ISLAMABAD: Notwithstanding the government’s euphoria surrounding the resumption of “comprehensive bilateral dialogue” with India, political parties across the aisle expressed their reservations over the outcome, alleging that the joint statement favoured New Delhi.

Although they welcomed the decision to sit across the table for resolution of all outstanding issues between the two countries, they saw the joint statement issued after talks between Indian External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj and Adviser on Foreign Affairs Sartaj Aziz as favouring the former’s stance.

“While the statement categorically addressed Indian concerns over the Mumbai trial, what about Samjhota Express case and Kashmir cause which the government recently took up at the United Nations and kept on boasting about taking such a bold stand,” PTI leader Dr Shireen Mazari said while speaking on a point of order in the National Assembly on Thursday.

Take a look: Pakistan, India agree to restart ‘comprehensive’ dialogue process

Quoting from the joint statement that “the Indian side was assured of the steps being taken to expedite the early conclusion of the Mumbai trial”, she sought clarification about the difference between ‘composite’ and ‘comprehensive’ bilateral dialogue.

“As far as I know, the term ‘composite dialogue’ was also a creation of the Indian side, which now has come up with a new terminology, ‘comprehensive dialogue’,” she said.

The PTI lawmaker wondered whether the resumption of bilateral talks meant Pakistan had relinquished its options to use multilateral forums to take up issues, particularly Kashmir. She questioned the language of the statement and said the prime minister must clarify it on the floor of the house.

JUI-F chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman was also of the view that such statements warranted a clarification from the government side because apparently it didn’t explain what actually transpired during the talks.

“When Pakistan highlights the issue of Kashmir at the UN under its resolution, India says it’s a bilateral issue which requires no international forum. At the bilateral level, the Indian argument has been that Kashmir is its integral part. Then somebody must explain to this house at what level the government intends to take it up with India,” he said.

The Maulana said that as far as the issue of Kashmir was concerned, under the UN resolution, no one could bar Pakistan from highlighting it at any forum in the world. He called for strengthening the National Assembly’s Kashmir committee which he heads, and making it a powerful arm of parliament.

However, the JUI-F chief, whose party shares the treasury benches with the ruling PML-N, praised Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif for organising the Heart of Asia ministerial conference which he believed would go a long way in bringing regional countries together.

Underscoring the importance of Afghanistan for regional peace and prosperity, he accused the West of fanning wars and conflicts in the developing world for the benefit their military-industrial complex.

PTI’s Shafqat Mehmood said: “Without waiting for our calls, Sartaj Aziz should have come here on his own to explain the outcome of the Heart of Asia conference.”

It’s an irony that the federal capital was host to a number of foreign dignitaries, but nobody from the government side had bothered to come and explain the house, he regretted. “The house doesn’t deserve this kind of treatment”.

Mr Mehmood wondered how one could expect the Indians to move ahead with critical bilateral issues afflicting the two countries when they had refused to go ahead with even the cricket series.

However, it was the Leader of Opposition, Khursheed Ahmed Shah, who reserved harsh comments for the prime minister for his continued absence from the assembly. Mr Shah, who was scheduled to open the house to discuss the president’s address to both houses of parliament, refused to do so until Leader of the House Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif came to the hall.

“Whom should I address; empty chairs on the treasury benches. I have decided I will not open the discussion on the presidential address unless the prime minister attends proceedings of the house,” he said.

The Minister for Inter-provincial Coordination, Riaz Pirzada, said he would convey the mood of the house to the prime minister and ask Mr Aziz to appear before it.

He agreed that at least the announcement of resumption of cricket series during talks between the two countries would have sent a positive message, but it didn’t happen.

In reply to a question by PPP’s Shazia Marri, he said his ministry was in touch with provincial governments to convene a meeting of the Council of Common Interests by the end of this month.

Published in Dawn, December 11th, 2015