Fooling Around

[King Julien]

Composite dialogue only after Pakistan’s action​

NEW DELHI: Having started a “limited dialogue,” India was not keen on meeting the Pakistani insistence that the composite dialogue be resumed, till it was convinced not only of Islamabad’s sincerity in taking action against the perpetrators of the previous attacks but also of its motivation to prevent attacks like the one that occurred in Mumbai, said South Block sources.

Even if the limited dialogue was to go beyond the Foreign Secretary-level talks, India would refrain from restarting the composite dialogue format because Pakistan had not kept its promise, made in January 2004, of dismantling the terrorist training infrastructure. “There have been attacks after attacks after that pledge,” the sources said.

Denying that Pakistan submitted any dossier on Indian involvement in Balochistan, they pointed out that the only paper given by Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir on the night of July 14 at Sharm-el-Sheikh (Egypt) was titled “After the attacks in Mumbai.” It was a “bland” listing of the actions taken by Islamabad to “make it look that it had worked hard.”

On the India-Pakistan joint statement uncoupling the composite dialogue from action taken against the perpetrators of the Mumbai attacks, India felt this would ensure that action against terrorism was not held hostage to the composite dialogue. In future, Pakistan could not say because there was no composite dialogue no action could be taken.

“The fact is that it [joint statement] was drafted in bits and pieces. It was supposed to be reflective of what was discussed and since Pakistan Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani had mentioned Balochistan we had no problem in leaving it in. We would be happy to discuss Balochistan because we have clean hands and a clear conscience,” the sources maintained.

On the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) Agency chief Shuja Pasha’s offer to negotiate with India, they said India would tread carefully. “It is not the man but the institution. ISI is an important part of the Pakistani establishment but it is also the source of trouble for India. We will have to look at this offer carefully because the noise to signal ratio in Pakistan is very high.”

Pakistan puts off Mumbai case for month​

ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - A Pakistani court due to hear the case against five Islamist militants accused of involvement in the attacks that killed 166 people in the Indian city of Mumbai adjourned for a month without charges being read.

India wants forceful action by Pakistan to bring to justice leaders of the Lashkar-e-Taiba militant group it says were behind the Nov. 26-29 attacks before formally resuming a peace process that was frozen during the subsequent tensions.

The government's prosecutor, Malik Rab Nawaz Noon, said formal charges against the accused had not yet been framed and Saturday's proceedings ended after some statements were recorded.

A member of the prosecution team and a defence lawyer said the court adjourned until Aug. 29, and officials said the court had accepted a request by the Federal Investigation Agency for the hearing to be held "in camera".

The media and public have been barred from hearings being held at the Adiala jail in Rawalpindi, the garrison town next door to Islamabad, and lawyers from both sides have divulged little during pre-trial proceedings.

Across the border in India, a trial in Mumbai opened dramatically earlier this week when Mohammad Ajmal Kasab, the only one of 10 Pakistani gunmen captured alive, pleaded guilty and asked to be hanged.

Having sent a dossier to New Delhi earlier this month, Pakistan has said it is waiting for more information from India to support the prosecution case, though Indian officials say all relevant information has been passed on.

---------- Post added at 07:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:04 PM ----------

i suppose its high time our media questions indian diplomacy..
why did they issue a joint statement when they were gonna contradict it?
what is the use of going for talks after 7 months? was it not possible that they kept the dialouges on after 26/11 as that would have yielded much better results..
these actions from both governments don't make any sense.....