Online News Paper

WASHINGTON: The meeting in Egypt between Prime Ministers Yousuf Raza Gilani and Manmohan Singh has ignited the hope that India and Pakistan will pursue a dialogue again, says US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who begins a five-day visit to India this week.
In an interview to Dawn newspaper and TV, Secretary Clinton assured the Pakistanis that they did not need to fear the outcome of her India visit.
The US media reported on Thursday that Pakistan was likely to figure high in Mrs Clinton’s talks in India.
In a meeting at the Egyptian town of Sharm El Sheikh on Thursday, the Indian and Pakistani leaders agreed to de-link bilateral talks from the issue of terrorism.
‘I’m going with the hope that has been ignited in the last weeks that India and Pakistan will pursue a dialogue again,’ said the top US diplomat when asked if she was going to New Delhi with an initiative for restarting India-Pakistan talks.
Mrs Clinton described an earlier meeting between the two prime ministers as ‘very promising,’ and showed that the two governments were keen to resolve their differences peacefully.
‘There is an interest and a seriousness on the part of both governments in trying to work towards resolution of some of the longstanding differences,’ she said.
‘I have always believed, and you may have heard me say in many meetings of my friends in the Pakistani and American community, that Pakistan’s future is unlimited. The potential for economic growth and for influence in the region is, in my view, as great as any country’s.’
But she suggested that Pakistan had to show commitment to focussing on its internal developments, which required dealing with and trying to resolve some of the outstanding concerns.
‘There are some in Pakistan who say that Indians are using Afghanistan to interfere in Balochistan. Will you discuss this with the India?’ she was asked. ‘Well, I’m going to raise everything that we believe is of significance with the Indian government. I believe that it is in India’s interest for Pakistan to be stable, democratic, free of terrorism,’ she said.
KASHMIR ISSUE
In his inaugural speech, President Obama said that Kashmir was one issue that needed to be resolved but the Obama administration does not seem to talk about it any longer. Does this indicate that the US no longer sees Kashmir as an issue that needs to be resolved?’
‘I think that the disputes between India and Pakistan, which are historical and long-standing, should be looked at with fresh eyes, and there should be an effort to build some mutual trust. And from what I hear, it was a very good meeting between Prime Minister Singh and Prime Minister Gilani in Sharm El Sheikh,’ said Mrs Clinton.
Responding to the question on Kashmir, she reiterated the US stance that India and Pakistan needed to resolve all such issues bilaterally.
‘The United States stands ready to support the steps that India and Pakistan may take together, but we know that the only way these matters can be finally resolved is between the two countries, but it’s not just the government, but the people,’ she said.
‘And so we will encourage that, but we know that it has to be left to Pakistan and India for there to be any resolution.’ ‘So Kashmir is still seen as a dispute that needs to be resolved?’
‘Well, it certainly should be on the agenda of discussion between India and Pakistan,’ said Secretary Clinton.
US Assistant Secretary of State Robert Blake said earlier this week that during Mrs Clinton’s visit India might announce two agreements for buying nuclear plants and 126 fighter jets from the US, worth about $20 billion.
‘Do Pakistanis have reasons to fear the outcome of your visit?’ the secretary was asked.
‘Not at all. And we don’t yet have any agreements resolved between us, but my goal in going to India is to work with the Indian government on a range of issues —agriculture, health, education, strategic cooperation, climate change, clean energy, just a very vast array of concern,’ she responded.
‘And I think that all of these issues are ones that are important not only to Indians, but, I would argue, also to Pakistanis.’
Trade between India and Pakistan, she noted, would benefit both countries, as would cooperation across borders on agriculture, education and on other issues, she added.
‘So the point of our trip is to certainly broaden and deepen our relationship with India,’ she said. ‘And I will be coming to Pakistan in the fall and be looking to do the exact same thing with Pakistan,’ she said.
‘But whenever somebody says that they would want India to play a leading role in the region, and you said that this week, the Pakistanis fear that perhaps it would translate to a subservient role for Pakistan and will lead to bullying by Afghanistan. How would you allay these fears?’
‘Well, that is certainly not at all what is intended. I think that what we see now in the region is a very courageous, sustained effort by Pakistan against the internal miscreants, those who would destabilise the Pakistani government and democracy, who kill innocent people, who are – they are not at all part of Pakistan’s future,’ she said.
‘And so what Pakistan is doing is, in my view, very important, as Pakistan tries to stabilise your democracy so that you can build on development. Actual economic development was going well. There were a lot of positive steps.’
Mrs Clinton noted that some of the Pakistani government’s policies were working out well as there seemed to be a growing acceptance of how Pakistan was doing with the global economic recession. But the constant threat from the internal terrorists was one that had to be dealt with in order for Pakistan to grow and flourish, she warned.
‘So I see what is happening in Pakistan as a necessary set of steps to get Pakistan to the point where the future is unlimited.’
Talking about US relations with India, Secretary Clinton noted that India had had a steady growth and was pursuing a very clear set of goals, which helped it to become a largely stable and internally secure country.
‘That’s what I want to see for Pakistan. And then I think you can be in a friendly competition for jobs and for prosperity and for growth and for education statistics,’ she added.
Secretary Clinton noted that Pakistani-Americans were among the most successful people in the US, adding that she would hope to see a day when Pakistanis would have the same opportunities in their own country.
