Don’t need strategy for friendship: PM

While stating India’s traditional position on Kashmir that it is an ‘‘integral part of India’’, Vajpayee demonstrated flexibility, adding: ‘‘We are willing to openly talk on Kashmir.’’ Also in an interview to India Today, Vajpayee conceded that he did not think that Pakistan will be willing to accept the LoC as an international border.

Significantly, it was the first time since almost a decade that Vajpayee himself did not raise the issue of cross-border terrorism while discussing Kashmir. Essentially picking up from Lahore and Agra, Vajpayee acknowledged that the problem existed on its own merit without blaming Pakistan for creating it. He called for ‘‘continued dialogue’’ on Kashmir. Cautioning against seeking instant solutions, he said getting to results would ‘‘take time’’.

As the BJP leader whose party won state elections in Gujarat by campaigning on an anti-Pakistan and anti-Musharraf wicket, he said that the issue in the 2004 election campaign will be who befriends Pakistan, not who fights it. He said in state elections subsequent to Gujarat, Pakistan was not an issue in the BJP campaign.

President Musharraf describes you as a man of peace. How would you describe him?

I came to Pakistan in 1979 as foreign minister. I then decided to open the Indian consulate in Karachi. Since then I am trying that Pak-India relations improve. In between a lot of water has flowed under yet the question of friendship between the two countries remains. It is in the interest of both countries and the region that there is friendship between both countries. And also for the world good, we should live together. Musharraf sahib, if he describes me as a man of peace, is not wrong. I have been working for peace and I will also in the future.

Mirwaiz Umar Farooq said about Musharraf that he had not seen a Pakistani leader more flexible than Musharraf on Kashmir. In Pakistan too people say Musharraf is flexible, some say too flexible. In President Musharraf’s position taken in Pakistan, Almaty, New York and Agra, he talks of a solution acceptable to Kashmiris, India and to Pakistan and that UN resolutions are important but solution can be seen from different angles. His flexibility, his positions, I would again ask how do you see him?

I think that with Musharraf sahib we can have a dialogue. That dialogue will take us to some results, that too I am sure about. First meeting I had with him in Lahore, then it was a different system. Since then we have consistently talked to each other. He is Pakistan’s head and would participate in our peace efforts. We hope our efforts towards peace will be successful.

In Pakistan people think you have a passion for friendship with Pakistan, we know you have a vision also, so let’s move to Kashmir. You also have flexibility on Kashmir. In 2001, you said we will go off the beaten track on Kashmir, one that will strengthen the peace structure of South Asia so then it seems that there is flexibility on both sides; both are willing to move from traditional positions, you said we will find a solution within the context of humanity. So if there is flexibility on both sides, why is it that we do not move forward on Kashmir?

We need time to move forward. There has to be consistent dialogue. We have never avoided talking on Jammu and Kashmir. My claim is that Jammu and Kashmir is a part of India, that is true. But we are willing to talk openly on Kashmir. I feel we have not had solid dialogue on Kashmir. Pakistan has been repeating its position, we have been repeating our position. The world has been saying move on together and resolve the issue. This will take time.

When you went to China, you brought about sweeping changes in India’s 44-year-old policy on Tibet. We see you as a man of great vision and stature so we expect that you will bring about such sweeping change in Pakistan and Indian relations as well.

We also want change. How far that will be fulfilled we will see.

People in Pakistan feel that in the 2004 election campaign a part of BJP will go for Pakistan bashing because you won in Gujarat, where 2500 Muslims were also killed, on an anti-Pakistan and anti-Musharraf campaign. What do you as a leader who will take BJP into the 2004 elections say in this regard to Pakistanis?

The Muslim massacre which took place in Gujarat was very tragic. Before that there was burning of Hindus that took place. That was wrong but that was not part of the election campaign. In the subsequent assembly elections, no one spoke of relations with Pakistan. No one made provocative statements. We will not make that into an election issue. The issue will be who wants friendship with Pakistan. Yes it is true friendship should be of a kind that has solid foundation and also in terms of principles it should be correct.

We hope that when dialogue begins then different issues will come up then issues will be clarified and gradually I hope that the shadows will go away and the reality of relationship will emerge.

Indian analysts say that to end the emerging communalism in India, friendship with Pakistan is important; a communalism that you have tried to stop. Are these people right that an anti-communalism strategy requires friendship with Pakistan?

Pakistan is a neighbour. For friendship with it, we need no strategy. We have to live together and whether we stay together fighting or as friends. So I think people are gradually understanding this fact.

Some strategists say that US now wants to be a junior partner of the US the way Israel is in the region. Will such a relationship promote India’s interests and the interests of South Asia?

With the US we are friends, we have partnership but it is on the principles of equality. What we do not like about the US we oppose that openly, we tell them we do like this about you. I don’t think there is any question of being a junior partner. I think no one says this. About Pakistan this was said earlier.