective concern in regard to terrorism because in one form or another, terrorism is an issue that has troubled the countries of the region.

Qn (TOI). The question is regarding the agenda of Terrorism during SAARC. Are you looking for any specific steps that will come out of this Summit?

EAM. We have earlier in the history of SAARC taken a number of specific issues. I think the document when it is finally adopted by the Heads of Government, will be a very forthright and an explicit document covering terrorism in all its aspects and it will be a document that will be unanimous. But, I cannot do what the Heads of Government will be doing. We will have the opportunity, I hope, to meet when Heads will arrive tomorrow and once the Heads of Government are here, then of course Foreign Ministers are forgotten. So ladies and gentlemen of the press thank you very much for being here and for this opportunity to meet you.