[world-vedic] Fwd: US condoned Pak military coup: Vajpayee

[Guest guest]

>OFBJP <OFBJP

>OFBJP Editor <Editor

>US condoned Pak military coup: Vajpayee

>Sun, 12 Mar 2000 13:52:40 -0500 (EST)

>

>----

>Overseas Friends of the BJP (USA) ........... Voice: (718) 271-0453

>54-15, 108th St. ............................ Fax: (718) 271-1906

>Corona, NY 11368............................ WWW:http://www.ofbjp.org

> BJP's Website: http://www.bjp.org

>

>Title: US condoned Pak military coup: Vajpayee

>Publication: Newsweek

>March 20, 2000

>

>Interview:

> By Lally Weymouth

>

> Newsweek, March 20, 2000

>

>

>

> WEYMOUTH: Will President Clinton's visit to

>

> India mark the beginning of a new chapter in

>

> the Indo-U.S. relationship?

>

> VAJPAYEE: We hope that the president's visit

>

> will add a new page in Indo-U.S. relations.

>

> There have been a lot of doubts and tensions.

>

> They need to be set aside and replaced by

>

> mutual trust and understanding of each

>

> other's concerns.

>

>

> You took a tremendous risk for peace when you

>

> traveled last year by bus to Lahore,

>

> Pakistan, to meet with then Prime Minister

>

> Nawaz Sharif. Do you feel you were betrayed

>

> by Pakistan when it subsequently launched an

>

> attack on Indian Kashmir at Kargil? Is it

> possible to get talks restarted with

>

> Pakistan?

>

> From the very beginning, India has been

>

> endeavoring to develop friendly relations. I

>

> went to Lahore with the hope that a new

>

> beginning would be made. We are neighbors,

>

> and we have to live together as friends or in

>

> an indifferent manner. My visit once again

>

> convinced me that the people of both

>

> countries, India and Pakistan, want to live

>

> in peace. Then came the Kargil. It was a rude

>

> shock to me. Now a proper climate has to be

>

> created for resuming talks. So long as

>

> cross-border terrorism is there and the

>

> hostile propaganda against India continues,

>

> no useful purpose will be served by having

>

> talks.

>

>

> People say that Pakistani strongman Gen.

>

> Pervez Musharraf was the architect of the May

>

> 1999 attack on Kargil. Is it possible to work

>

> with him?

>

> Politicians should really forget the past if

> a new beginning could be made for the future.

> But I don't see any sign of a new beginning.

>

>

>

> I heard that Musharraf has been sending

> messages through various people that he would

>

> like to have talks at some level with India.

>

> Messages are not necessary. What is necessary

>

> is action...

>

>

>

> Do you mean no more terrorism?

>

> No more terrorism and a commitment that all

>

> problems, including Kashmir, will be solved

>

> by peaceful means.

>

>

>

> Are you worried about the threat of a nuclear

>

> war over Kashmir?

>

> No. There is no possibility. I completely

>

> rule out a nuclear war.

>

>

>

> There are daily artillery clashes in Kashmir,

>

> and tensions are high between the two

>

> countries. Are you concerned, and is there a

>

> role for the United States to play?

>

> There is no role for any third party, however

>

> well intentioned. We would like to solve the

>

> problems bilaterally.

>

>

>

> Do you have a vision for a settlement for

>

> Kashmir?

>

> Unless it is recognized that Jammu and

>

> Kashmir is an integral part of India, there

>cannot

> enduring solution.

>

>

>

> You say that there is hard evidence of

>

> Pakistan's involvement in the recent

>

> hijacking of an Indian Airlines plane. What

>

> is it?

>

> Some Pakistani officials posted in Katmandu

> [Nepal] were directly involved with the

> hijackers. The hijackers themselves had

> connections with Pakistan and its

> intelligence agencies.

>

>

> Were you disappointed by the U.S. reaction to

> the October military coup in Pakistan? Should

> the United States have been more forceful in

> denouncing it?

> Yes, that is what we had expected. The United

> States has condoned the military coup.

>

> In December 1998 you said at the United

> Nations that India would sign the

> Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty a year later.

> Will India sign CTBT in the near future?

> The matter is under discussion. We are

> evolving a consensus. We are a democracy, and

> on such important international issues we

> proceed on the basis of a consensus. What I

> said in the United Nations was that India

> would not stand in the way of the treaty

> being implemented. First, all the nations

> which matter the most have to sign the

> treaty. That has not happened as yet. The

> vote in the U.S. Senate [rejecting the

> treaty] came as a negative development so far

> as the people of India are concerned.

>

> It was well known that India had a nuclear

> capability. Why, then, did you decide to

> conduct nuclear tests?

> Because of the deteriorating security

> environment.

>

> Is India today more secure as a result of the

> tests?

> Yes. [Nuclear capability] is a deterrent.

> That is all that we wanted to have-a minimum

> credible nuclear deterrent. We have already

> declared that there will be no further tests.

> We have also announced that India will not be

> the first to use nuclear weapons. We will not

> use nuclear weapons against nonnuclear-weapon

> states either.

>

>

>

 

____