NEW DELHI: In the war of nerves over NSA-level talks, India clearly has the edge. Sushma Swaraj accused Pakistan of chaning its attitude immediately even before Nawaz Sharif had returned to Islamabad from Ufa. “He faced a barrage of criticism even before he landed, and thereafter Pakistan had decided that it will not allow for NSA talks to be held,” she asserted.
The attempt by Aziz in Islamabad to try paint India as a state fomenting terror within Pakistan had glaring irregularities. At his afternoon press conference, he waved a white spiral-bound file, emblazoned with the words ‘RAW’s involvement in Pakistan’ to the assembled cameras. On the title page was printed the warning “Highly Confidential” below which was printed “to be handled by authorised personnel only”. The first sentence was repeated at the bottom, as if a novice playwright was trying to hardsell his script. Curiously, the middle section of the title page of the document sported a logo, which an overzealous Pakistani bureaucrat had perhaps taken off the web to represent the Indian external spy agency. As per informed sources, RAW has no official logo which is published in any document from the agency.
Perhaps unaware of this blooper, Aziz declared, “I am carrying three dossiers about RAW’s involvement. If I don’t get an opportunity to hand over the dossiers to Indian NSA in New Delhi, I hope to give it to him in New York next month if he comes with PM Narendra Modi.”
He also threatened to present the documents to United Nations Secretary General Ban ki-Moon. That it was an unequal battle between Swaraj and Aziz was obvious in the body language and tenor of both. Her voice laced with contemptous dismissal, the Indian Foreign Minister said, “Woh dossier denge, hum zinda aadmi denge (If they give us dossier, we will show them a live man).” She was referring to Pakistani terrorist Yakub Naved, who was caught alive during an operation to ambush a BSF bus in Udhampur on August 5.
India, meanwhile, continues to play its anti-Pak diplomatic strategy effectively by pointing out that Sharif was wriggling away from the NSA-level talks due to the Pakistan military establishment’s pressure. Swaraj said Islamabad’s stance contrary to the Ufa declaration was due to “known forces”.
“We did not have less pressure. There have been as many 91 ceasefire violations besides the two terror attacks in Gurdaspur and Udhampur. But we still decided to go ahead because these talks are on terror. The Pakistan government has succumbed to pressure,” she said.
Aziz had indicated that Pakistan was only going to “explore the modalities for discussions on all other outstanding issues including Kashmir, Sir Creek and Siachen” in the NSA talks.
But it was a definite no-go for the seasoned politician in Swaraj, who insisted Pakistan talk only about terrorism first. “We are ready to talk about Kashmir. But, there had to be the right environment for that. These NSA-level talks were going to build up to that right environment,” she said.
Terror is not the only cause of concern to India with Pakistan. Further talks are on the agenda between the BSF and Pakistan Rangers, to be followed by DGMOs (Director General of Military Operations) over repeated ceasefire violations over the Line of Control and the International Border by Pakistani forces, which has claimed the lives of many civilians and Indian soldiers.
The Ufa statement is Pakistan’s Sharm-el-Sheikh moment. Both India and Pakistan had met at Sharm-el-Sheikh in Egypt in July 2009, on the sidelines of the Non-Aligned Movement Summit. The joint statement between the then Prime Ministers, India’s Manmohan Singh and Pakistan’s Yousuf Raza Gilani left India red-faced, and the UPA government totally bruised at home. In the statement, Gilani said Pakistan had information on threats in Balochistan and other areas, and both countries will share “real-time credible and actionable information on future terrorist threats”, suggesting India was involved in fomenting trouble across its western border. In Ufa, this time, it was Pakistan’s turn. The statement drafted by Pakistan Foreign Secretary Aizaz Chaudhry and Indian Foreign Secretary S Jaishankar was the opening page of the rest of the histrionics that came later. Framed rapidly, sitting on a sofa in the corridor of the Ufa convention centre, Jaishankar ensured that the K-word was not mentioned in the statement explicitly.
Swaraj has said that even if the NSA talks are not held, it will not be the end of the road. “Just because talks are not held tomorrow, that doesn’t mean they will not take place ever. I repeat, there are no full-stops in diplomacy, only colons and semi-colons,” she stated.
To save face, Aziz appealed to “global think tanks and foreign policy experts” to ponder on why Modi government cancelled the first ministerial interaction “on such flimsy grounds”.
Pakistani sources said that Aziz’s visit may not happen as “principle of support for Kashmir is more important than talks.”
Sources said that when US President Barack Obama came to New Delhi as India’s chief guest for Republic Day this year, he had advised Modi that India should engage in dialogue with Pakistan to defuse the tense atmosphere in the subcontinent. In the last leg of his Presidency, when the US forces are pulling out of Afghanistan, Obama would want to leave behind the legacy of a global statesman who preferred peaceful dialogue over military means. For Pakistan, which depends heavily on US aid, ensuring a smooth transition and reconciliation is important. India, here too, seems to have got a headstart in Kabul with Afghan President Ashraf Ghani turning against Islamabad after bomb attacks in Kabul and the death of Mullah Omar.
Surely, Pakistan’s quandary has been caused because it exists on flimsy excuses as a failed state which sponsors terror, not just in India but all over the world.
The Terror Sponsor
In the past 14 years, Pak terrorists carried out over 10 major attacks on Indian soil.
December 13, 2001: Parliament attacked, 7 dead
September 24, 2002: Akshardham Temple attacked in Ahmedabad, 31 dead
March 7, 2006: Three synchronised terrorist attacks Varanasi’s Shri Sankatmochan Mandir and Varanasi Cantonment Railway Station, 21 dead
July 11, 2006: Series of seven train bombing during evening rush hour in Mumbai, 209 dead
August 25, 2007: Two blasts in Hyderabad’s Lumbini Park and Gokul Chat, 42 dead
May 13, 2008: 9 bomb blasts in Jaipur, 63 dead
September 13, 2008: 5 bomb blasts in Delhi markets, 33 dead
November 26-29, 2008: 10 Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorists carry out a series of 12 coordinated shooting and bombing attacks across Mumbai, 164 dead
March 20, 2015: Militants in army uniforms storm a police station in Kathua in J&K, 4 dead
July 27, 2015: Three Lashkar terrorists in army uniforms open fire on a bus and attack Dina Nagar police station in Gurdaspur district of Punjab, 7 dead
India’s Arsenal Against Pakistan
Kashmir: Many dialogues have fallen flat mainly because of Pakistan violating ceasefire in the borders of Kashmir. Also, while India claims Siachen Glacier, situated in north Kashmir, falls in its area, Pakistan has refused to relent.
State-sponsored Terrorism: India has always been vocal against Pakistan promoting state-sponsored terrorism and nurturing terror nurseries on its soil to attack India’s hinterlands.
Dawood Ibrahim: India’s demand to bring back the 1993 Mumbai blasts mastermind from Pakistan might have grown louder but has only fallen on deaf ears.
Hafiz Saeed: The Jamat-ud Dawa chief and 26/11 Mumbai attack mastermind has continuously been launching attacks against India from Pakistan’s soil. Even, a Pakistani court recently banned the release of Bollywood movie ‘Phantom’ in the country on his plea.
Zakiur Rehman Lakhvi: India has been trying to get the LeT commander, who executed 2008 Mumbai terror attacks, for trial.