Delhi Round of Indo-Pak Talks - V Terrorism and Drug Trafficking
21 Nov, 1998 · 159
D. Suba Chandran analyses why India and Pakistan failed to reach any agreement on terrorism and drug-trafficking issues
The most contentious of the six issues on which the recently concluded Indo-Pak talks focussed was terrorism. Of the two inter-linked issues – Terrorism and Drug Trafficking, had
India
and
Pakistan
differed more on the question of terrorism.
India
's proposals on terrorism:
India
accused
Pakistan
of relentlessly pursuing State sponsored terrorism to destabilise
India
, using terrorism as an instrument of state policy against
India
.
India
handed over a list of training camps in
Pakistan
and Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK).
India
also gave a list of top ranking terrorists, drug lords and fugitives such as Dawood Ibrahim, Abdul Razak Memon, Mohammad Dosa etc, who are being sheltered by
Pakistan
.
India
also presented a four point proposal.
India
. Dismantle the terrorist camps for indoctrinating, recruiting, training, arming, financing and infiltrating militants.
Pakistan
India
also handed over a document containing evidence of
Pakistan
's involvement in sponsoring terrorism in
India
.
Pakistan
refuted all these charges and told
India
they had only extended moral, political and diplomatic support to the "freedom fighters" in Kashmir.Pakistan accused
India
of abetting terrorism in
Pakistan
especially in the
province
of
Sindh
.
Pakistan
's proposals:
India
's accusations and proposals,
Pakistan
proposed third party observation of terrorism in the region, especially in
Kashmir
.
Pakistan
suggested the involvement of either the United Nations Military Observers Group for
India
and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) or any other neutral force to verify
India
's allegations.
Pakistan
also challenged
India
to choose either arbitration or mediation.India rejected
Pakistan
's proposal for a third party to observe the sponsorship of terrorism by
Pakistan
..
Pakistan
's proposal challenging
India
to prove its charge via a neutral party.
Pakistan
knew that
India
would reject any such proposal. By making
India
reject a proposal that would be seen by the outside world as rational,
Pakistan
may, score a debating point over
India
. Then, why did
India
reject this proposal?
India
's rejection stems from fears that once it agrees to any third Party mediation or even observation, this would increase external pressures upon it to solve the
Kashmir
issue by a similar modality. Hence,
India
would reject any proposal involving a third party, even if such an action would favour
India
against
Pakistan
.
India
and
Pakistan
failed to reach any agreement on the terrorism issue.
Pakistan
is being used for both cultivating and trafficking illegal opium
India
is only being used as a transit route. The problems posed by drug trafficking covers a wide range of areas that affect the security of the state. Drug trafficking not only results in drug abuse, but also increases the proliferation of arms, crime, money laundering and terrorism in society. Both
India
and
Pakistan
are affected by this menace. In 1997 the amount of heroin that was seized along the India Pakistan border alone was 640 kg, which reveals the seriousness of the problem.
India
and
Pakistan
during the talks agreed the following on drug trafficking:
Pakistan
and Central Bureau of Investigation in
India
to combat crimes such as drug trafficking;
India
and Anti Narcotics Force (ANF) of
Pakistan
to combat drug trafficking
India
and
Pakistan
on these issues.
Terrorism:
In the talks
· Abandon state sponsorship of terrorism against
· Close down the 30 or more training camps for training terrorists in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir
· Deny the use of Pakistani territory and other facilities to militant organisations and fundamentalists propagating religious violence, training militants and raising funds for jihad
· Hand over the 32 terrorists and underworld operators of Indian origin currently living in
While rejecting
What are the motives underlying these proposals and their rejection? They were obvious and expected. What is significant is
In the event,
Drug Trafficking:
Whereas
· Setting up a mechanism for regular meetings and exchange of operational information between the Federal Bureau of Investigation in
· Strengthening bilateral cooperation between the Narcotics Control Board (NCB) of
Finally, despite basic differences, both countries agreed to continue their discussions during the next round of talks. This seem to be the only positive outcome of the recently concluded talks between