20
ABDUL Basit, who has been Pakistan’s High Commissioner to India since 2014, spoke about the challenges of his job and the future of bilateral relations in an interview with Junaid Kathju and Zulkarnain Banday of the Indian newspaper Statesman. Excerpts:
Q: Considering the new low in relations India and Pakistan have witnessed lately, do you think the two governments can restart the long-stalled dialogue at an early date?
A: First of all we need to understand that Jammu and Kashmir is the root cause of all our problems. I think unless we solve this problem as per the aspirations of the people there it will continue to be difficult to have viable peace in the region. It is important not to shy away from settling this issue, because that is the cause of our mutual distrust. We have fought wars because of this dispute. India also agrees that the Kashmir dispute needs to be settled, whether you take UN resolutions or the Simla Agreement or Lahore declaration or Islamabad joint statement. So we should sit and solve it amicably. Once that is done, there is hardly anything between our two countries that cannot be settled easily and quickly.
Envoy to India says conviction of Jadhav shows Pakistan too is suffering at the hands of terrorism
Q: India has always stressed that cross-border infiltration and terrorism must stop before any dialogue. What is Pakistan’s view on it?
A: As far as Pakistan is concerned we do not believe in setting pre-conditions for talks. If we can address all these issues then there is hardly anything left for talks between the two countries. Our approach is more practical because we also have concerns about terrorism. The conviction of Commander Kulbhushan Jadhav clearly shows that Pakistan too is suffering at the hands of terrorism which has internal and external dimensions. My own take is that sooner or later India and Pakistan will have to come to the negotiating table. I am convinced that we are not destined to live in hostility forever.
Q: Talking about Jadhav, will consular access be granted?
A: The ICJ (International Court of Justice) in its provisional order discusses this issue in the realm of plausibility, so there was no ruling on the issue of consular access. The ICJ has very clearly said the provisional order will not have any bearing on the final judgement. We need to understand Commander Jadhav is not an ordinary citizen. He was convicted for sabotage, subversion and terrorism.
Q: Pakistan has also said that they are going to give strong evidence against Jadhav.
A: Yes, we are considering it. I will not discuss our strategy here but we do not have a shred of doubt about his involvement in terrorism. Pakistan is on terra firma. We are on a stronger wicket in this case.
Q: What was the reason for industrialist Sajjan Jindal’s visit to Pakistan? Did it have anything to do with the Jadhav case? Was it a kind of Track-II dialogue on the issue?
A: No, (laughs) as you know he went there to meet the prime minister. They have known each other for many years, so there wasn’t anything official about it.
Q: The Kashmir issue as you said is the core issue between India and Pakistan. Why is Pakistan seeking to take political and diplomatic advantage of the current uprising in Jammu and Kashmir? Do you think Pakistan’s open support to separatists in Kashmir has vitiated the atmosphere in the state?
A: I don’t think so, because Pakistan has always said that Kashmir is an indigenous movement. We need to understand that for decades the people of Jammu and Kashmir have been struggling for their right to self-determination which is very much enshrined in the UN charter as well as in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This is a legitimate struggle. So I don’t see how Pakistan can vitiate the atmosphere by supporting it. There are many voices inside India also who are emphasising on the need to solve this problem politically.
Q: India has always said that Pakistan internationalises Kashmir while India believes that it is a bilateral issue and should be resolved by India and Pakistan.
A: It is an international issue. There are UN Security Council resolutions on this issue. If the Indian position is that Pakistan and India should talk to each other and it can be resolved only bilaterally because of the Simla Agreement, Pakistan is ready to resolve it bilaterally but 47 years have already elapsed since the Simla Agreement. I do not know how many more years you would need to discuss this issue bilaterally. I think the time has really come now for India to do some introspection. Pakistan is not averse to bilateralism, provided it leads to results.
Q: One can understand border skirmishes between India and Pakistan but we often see Pakistani soldiers commit the heinous crime of mutilating Indian soldiers?
A: These are just allegations. The Pakistan Army is a very professional army, one of the best in the world. We do not get into these things. As far as Pakistan is concerned there was no beheading at all.
Q: Why is Pakistan opposed to India’s involvement in the reconstruction programme in Afghanistan? Why can’t Pakistan and India sit together and jointly undertake reconstruction activities in the war-ravaged nation?
A: First of all, we share a 2,500km border with Afghanistan. Afghanistan is our immediate neighbour and whatever happens there ineluctably and inevitably affects Pakistan. So stability and peace in Afghanistan is essential for our own security and stability.
Afghanistan is a sovereign country and has the liberty to have relations with any country. We have no issues as long as those relations do not directly affect or harm us. Unfortunately, we have seen how in the past Pakistan has been destabilised through Afghanistan. We are in touch with Afghanistan and we hope that given our brotherly relations its territory is not used to destabilise Pakistan, particularly Balochistan and the Fata (Federally Administered Tribal Areas) region.
By arrangement with The Statesman/ANN
Published in Dawn, May 24th, 2017
