'Going back to Lahore will be appropriate'

By Malini Parthasarathy

CHENNAI, NOV. 29. The Clinton administration views the Prime Minister, Mr. A. B. Vajpayee's Ramzan ceasefire initiative in Kashmir as a welcome development deserving of a response from the Kashmiri militant groups. According to a senior administration official, Mr. Karl Inderfurth, who is now in Delhi as part of his farewell trip to the region, ``after several false starts in recent months, the Prime Minister's new initiative could be the step that leads to a new opening in addressing the Kashmir dispute.''

Mr. Inderfurth, who is Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia in the outgoing Clinton administration and who has played a major role in the radical improvement of the context of U.S.- India relations which ensued despite the differences over India's nuclear tests, expressed hope over the recent developments in Kashmir, in a conversation in a brief stopover here in Chennai on his way to Delhi from Sri Lanka. While he took care to say that at that point in time, he was not really up to date on the latest developments in regard to the ceasefire, he did note that a dialogue between India and the Kashmiri groups would be ``a good thing''.

Asked for an elucidation of the U.S. stance in the context of the Indian official argument that a dialogue with Pakistan was not possible until there was a complete cessation of cross-border terrorism, Mr. Inderfurth said:``It has been our view consistently that dialogue is needed between India and Pakistan but that it is also important for Pakistan to take important steps to demonstrate its seriousness in seeing that dialogue is resumed.'' This would include ``steps to see that the level of violence is reduced in Kashmir.''

Explaining that the United States saw the Lahore process as an important step, the Clinton administration official said, ``we were then very disappointed with Kargil... we made it clear that Pakistan needed to see those forces withdrawn back across the Line of Control... we know that there were political costs here for Mr. Vajpayee and Mr. Jaswant Singh as a result of Kargil.'' Therefore, as a result of the Kargil episode, ``a demonstration by Pakistan of its sincerity that it wants to resume the dialogue and to go back to the Lahore process would be an appropriate step to take.'' Mr. Inderfurth also noted that in the context of the process of addressing the Kashmir dispute, the United States also believes that ``at some stage Pakistan would need to be involved in the process.'' He made clear that this was not to suggest that Pakistan be included in a three-way discussion. The idea was that there could be several tracks of discussions, for instance, one involving India and the militant groups and another between India and Pakistan. ``India and Pakistan need to resume their dialogue in a serious and sustained fashion.''

The U.S. Assistant Secretary, who is on his final tour of the region before the Clinton administration makes its exit in January, said that under the leadership of Mr. Bill Clinton and Mr. Vajpayee, the two countries had been able to ``chart a new and positive relationship''. The new turn in U.S.-India relations, Mr. Inderfurth asserted, had become a ``significant part of the redefinition of U.S. foreign policy for the 21st century.'' He pointed out that Mr. Clinton considered ``this new relationship as one of the high points of his presidency.'' The initiative to improve ties with India was ``a top-down initiative'' by Mr. Clinton, fuelled in part by the end of the Cold War, India's own steps ``towards the global marketplace'' and the fact that both were ``vibrant democracies''.

Outlining the implied tasks for the next U.S administration in sustaining the new momentum in U.S.-India relations, the Clinton administration official said that the new foundation laid during the Clinton era would have to be built upon. Striking a note of caution, he said: ``We must be vigilant that we do not relapse into old ways of dealing with each other... the old sensitivities, and we all know what they are, are receding and we are beginning to have a greater degree of confidence in what we have to say to each other but that does not mean that we will agree on every issue and we should not expect to.''

``Over the next several years, we will be testing the proposition that by expanding our relationship to encompass a broadbased agenda, we will be better able to narrow our differences on those issues that have proven difficult for us in the past, like nonproliferation...'' Mr. Inderfurth said, adding that his hope was that ``a few years from now, we will be able to look back and say that this period truly did represent a fundamental change in the U.S.-India relationship but it will take us a few years to make that determination.''

According to Mr. Inderfurth, the changed relationship was ``so much in line with larger US national interests'' and enjoyed ``such broad support across the political spectrum in the United States, from both the Democrats and the Republicans'', that this changed perspective on U.S.-India relations was certain to continue into the next administration. But, he underlined that it was also important to recognise that while the foundation for the relationship had been laid, ``expectations'' should ``not be too high'' so as to evoke subsequent disappointment. ``It is important to place our expectations at a realistic level,'' said the outgoing U.S. Assistant Secretary of State, whose farewell visit here virtually draws down the curtains on the Clinton administration's engagement of South Asia.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Front Page
Previous : SGPC president: Badal to announce candidate today
Next     : Iraq seeks 'strategic ties' with India