11-16-2006, 02:34 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Pak uses anti-terror tool to attack India </b>
Shobori Ganguli | New Delhi
Lectures on human rights violation in Kashmir
Points fingers at New Delhi 'role' in Baluchistan
<b>At the end of the two-day Foreign Secretary level talks here, Pakistan literally got away with murder. From terrorism to Kashmir, Mumbai to Siachen, the Pakistani side on Wednesday walked out confidently from the two-day negotiations, not conceding a single Indian concern.</b> T<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>he talks ended with Pakistan asserting there was no discussion on the Mumbai blasts, </span>an incident that had stalled the peace process for four months.
<b>India was first reprimanded for pointing fingers at Pakistan within "15 minutes" of the Mumbai blasts and warned that it would be a "dangerous folly for either country to destabilise the other." </b>Â
Turning the newly established joint anti-terror mechanism to its advantage, Pakistan also said it would be used by Islamabad to furnish New Delhi with evidence of Indian involvement in the worsening security situation in Pakistan's south-western province of Baluchistan. "We have evidence (of India's involvement). We will use the mechanism to provide India with that evidence," Pakistan Foreign Secretary Riaz Mohammad Khan said.
The strongest words, predictably, were reserved for Kashmir, with Khan maintaining, "The main focus (of the talks) was on how to resolve this longstanding dispute." He said Islamabad sees a clear "linkage between the coercive atmosphere on the Indian side of Kashmir and the human rights issue."
Asserting that "there should be zero tolerance for human rights abuses," he said, if India reduces its "heavy military presence" in the Valley, then "we can take some reciprocal steps to raise the comfort level of the Kashmiris."
On Siachen too, Pakistani intransigence was evident. "If there is a desire for indication of present positions, that would be possible. If there is an intention to seek endorsement of a certain claim, then we cannot proceed," Khan said, indicating that the issue will stay alive for a while.
Although the joint anti-terror mechanism has been propped up as a final hope of some civilised exchange between India and Pakistan on the issue of terrorism, the terms of engagement appear blurred with Pakistan all but denying it is a port of origin for anti-India terror.
Instead of addressing India's specific concerns on terror which were formally handed over to Pakistan in the shape of some evidence gathered on terror attacks in the past year, Khan made out a case for Pakistan instead as a country afflicted by terrorism and in need of urgent cooperation with other South Asian countries.
<b>"The joint anti-terror mechanism is a two-way channel. If we have information we will convey it to the Indian side. And if India has information they will hand it to us. Terrorism is a global challenge. All countries in South Asia are afflicted by this menace. Pakistan is a victim of terrorism which has local implications and international dimensions," Khan said. He also expressed Pakistan's resentment at India's reaction to the Mumbai blasts: "There was immediate finger-pointing at Pakistan which we rejected." </b>
In a statement that all but said India is suffering from home-grown terror, Khan said, "There are terrorists and extremists in India and there are terrorists and extremists in Pakistan. Many incidents of terrorism and violence have taken place in India in recent times like Malegaon and Gujarat....but the finger pointing within 15 minutes of the Mumbai blasts, we could not understand."
Given such stonewalling, the two-day talks, which India said focused on terrorism, seem a wasted effort. India, however, sounded optimistic. Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon said, "Pakistan says with specific information (on terrorists) they can act. Some information we have handed over. Let's see what happens." From the Indian perspective, "Our goal in this process (of peace) is to try and achieve a relationship with Pakistan, who is our neighbour, that is not only normal but good neighbourly," Menon said.
Pakistan talked at a tangent, partly courtesy the long rope India has decided to give it. "There was nothing about the Mumbai blasts (during the talks) but we were given material on certain other blasts with linkages between banned groups in India and banned groups in Pakistan. We will examine them. There was nothing related to Mumbai," said Khan.
