By IANS,
New Delhi/Islamabad: India said Thursday it had taken a “conscious decision” to hold talks with Pakistan even though it was “not fully satisfied” with the steps Islamabad has taken to dismantle the terror infrastructure on its soil. On its part, Pakistan said it favoured the composite dialogue to war to resolve issues with India.
And, Pakistan’s foreign minister, insisting that the stalled composite dialogue should resume, said Feb 25 was “not a bad date” for the proposed foreign secretary-level talks.
Speaking in New Delhi, Indian Defence Minister A.K. Antony said: “We were watching the developments in Pakistan and felt we are not fully satisfied with the steps taken to control terrorism. At the same time, they have taken some action as per our wishes. Therefore, we took a conscious decision that it is better to start talks.”
In this context, Antony, while speaking to reporters on the sidelines of the Asian Security Conference, noted that “all the 42 terrorist organisations across the border are intact and there is no attempt on the part of the government of Pakistan to dismantle them”.
New Delhi has suggested two dates – Feb 18 or Feb 25 – for talks between the foreign secretaries of India and Pakistan, saying that while the focus would be on countering terrorism, other matters of mutual concern could also be discussed.
Pakistan, however, has been harping on the resumption of the composite dialogue process that India suspended in the wake of the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks, which New Delhi blames on elements operating across the border.
India says it is premature to talk about resuming the dialogue at the present moment and has made it clear to Pakistan that the proposed foreign secretary-level talks are part of “a step-by-step incremental approach” and that Islamabad should “do more” to address New Delhi’s concerns over cross-border terror.
Antony made a pointed reference to this while addressing the security conference, saying the “support base” of terror organisations like the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Al Qaeda in Pakistan, as also in Afghanistan, needed to be dismantled for peace and development in the region.
“Terror infrastructure continues to thrive on Pakistani soil. We continue to be firm with our demand that Pakistan must put an end to terror activities emanating from its soil,” he maintained.
Noting that India-Pakistan relations “have a huge bearing on regional peace and stability”, Antony said: “Our government’s willingness to resume negotiations with Pakistan must be seen in this backdrop. At the same time, we are also closely monitoring the developments in Pakistan.”
In Islamabad, Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani appreciated India’s “intention” to resume talks but also reiterated Pakistan’s stance on resumption of the composite dialogue.
“I appreciate India’s intention to resume talks,” he said, adding the “threat perception” regarding India necessitated the need for a dialogue to resolve all outstanding issues between the two countries.
“There is an intention that we say that there will be no war. But intentions can change anytime. There is a threat perception, that’s why we want dialogue,” Gilani said in interview with a private TV channel telecast Wednesday night.
Speaking to reporters on Thursday, Gilani lamented that India is not ready for a dialogue on Kashmir and noted that Pakistan is waiting for its “final response” that resumption of talks should only mean having a “composite dialogue”.
“Kashmir dispute should come under discussion in the composite dialogue between Pakistan and India and we are still awaiting the final response of India in this regard,” he said on the sidelines of a function at the Capital Development Authority in Islamabad.
“Composite dialogue is the only way to resolve disputes between the two nuclear-armed nations,” Online news agency quoted Gilani as saying.
Also in Islamabad, Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi told The News: “We do not have too many concerns regarding dates. February 25 is not a bad date, that is if it also suits our foreign secretary, and as to where we meet, it is really not that important.”
“Of course, we feel that these talks should be the re-start of the composite dialogue and take it up from where we left off. After all, all the issues that both sides want to raise are included in the composite dialogue,” he added.