|
The prime
minister initiated the row this morning in a speech to Indian business
leaders in Bangalore, when he spoke of his horror at the 2008 terrorist attacks in Mumbai. Delhi directly blamed the Pakistani authorities for the attacks.
Cameron
came close to endorsing Delhi's view when he said: "We cannot tolerate
in any sense the idea that this country is allowed to look both ways and
is able to promote the export of terror, whether to India or Afghanistan or anywhere else in the world.
"That is why this relationship is important. But it should be a
relationship based on a very clear message: that it is not right to have
any relationship with groups that are promoting terror. Democratic
states that want to be part of the developed world cannot do that. The
message to Pakistan from the U.S. and from the U.K. is very clear on that
point."
Pakistan took the rare step of issuing a rebuttal. Abdul
Basit, a spokesman for the Pakistani foreign ministry, told Radio 4's
World at One: "There is no question of Pakistan looking the other way. I
think the prime minister was referring to these reports, which are
unverifiable and outdated. If we start drawing inferences from these
self-serving reports, then obviously we are distracting ourselves."
Pakistani
senator Khurshid Ahmad, vice-president of the Islamist Jamaat-e-Islami
party, said: "I am deeply concerned. The basis on which this statement
has been made is very fragile. The documents released are unreliable:
90% of them have been attributed to Afghan intelligence agencies, whose
reports are totally unreliable and fabricated. On the basis of such a
report, it is not acceptable to make the statement that has been made."
Britain
has spoken in the past of the terror threat from Pakistan, though
ministers have restricted themselves to criticizing Pakistan for
tolerating terror groups. But the prime minister's language came close
to endorsing the Indian view that authorities in Pakistan have a hand in
the terror.
Cameron named several terror groups which are,
according to India, sponsored by Pakistan. "We - like you - are
determined that groups like the Taliban, the Haqqani network or Lakshar e
Taiba should not be allowed to launch attacks on Indian and British
citizens in India or in Britain."
Downing Street insisted that the
prime minister was not accusing the Pakistan government of sponsoring
terrorism. But a few minutes after his speech, Cameron made clear that
official agencies in Pakistan were some way culpable.
Asked on the
Today program whether Pakistan exports terrorism, Cameron said: "I
choose my words very carefully. It is unacceptable for anything to
happen within Pakistan that is about supporting terrorism elsewhere. It
is well-documented that that has been the case in the past, and we have
to make sure that the Pakistan authorities are not looking two ways.
They must only look one way, and that is to a democratic and stable
Pakistan."
Cameron confirmed in his speech that he had discussed
the terror threat from Pakistan with Barack Obama and officials at the
Pentagon last week. The P.M.'s remarks indicate that he and President Obama
discussed one of the key issues at the heart of the leaked intelligence
documents days before their publication in Monday's Guardian newspaper.
The
prime minister's words on Pakistan overshadowed the first day of a visit
to India designed to herald a new special relationship. Downing Street
says the trip is meant to show that Britain can treat India as a normal
trading partner, with the security issues surrounding Delhi's troubled
relations with Pakistan dealt with on a separate tack.
But the main business announcement - a relaxation of license rules to allow the export of civil nuclear technology and expertise to India - had the potential to upset its nuclear
neighbor. Pakistan and India have both refused to sign the nuclear
non-proliferation treaty, prompting the last government to refuse to
offer co-operation to India on civil nuclear power. British ministers
had feared there would be leakage to its military nuclear program.
The
U.S. sanctioned the use of civil nuclear technology to India in 2008.
Britain believes yesterday's agreement is compatible with the NPT, which
bans the sale of nuclear technology to nuclear powers that have not
signed it. The Nuclear Suppliers' Group, of which Britain and the U.S. are
members, granted India a waiver that allows the transfer of technology.
Vince
Cable, the business secretary who has championed the change, said:
"There are obvious security sensitivities. We are conscious of those, as
are the Indians. But within those constraints we really want to push
ahead with civil nuclear co-operation. That would be quite a big sector
within which we could really make progress."
Intellpuke: You can read this article by Guardian correspondent
Nicholas Watt, reporting from Delhi, India, in context here:
www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jul/28/david-cameron-india-pakistan-terror
|