Â
Asked if India brought up Mumbai during the talks, Khan denied, saying, "Information sharing is not some verbal communication. It has to be done in a formal manner." Since India has not yet filed chargesheets in the Mumbai case it could not share that information with Pakistan.
On the overall question of terrorism, Menon said, "There are elements in Pakistan involved in assisting and inciting terror in India. Who controls them is not for us to say. But on any terrorist action we expect action to be taken."
As for Pakistan's demand for troops reduction in Kashmir, Menon said, "We have removed some troops last year. Troop levels are really related to the security situation...If there is improvement in the situation, troops can be reduced. But violence has to go down."
<b>Highlights
Shivshankar Menon, Indian Foreign Secretary </b>
<b>On Kashmir </b>
Troop levels (in Kashmir) are really related to the security situation...If there is improvement in the situation, troops can be reduced. But violence must go down in Kashmir.
<b>On Siachen</b>
What India would see the beginning of a process is prior authentication of present positions.
<b>On joint anti-terror mechanism</b>
Pakistan says with specific information (on terrorists) they can act. We have handed over some information. Let us see what happens.
<b>Finger pointing by India</b>
We have told Pakistan about the groups that have been banned in India and in Pakistan. We have sought cooperation in controlling these elements.
<b>Riaz Mohammad Khan, Pakistan Foreign Secretary
On Kashmir </b>
We see a linkage between the coercive atmosphere on the Indian side. There should be zero tolerance for human rights abuses...If steps can be taken by India (to demilitarise) then we can take steps to raise the comfort level of Kashmiris.
<b>On Siachen</b>
If there is an indication of present positions, that would be possible. But if there is any intention to seek endorsement of a certain claim, then we cannot proceed.
<b>On joint anti-terror mechanism</b> <!--emo&
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Pakistan has evidence (of Indian involvement in Baluchistan). We will use the mechanism to provide India with that evidence.
<b>Finger pointing by India</b>
After the Mumbai blasts there was immediate finger pointing which we rejected. It would be a dangerous folly for either country to try and destabilise the other.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Here you go Moron Singh with full stupidity on display.
Shobori Ganguli | New Delhi
Lectures on human rights violation in Kashmir
Points fingers at New Delhi 'role' in Baluchistan
<b>At the end of the two-day Foreign Secretary level talks here, Pakistan literally got away with murder. From terrorism to Kashmir, Mumbai to Siachen, the Pakistani side on Wednesday walked out confidently from the two-day negotiations, not conceding a single Indian concern.</b> T<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>he talks ended with Pakistan asserting there was no discussion on the Mumbai blasts, </span>an incident that had stalled the peace process for four months.
<b>India was first reprimanded for pointing fingers at Pakistan within "15 minutes" of the Mumbai blasts and warned that it would be a "dangerous folly for either country to destabilise the other." </b>Â
Turning the newly established joint anti-terror mechanism to its advantage, Pakistan also said it would be used by Islamabad to furnish New Delhi with evidence of Indian involvement in the worsening security situation in Pakistan's south-western province of Baluchistan. "We have evidence (of India's involvement). We will use the mechanism to provide India with that evidence," Pakistan Foreign Secretary Riaz Mohammad Khan said.
The strongest words, predictably, were reserved for Kashmir, with Khan maintaining, "The main focus (of the talks) was on how to resolve this longstanding dispute." He said Islamabad sees a clear "linkage between the coercive atmosphere on the Indian side of Kashmir and the human rights issue."
Asserting that "there should be zero tolerance for human rights abuses," he said, if India reduces its "heavy military presence" in the Valley, then "we can take some reciprocal steps to raise the comfort level of the Kashmiris."
On Siachen too, Pakistani intransigence was evident. "If there is a desire for indication of present positions, that would be possible. If there is an intention to seek endorsement of a certain claim, then we cannot proceed," Khan said, indicating that the issue will stay alive for a while.
Although the joint anti-terror mechanism has been propped up as a final hope of some civilised exchange between India and Pakistan on the issue of terrorism, the terms of engagement appear blurred with Pakistan all but denying it is a port of origin for anti-India terror.
