ISLAMABAD, July 17: Foreign Secretary Riaz Mohammad Khan on Monday termed India’s decision to indefinitely postpone peace talks a ‘negative development’ and called for early resumption of the process.
Addressing a press conference, he said the Indian decision was unwarranted and would not augur well for the composite dialogue.
“We look at this unspecified postponement as a negative development and the linkage between this postponement and the terrorist attacks in Mumbai is incongruous, a bit out of place,” he said.
In reply to a query as to how the dialogue process could be resumed, he said it was a question of new dates which had to be given by India.
The foreign secretary said the hotline with his Indian counterpart was intact, adding that following the Mumbai blasts he had contacted him and expressed condolences and inquired about the tentative schedule for the review meeting.
However, Mr Khan said progress had been achieved in the Indo-Pakistan dialogue even though it might not have been in conformity with expectations.
“There has been certain confidence building, improved relationship, and a better environment in South Asia,” he underscored.
He said the composite dialogue was an important engagement between the two countries and was in their interest as well as in interest of the region. “It is also part of our overall policy to promote and build a peaceful environment and it is with this conviction that we are pursuing this peace process. We emphasise that it must be sustained, must be maintained that it must progress and that it must succeed,” he said.
He pointed out that it was also in conformity with the spirit of the April 18, 2005 joint declaration issued after President Pervez Musharraf’s meeting with the Indian prime minister in New Delhi.
According to the joint statement, terrorist acts must not be allowed to impede the peace process and that the peace process is irreversible.
Answering a question, Mr Khan declared: “We would not be reversing any of these steps, any of the Confidence Building Measures (CBMs), any of the measures which have been agreed between the two sides and which are in place.”
He emphasised that there ought not to be any linkage between efforts to fight terrorists and the efforts to resolve disputes.
Terrorism, he said, must not be allowed to prevent countries from inter-state interaction and from resolution of problems. He recalled that Pakistan had condemned the Mumbai terror attacks.
In reply to a question, Mr Khan said there had been no formal communication from New Delhi regarding any evidence or information about those involved in the Mumbai blasts. He said there should be no room for unsubstantiated allegations and added that if India had any concrete evidence it should be shared with Pakistan.
He said Pakistan would help with investigations only if solid information was provided to it.
The foreign secretary said Pakistan did not allow its territory to be used against any country and added: “This is our firm policy and commitment. Pakistan is part of international coalition against terrorism and we have been cooperating with countries on the basis of shared information and this is the way this cooperation proceeds.”
He said terror incidents had been taking place all around the world, including Pakistan, and added: “We do not expect that whenever there is a terrorist attack in Pakistan the world leaders should be telephoning our leaders or similarly there is no such expectation on the part of anyone.”
Answering a question, he asserted: “I don’t think that there is any country which has done more (than Pakistan) to fight international terrorism, there is an appreciation that we broke the back of Al Qaeda.”
“We are doing it with a conviction because this is also in our interest because we want to develop, we want to progress, we want to become a modern society.”
Going into the history of Al Qaeda, he said it had something to do with the Afghan jihad of the ‘80s and the international community was responsible for all that because there was something at stake.
“As a result of what happened there had been dividends for the freedom movements but there were also negative consequences. This was a reality to which the rest of the world woke up only after 9/11,” he pointed out.
