May 30, 2008	Friday	Jamadi-ul-Awwal 24, 1429

WASHINGTON, May 29: A State Department spokesman told reporters on Thursday that while Pakistan had given a broad outline of its talks with the militants, it had not shared details of any agreement it might have reached.

“My understanding is that the government’s been in a number of conversations, but there’re no specific agreements that we, at least, have been briefed on,” said the department’s deputy spokesman Tom Casey.

Meanwhile, Gen David Petraeus, commander of the multi-national force in Iraq, arrived at the Pakistan Embassy in Washington for a surprise meeting with ambassador-designate Hussain Huqqani.

Gen Petraeus, who awaits his confirmation as the new head of the US Central Command, warned last week that if there’s another 9-11-style attack on the United States, it would originate in Pakistan.

He also told the Senate Armed Services Committee that if confirmed Pakistan would be the first country he would visit to assess its desire and capability to fight terrorism.

Gen Petraeus’ confirmation is almost certain as he enjoys a bipartisan support in the US Congress and was recently included in a Time magazine list of 100 most influential Americans.

As the Centcom head, Gen Petraeus will be responsible for US military activities in the great Middle East, which also includes Pakistan.

Talking to Dawn after the talks, Ambassador Huqqani said he reaffirmed Pakistans desire to have multi-faceted and long-term relationship with the US.

“We also reaffirmed our commitment to the global war on terror and I assured the general that the country’s new leadership considers the war against terror as its own war,” he said.

At the State Department, spokesman Casey indicated that the United States continues to be sceptical of Pakistans efforts to sign peace deals with religious militants.

“We’ve seen similar kinds of agreements reached in the past that have not been successful,” he told reporters. “I think there’s a healthy degree of scepticism as to exactly how effective these kinds of agreements can be.”

US and Afghan officials have reacted cautiously to Islamabad’s peace moves, saying it could result in stepped up violence in Afghanistan.

Pakistan, however, points out that a peace agreement it signed with the militants in Swat ended months of fighting between troops and followers of Maulana Fazlullah, who was campaigning for the introduction of Sharia in the valley.

Under the terms of the deal signed on May 21, the government agreed to gradually pull out troops and introduce an Islamic justice system, while the rebels said they would halt attacks and surrender arms.

Until now, the United

States has withheld judgment on the deal.

“Certainly, while we are open to any kind of agreement that would in fact end terrorist violence and bring those outside the political process into it,” Mr Casey said.

“In the end, we want to make sure that nothing is done that would undermine the security either of Pakistan or of Afghanistan.”

Mr Casey said that the government of Pakistan had assured the US that its intention was to bring into the political process those who were outside of it and to bring a halt to terrorist activities.

“The bottom line, though, is any agreement needs to be judged by whether it achieves its objectives,” he added. “And the objectives, again, as stated to us by the Pakistanis and by themselves, is to reduce violence, to bring those into the political system who have been standing outside of it, and ultimately to bring greater peace and security to the region as a whole.”