Visit Indian Travel Sites
Goa,
Kerala,
Tamil Nadu,
Andhra Pradesh,
Delhi,
Rajasthan,
Uttar Pradesh,
Himachal Pradesh,
Assam,
Sikkim,
Madhya Pradesh,
Jammu & Kashmir
Karnataka
|
Indo-Pak talks - positive outcome or free-for-all! | The foreign ministers of India and Pakistan on Thursday may have sought to project before a global audience and their respective media that their much awaited talks here were positive, constructive and meaningful - it was anything but that. Going by the body language of both S.M. Krishna and Shah Mahmood Qureshi,
and the pointed, at times, aggressive questions asked by the media, it was plain
and simple -- disastrous and awful. Here is why? For starters, the press conference
was to begin at about 12.30 p.m. Pakistan time, but commenced nearly eight hours
later, leaving media persons of either side tired, and experiencing feelings of
anxiousness, exasperation, and indulging in rumor and banter about possible pluses
and minuses - more focused on the latter. When it actually started at around 8.30
p.m. Pakistan time, it seemed initially to be going according to script, but as
it progressed, it went beyond the prescribed format and descended into a virtual
free-for-all. The last question of the press conference, which continued further,
said it all. An Indian journalist asked Pakistan Foreign Minister Qureshi -"We
are talking about taking the dialogue process (between India and Pakistan) ahead.
In this scenario, Hafiz Saeed's anti-India tirade is affecting the environment
- was this issue discussed? In what appeared to be a measured response, Qureshi
said: "We discussed it. Incidentally, the minister (referring to India's S.M.
Krishna) raised the question that he was concerned about hate speeches that incite
people, and that we should avoid them. I do agree that both sides need to create
an enabling environment, and not let the climate of engagement be vitiated by
these speeches, should refrain from negative propaganda against each other. At
this point, Qureshi changes tack, and takes potshots at Indian officialdom, suggesting
that the interaction between the two delegations was not all hunky dory. He said:
"When you point out to Saeed's speech, or speeches, let me draw your attention
to the Indian Home Secretary's (G.K. Pillai) statement. The dialogue which was
reported in all Pakistani papers.. Tell me, to what extent it has helped? We were
of the opinion that it was uncalled for In effect, the Pakistan Foreign Minister
was equating Indian Home Secretary G.K. Pillai, a veteran law-abiding civil administrator
with nearly four decades of experience with Saeed, a man with alleged, if not
certain, terrorist links and antecedents. It maybe recalled that Pillai had cited
the information provided by accused Lashkar-e-Toiba recruit David C Headley regarding
the involvement of Pakistan's spy agency - the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI)
-- and Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD) chief Hafiz Saeed in the 26/11 attack during his interrogation
in Chicago by FBI and Indian investigators. Pakistan said it was disappointed
with Pillai's remarks and its timing, as it was delivered on the eve of the foreign
minister-level talks. |
|
|
|
|
|