|
|||||
|
|
|||||
> magazine |
|||||
|
June 16, 2000 VOL. 29 NO. 23 | SEARCH ASIAWEEK A Minimum Deterrent Outside India, Brajesh Misra is not well-known. Yet he is his country's most powerful bureaucrat. Misra, 72, is a career diplomat who is principal secretary to Prime Minister A.B. Vajpayee as well as head of the National Security Council. He not only advises Vajpayee on foreign policy but also coordinates the top-level inner workings of the government. Considered a hawk, Misra has been a strong voice for India going nuclear. He recently spoke with Contributor Sanjay Kapoor. Excerpts from their talk: What are you doing about Sri Lanka? India will not intervene militarily in Sri Lanka. That is the firm decision of our government. We also believe that the people of India are against any kind of military intervention there. So far as humanitarian assistance to the people in Jaffna is concerned, Prime Minister Vajpayee has expressed his willingness to undertake this task. As regards mediation, both parties [the Sri Lankan government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam] have to ask us. But you do not recognize the LTTE? And when do you mediate -- after Jaffna falls? Our decision to mediate would not be influenced by the ground reality in Jaffna but by when both the parties want us there. Having said that, I would like to state that the political solution to the crisis in Sri Lanka would have to be to uphold the territorial integrity of Sri Lanka. The solution would also have to keep in mind the legitimate aspirations of the Tamils of Jaffna. U.S. official Tom Pickering was recently in New Delhi. What do the Americans expect India to do in Sri Lanka? They want India to take the lead. Other countries too want us to mediate as they think that we are an important factor. Does this reflect a lack of confidence in the Norwegian Initiative? Even the Norwegian negotiator has [talked about an India role]. Is the U.S. more predisposed toward India since President Bill Clinton's visit? Your question implies that the United States has given up on Pakistan. This is not true at all. What is happening is that the U.S. is reordering its priorities in this part of the world. Perhaps the U.S. sees India as an important contributor to international affairs, peace and democracy. The impact is not confined just to South Asia. It will be felt all over. Pakistan military ruler Pervez Musharraf has offered to talk with India. We would like to have a dialogue with Pakistan but before that we would like certain conditions to be fulfilled. First of all there should be an end to cross-border terrorism. Every day a dozen or more lives are lost in the state of Jammu and Kashmir or near the Line of Control. Secondly, Islamabad should end the vicious propaganda both on television and in newspapers which vitiates the atmosphere. Thirdly and more importantly, they cannot talk of jihad between India and Pakistan and ask for a dialogue at the same time. Gen. Musharraf himself talks of jihad over Kashmir. Jihad cannot be a state policy. We refute the arbitrary distinction between jihad and terrorism. This is too facile. Gen. Musharraf has also been saying that any dialogue with India must go through the Kashmir route. It is not that we do not want to talk about Kashmir. Of course we want to talk about it. But Kashmir is just one part of the problem between the two countries. It has been a year since India fought Pakistan-backed intruders at Kargil. Do you think a "limited war" with Pakistan is still possible without it erupting into a nuclear conflict? As far as India is concerned, it would try its utmost to prevent a conflict with Pakistan. We have made it amply clear that we do not want to engage in a nuclear arms race with anyone. [But] what we will have is a minimum credible deterrent. Write to Asiaweek at mail@web.asiaweek.com Quick Scroll: More stories from Asiaweek, TIME and CNN |
|