Recently, the Secretary helped establish an organisation called the Pakistan Foundation to encourage the Pakistani-American country to help the place they came from.
‘What are your expectations from the Pakistan Foundation?’
‘It’s interesting because – as you know, because we have some mutual friends, there are so many Pakistani-Americans who are very successful financially,’ she said. ‘They have a very deep connection to their homeland. And I thought it would be important to try to convince Pakistani-Americans to be putting forward financial resources to work back in Pakistan.’
Mrs Clinton said that the US administration had also reached out to Pakistani-American doctors, asking them to serve the internally displaced people and now these doctors were going to Swat, Buner or other places to provide medical care.
Talking about widespread anti-Americanism in Pakistan, Secretary Clinton hoped that more and more people in Pakistan would understand that President Obama and she had no other interest than providing assistance to the Pakistani people and that other Americans too wanted to help.
‘We are not in any way making decisions, interfering or dictating. That is not our intent at all. But we want to be helpful because we see this courageous fight that you are waging. We know how hard it is because we are fighting the same enemy,’ she said.
The secretary noted that the vast majority of Pakistanis just wanted a better life for themselves and their children. ‘So if we can be helpful in helping to provide schools or textbooks or health programmes and physicians, nurses, things that will actually help improve the daily lives of the people of Pakistan, that’s what we are interested in doing,’ she said.
PAST MISTAKES
‘You once said that America too made mistakes in Pakistan. What were those mistakes and how would you avoid them?’
‘Well, I think that if you go back and look at the history between the United States and Pakistan, we were not always as sensitive or understanding of the needs of the Pakistani people. We were not always constant in our support and our friendship for Pakistan. We encouraged Pakistan to create the forces that fought against the Soviet Union occupation in Afghanistan and then left you to deal with the aftermath. So it’s been, I would argue, a relationship that hasn’t been as constant and as effective as we would want it to be.’
Mrs Clinton stressed that while this administration was committed to a long-term relationship with Pakistan, it might make mistakes too.
‘I mean, we are just human beings; we know that. But we want to be as honest in admitting them as possible, learning from them, and then trying to move forward. We weren’t as supportive of Pakistan’s democracy as we could have and should have been in the past.’
The current administration, she noted, had a different approach. ‘Our goal is to be there as a constant friend and a country that Pakistan, not just the government, but the people can rely on to build up more trust and understanding between us, and to be of assistance when asked by Pakistan.’
Asked if the US too had complaints against Pakistan, Mrs Clinton observed that developing trust required time but the present US administration had started a much deeper engagement with Pakistan on all levels.
‘We’ve even established a trilateral relationship between the United States, Pakistan, and Afghanistan to try to work through some of the common problems we face. I hope that there is a growing awareness that President Obama and I care deeply about the future of Pakistan, and particularly want to reverse some of the misconceptions and perceptions that existed in the past.
‘So I hope that we’re going to be given a fair hearing. I hope that people will look at us and say there is something different here, it’s not the same old, same old attitude.’
Referring to President Obama’s recent interview to Dawn, the secretary recalled that he talked about how much he loved Pakistani food.
‘And do you?’
‘I echo that. I am also a fan,’ she said. But her interest in Pakistan was much deeper, she added.
‘It’s a sense that the people of Pakistan are working hard for a better future. And we want to be of help. And we have no claims, we have no interest other than assisting you in achieving the kind of sovereignty and self-determination and very solid democracy, and then results for people,’ she said.
Democracy, she noted, in itself was only the means to an end of a better life, so that every child had a chance to live up to his or her God-given potential to get an education, to get the healthcare he or she needs, to have their parents have jobs with rising wages and dignity.
‘I mean, that’s what all people are looking for, and the people of Pakistan deserve that.’
‘Drone attacks. I think it was Senator John Kerry, who stated they are making more enemies than they are killing. Do you agree with this comment?’
‘I don’t comment on any matter that is of that nature,’ she said. ‘But I think that what we see is what’s happening on the ground with the Pakistani army and the sacrifices that they’re making. And I think that it’s important that we pursue joint efforts against those who would murder innocent Pakistanis, innocent Americans, innocent Indians, people who were just going about their daily lives and have no reason to be targeted the way that they are.’
The US goal, she said, was to help Pakistan, in whatever way was appropriate, to defeat the enemy ‘who wants to totally, radically change Pakistan.’
GOOD TALIBAN
‘On Wednesday, you said in your speech that there were some good Taliban in Afghanistan. Are there good Taliban in Pakistan and can they be engaged too?’
‘I think that would be up to the Pakistani government to determine, but it does seem to us that people get caught up in these organisations, sometimes because they’re paid, sometimes because they’re intimidated, sometimes because they think that they mean something other than what they do,’ she said.
‘And for those who are willing to put down arms against the Pakistani government, who are willing to renounce violence and try to work to achieve a better life for themselves in connection with the democracy that Pakistan is, I certainly think that it would be appropriate for Pakistan to consider that.’
But she recalled that Pakistan had tried this approach before, reaching an agreement with the Taliban and their related organisation.
‘And I’m told they didn’t keep it. I mean, they didn’t abide by it. They resumed their aggressive behaviour, their violence, their terrorism. So I think that it’s up to the Pakistani government, of course, to decide what’s appropriate for Pakistan.’