Instead of addressing India's specific concerns on terror which were formally handed over to Pakistan in the shape of some evidence gathered on terror attacks in the past year, Khan made out a case for Pakistan instead as a country afflicted by terrorism and in need of urgent cooperation with other South Asian countries.
<b>"The joint anti-terror mechanism is a two-way channel. If we have information we will convey it to the Indian side. And if India has information they will hand it to us. Terrorism is a global challenge. All countries in South Asia are afflicted by this menace. Pakistan is a victim of terrorism which has local implications and international dimensions," Khan said. He also expressed Pakistan's resentment at India's reaction to the Mumbai blasts: "There was immediate finger-pointing at Pakistan which we rejected." </b>
In a statement that all but said India is suffering from home-grown terror, Khan said, "There are terrorists and extremists in India and there are terrorists and extremists in Pakistan. Many incidents of terrorism and violence have taken place in India in recent times like Malegaon and Gujarat....but the finger pointing within 15 minutes of the Mumbai blasts, we could not understand."
Given such stonewalling, the two-day talks, which India said focused on terrorism, seem a wasted effort. India, however, sounded optimistic. Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon said, "Pakistan says with specific information (on terrorists) they can act. Some information we have handed over. Let's see what happens." From the Indian perspective, "Our goal in this process (of peace) is to try and achieve a relationship with Pakistan, who is our neighbour, that is not only normal but good neighbourly," Menon said.
Pakistan talked at a tangent, partly courtesy the long rope India has decided to give it. "There was nothing about the Mumbai blasts (during the talks) but we were given material on certain other blasts with linkages between banned groups in India and banned groups in Pakistan. We will examine them. There was nothing related to Mumbai," said Khan.
Â
Asked if India brought up Mumbai during the talks, Khan denied, saying, "Information sharing is not some verbal communication. It has to be done in a formal manner." Since India has not yet filed chargesheets in the Mumbai case it could not share that information with Pakistan.
On the overall question of terrorism, Menon said, "There are elements in Pakistan involved in assisting and inciting terror in India. Who controls them is not for us to say. But on any terrorist action we expect action to be taken."
As for Pakistan's demand for troops reduction in Kashmir, Menon said, "We have removed some troops last year. Troop levels are really related to the security situation...If there is improvement in the situation, troops can be reduced. But violence has to go down."
<b>Highlights
Shivshankar Menon, Indian Foreign Secretary </b>
<b>On Kashmir </b>
Troop levels (in Kashmir) are really related to the security situation...If there is improvement in the situation, troops can be reduced. But violence must go down in Kashmir.
<b>On Siachen</b>
What India would see the beginning of a process is prior authentication of present positions.
<b>On joint anti-terror mechanism</b>
Pakistan says with specific information (on terrorists) they can act. We have handed over some information. Let us see what happens.
<b>Finger pointing by India</b>
We have told Pakistan about the groups that have been banned in India and in Pakistan. We have sought cooperation in controlling these elements.
<b>Riaz Mohammad Khan, Pakistan Foreign Secretary
On Kashmir </b>
We see a linkage between the coercive atmosphere on the Indian side. There should be zero tolerance for human rights abuses...If steps can be taken by India (to demilitarise) then we can take steps to raise the comfort level of Kashmiris.
<b>On Siachen</b>
If there is an indication of present positions, that would be possible. But if there is any intention to seek endorsement of a certain claim, then we cannot proceed.
<b>On joint anti-terror mechanism</b> <!--emo&
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo--> Pakistan has evidence (of Indian involvement in Baluchistan). We will use the mechanism to provide India with that evidence.
<b>Finger pointing by India</b>
After the Mumbai blasts there was immediate finger pointing which we rejected. It would be a dangerous folly for either country to try and destabilise the other.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Here you go Moron Singh with full stupidity on display.