Achievers
Books
Business
Calender
Community
Controversy
Cuisine
Eateries
Education
Enterprise
Faith
Good Samaritans
Health
Infotech
Media
Memories
Movies
News Archives
Opinion
Specials
The Arts

Clinton, recalling Northern Ireland, says America will mediate in Kashmir if India and Pakistan ask for it

M D Devasahayam

President Bill Clinton's assertion that Washington would not want to mediate in the Kashmir issue, unless New Delhi and Islamabad sought American help, was hailed by many Indian Americans and their supporters in the United States Congress.

But Clinton, recalling America's involvement in Northern Ireland in recent months to broker an accord between Catholics and Protestants, also said America is willing to mediate in the subcontinent's conflict, partly because of the threat it posed to the world, and partly as a gesture to the contributions made by immigrants from the Indian subcontinent to America.

"You know, I think one of the reasons we have been able to play a meaningful role in Northern Ireland is we have so many Irish Americans here," he told a press conference on Wednesday.

"I think one of the reasons we have been able to play a meaningful role in the Middle East is we have a lot of Jewish Americans and a lot of Arab Americans. I think we forget that among all the some 200 ethnic groups that we have in our country, Indian Americans and Pakistani Americans have been among the most successful in terms of education level and income level. They have worked and succeeded stunningly well in the United States and, astonishingly maybe, had good contacts with one another.

"And I think the United States should be more involved there, even though I think they will have to work out this business of Kashmir between themselves. Unless we were asked by both parties to help, we can't get involved. In every other case we are involved, it is because both parties have asked us to be involved.

"But if they don't want us, it won't be doing any good; we'd just be out there talking into the air. And I am not in for that."

If the request for mediation came from both countries, America was "absolutely" willing to mediate, he said firmly.

"Why? For the same reason we have been involved in Northern Ireland and the Middle East," he continued. "Because, number one and most importantly, it is a hugely important area of the world. If the tensions between India and Pakistan on the Indian subcontinent could be resolved, it is my opinion, based on my personal experience with people from India, people from Pakistan and people from Bangladesh, that the Indian subcontinent might very well be the great success story of the next 50 years."

"You are talking about people who are basically immensely talented, have a strong work ethic, a deep devotion to their faith and to their families. There is nothing they couldn't do. And it is heartbreaking to me to see how much they hold each other back by being trapped in yesterday's conflicts -- number one.

"Number two, like Northern Ireland and the Middle East, this country has been deeply enriched by people from the Indian subcontinent, and I think we might be, because of our population, in a position to make a constructive contribution."

Congressman Gary Ackerman was among the many pro-India politicians to applaud Clinton's answers.

"I welcome this clear position of the Administration and applaud the President for appreciating the complex nature of the Kashmir problem," Ackerman, co-chairman of the influential Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans, said.

"The Administration realizes full well that Kashmir is a bilateral issue that can be best resolved through bilateral dialogue between New Delhi and Islamabad," he added.

Calling Clinton's approach "even-handed," Ackerman reiterated his earlier position about Pakistan exporting terror into Jammu and Kashmir and called for stronger co-operation between India and America to fight terrorism.

"Kashmir is a victim of cross-border terrorism -- pure and simple. The US and India, as the torch bearers of democratic values have a moral duty to firmly combat this menace to international peace and put an end to cross-border terrorism and acts of religious hate and bigotry. Both the US and India must evolve a common strategy to fight this global problem. Those who abet and sponsor terrorism and allow their territory to be breeding grounds for terrorism must be put on notice, " Ackerman said.

In an earlier letter to Representative Ackerman, a leading member of the House International Relations Committee, President Clinton noted: 'I continue to be concerned about the lack of dialogue between India and Pakistan. Both countries should work to resume their dialogue with the goal of resolving all the issues dividing them, including Kashmir.'

Recalling the provisions of the Simla Agreement of 1972 and the reiteration of its key principles in last year's Lahore Declaration, particularly about resolving all differences through dialogue between the two countries, Ackerman said: "Given all these previous commitments to address the issue of Kashmir on a bilateral basis, I do not believe that internationalization of the Kashmir question is in any way warranted."

"The Kashmir issue can never be resolved by military means. It can only be resolved by mutual dialogue between India and Pakistan within the framework of the Simla Accord of 1972," Ackerman asserted. "The issue has to be resolved bilaterally, by the parties themselves."

Ackerman is one of the more articulate Congressmen who have asked Clinton to skip visiting Pakistan. To go to Pakistan would be equal to putting a democratic India and a dictatorial Pakistan on the same footing, he has argued.

On the other hand, there are Congressmen who say that by snubbing Pakistan, Clinton would push it farther into a militant corner. He should at least consider a courtesy visit of a few hours, they point out.

Many Indian American lobbyists do not want that to happen.

"Even a few hours visit to Pakistan can be interpreted as a strong goodwill gesture," says Sunil Aghi, a Los Angeles-based community leader and active member of the Democratic Party there, who has been petitioning the White House and Congress for several years, to declare Pakistan a sponsor of international terrorism.

Clinton was asked at the press conference what Pakistan's military rulers could do to get him to reconsider his decision not to visit their country.

"I have not decided whether I am going to Pakistan, or not," Clinton said. "I have decided that I am going to India and Bangladesh, and I will make a decision about whether to go based on what I think will best serve our long-term interests in non-proliferation, in trying to stop, particularly, the arms race, and trying to help to promote stability, democracy and a resolution of the conflict between India."

"I hope my trip will serve to highlight to Americans the importance of that region to us, and the very real danger that a conflict between India and Pakistan, if not contained, is one of the most significant security threats to the interests of the United States in this new century -- and, I might say, a tragic situation."

Next: Reddy's attorneys want separate trials for father and son

Tell us what you think of this report