The U.S. did not brief India on progress in the case of Saeed: Krishna
With their shoulders to the wheel External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pushed the third India-U.S. Strategic Dialogue to a broadly successful conclusion in Washington’s Foggy Bottom on a hot Wednesday afternoon.
Yet like Banquo’s ghost the spectre of India’s troubled bid to gain access to terror suspects David Headley and Tahawwur Rana raised its head once again, threatening to muddy the clear waters of cooperative bonhomie.
Both men, currently in U.S. custody, are associated with Pakistan-based terror outfit Lashkar-e-Taiba and are suspects in the 2008 Mumbai attacks case. Headley was said to have been an informant for U.S. law enforcement even as he continued to visit LeT camps in Pakistan.
In her opening remarks Ms. Clinton came out strong on security cooperation with India. She argued that, as one of the five pillars of progress in bilateral ties, the two nations’ militaries were engaged in joint exercises and cooperating to combat piracy, patrol vital sea lanes, and protect freedom of navigation.
Further, bilateral defence trade had surpassed $8 billion over the last five years, Ms. Clinton said, and joint research and development, and co-production of defence systems were on the cards.
However the cracks in the positive perspective began to emerge when it came to one core dimension of security cooperation, coordination and information sharing in the fight against violent extremism.
The contrast between the responses of Mr. Krishna and Ms. Clinton in this regard were stark. Responding to a question on India’s access to the terror suspects in U.S. custody the Secretary said, “It is our policy and practice to share information, and we do that. But I’m not going to go into details because we think that our cooperation on intelligence sharing, on homeland security issues, on counterterrorism, has gotten to a new level.”
Yet taking a question from The Hindu at a post-Dialogue briefing Mr. Krishna noted that the U.S. had not briefed India on any progress in the case of Hafiz Saeed, the alleged mastermind of the Mumbai attacks of 2008, on whose head the Obama administration recently placed a $10 million bounty.
He also implied that no further promises had been made by the U.S. regarding India’s years-old plea for further direct access to Headley. While the U.S. defused growing anger and suspicion in the Indian corner by granting India’s National Investigation Agency access to Headley for ten days in June 2010, additional opportunities to question him have not materialised.
A genuine sense of disappointment in this matter may have indeed gripped Mr. Krishna after his confabulations with Ms. Clinton, because at the media briefing he could not even confirm that he was satisfied with the response he received from the State Department. “I will have to check up with the Home Secretary [R.K. Singh]” he said to this correspondent.
India’s Foreign Secretary Ranjan Mathai added, “We are actually looking for access right now. This is an ongoing process and we made some headway. The discussions are still going on and the question of [what steps follow] will come up after that process is completed.”
Keywords: Indo-U.S. Strategic Dialogue, Hillary Clinton, S.M. Krishna, war on terror, Mumbai terror attacks, 26/11, Indo-U.S. relations, David Headley, Tahawwur Rana, Lashkar-e-Taiba






I don't think the United States is going to grant Indian authorities access to Headley anytime soon if at all for the very obvious reason that he had acted as a double agent for them and is privy to a lot of secret information and double dealings of the FBI and the CIA that if come out in the public domain could embarrass the US government. No matter how sincerely the USA talk about cooperation with India on security issues the extent of that will always be limited to actions that serve their interest first even at the cost of India's. As far as Saeed is concerned, the bounty has not been placed considering India's demand but it's a result of American preoccupation with Al-Qaeda to which he is closely linked. We, though, should push for gaining access, have to be pragmatic about what we can get in the end.
What exactly is the plan for Congress to do with Headley? Has Govt of India punished all caught and proved in the terrorism activities? If not - why this attempt to fool all of us again and again?
Please leave him there, we dont want to waste tax payers money like we spend it for kasab!
Assuming that the USA hands over Headley and Rana to us, what are we supposed to do with them? Give them the same VIP treatment as we are giving to Mohd Afzal and Ajmal Kasab? The USA are not fools - they know well enough that our prime objective is securing a particular vote bank, not eliminating convicted terrorists. It is high time that we stopped this nautanki concerning 26/11. Our netas can fool our gullible citizens but they cannot fool the international community.
Not a single efficient ministers in UPA II ,can work,speak with the mighty US administration. From the day one our efficient S M Krishnaji,Chidambramji were boasting about the access of 26/11 culprit but what happened.
Another thing UPA II has no will or intention to take the case strongly due to VOTE BANK POLITICS.
Please Email the Editor