![]() Saturday, May 03, 2003 |
| Front Page | ||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | Front Page
By Our New Delhi Bureau
Four days after a telephone conversation with his Pakistani counterpart, Mir Zafarullah Khan Jamali, the Prime Minister said that his "third'' attempt at dialogue with Islamabad would be "decisive" and the last effort during his lifetime. Giving clarifications in the Rajya Sabha after a statement in both Houses, Mr. Vajpayee said the re-engagement with Pakistan must be seen in the changed world situation with the world standing on one "pole". In a statement that found wide support from members, the Prime Minister asked how long would "we" continue to fight with Pakistan, how long would Pakistan and India continue to fight each other. "Will this 50-year-old bloody game end or not," he wondered. Mr. Vajpayee said he wanted to give peace one more chance a chance backed by self-confidence, not weakness. He admitted that he did not know how this third effort (after Lahore and Agra) would work itself out. But there would be no compromise on the unity, integrity and security of the country. He said that if he placed before the members all that Mr. Jamali had said against terrorism they would believe that the Pakistani leader was truly against this menace.
A "new beginning"
Describing the move as a "new beginning" amid thumping of desks, Mr. Vajpayee said that "we should not remain a slave to the past; while not forgetting it either." He said Pakistan should remember that even as it took over as President of the U.N. Security Council it remained tied to the Shimla Agreement. The Kashmir issue had to be resolved bilaterally, without mediation and not through a "third forum". "We know the circumstances of the Shimla agreement. Pakistan is trying to back off from it. It has thrust a proxy terrorism war on us. Terrorism is an enemy of humanity. It should be ended or else we, as an independent nation, will decide our policy."
There was "darkness" around, but who had said that a lamp could not be lit? The Prime Minister also said that he had been invited to visit Pakistan by Mr. Jamali, but he had not accepted the offer. ''I don't want to say anything further." On the return of High Commissioner (India recalled its envoy after the December 13, 2001 attack on Parliament while it sent back the Pakistani High Commissioner in May 2002), Mr. Vajpayee said that India had felt the need to have an ambassador in place. He left none in doubt about the "uncertainties" of the process he was embarking. No one, he said, could make any predictions about terrorism. India, he said, was prepared to deal with situations as they developed.
Delicate issue
In a speech marked by caution, he said there was no need to speed up rapprochement. Every step should be taken after due deliberation. The issue, he said, was very delicate. (Bada nazuk masla hai). Buoyed up by the collective appreciation of the House for his April 18 Srinagar speech, Mr. Vajpayee said: "I have taken on a big responsibility. I am in the dock before my colleagues... that is why I am telling them that this is my last attempt (at peacemaking)." But, he said, India and Pakistan should live in peace. Pointing out that Pakistan was in occupation of one-third of Kashmir, he referred to the Parliament resolution on the issue, but added that he was willing to discuss this issue in a friendly atmosphere. "There should be no battle even on this." Mr. Vajpayee, who repeatedly referred to the concerns on terrorism, stated that if the U.S. President had declared that he had won a battle against terrorism, then he wanted to tell Mr. George W.Bush that there were other centres of terrorism which were still to be tackled. Responding to the Opposition concern at the reported remarks made by a former U.S. army officer, Jay Garner, in Iraq that a solution to the Kashmir issue would be in place by December 2004, the Prime Minister said he would not give importance to such statements but it was a matter of concern that such forces were raising their heads to decide about other nations.
Related Stories:
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | Home |
Copyright © 2003, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|