Days after the India-Pakistan talks in Islamabad ended in sharp differences, External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna has broken his silence over the controversy surrounding Home Secretary G.K. Pillai's remarks on the ISI's involvement in the 2008 Mumbai attacks, describing their timing as “very unfortunate.”
Clearly unhappy with Mr. Pillai's statement on the eve of the talks, Mr. Krishna on Wednesday said had he been the Home Secretary, he would not have spoken about the revelations by Pakistani-American David Headley.
Factually, Mr. Pillai was “very much in order” in speaking about the disclosures made by Headley to the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Indian interrogators but “the timing was something which was very unfortunate,” Mr. Krishna told PTI in an interview.
His whole visit to Pakistan was “underpinned” by Mr. Pillai's remarks and these had become a “factor” with Pakistan, he said, apparently meaning that the remarks created a negative environment.
The Minister said he discussed Mr. Pillai's comments with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh at a briefing on his parleys with Pakistan leaders.
He insisted that the government was speaking in one voice on Pakistan and he was “glad” that the Home Ministry had announced the appointment of an official spokesperson. In recent months, Mr. Pillai had been briefing the media.
Disagreeing with the perception that his discussion with his Pakistan counterpart, Mehmood Qureshi, ended in a deadlock, Mr. Krishna said he was “quite satisfied” with his visit, which bridged the trust deficit “to some extent.”
About Mr. Qureshi's undiplomatic remarks after the talks and whether he was willing to ignore such behaviour, Mr. Krishna said: “I am willing to mind my business and concentrate on my work.”
However, he dismissed as “ridiculous” the comparison sought to be drawn by Mr. Qureshi between Jamat-ud-Dawa chief Hafiz Saeed's anti-India statement and Mr. Pillai's remarks on the ISI.
The Minister said the minute details of how the “whole conspiracy of 26/11 was hatched and executed” showed the “diabolical nature of the conspiracy.”
Rejecting suggestions that the outcome of his talks was a setback to the overall dialogue process, he said the visit was a confidence-building exercise and “to that extent, we have succeeded.”
