Printer Friendly Version

Spokesperson Briefings

Date: 12/06/2006

RECORD OF THE PRESS CONFERENCE ADDRESSED BY THE FOREIGN OFFICE SPOKESPERSON ON 12 JUNE 2006

No statement was made in the beginning, and the Press Conference opened with Question/Answer Session.

QUESTION/ANSWER SESSION

- To a query regarding some media reports that Gwadar deep-sea port was in reality a military port for the use of China , the spokesperson observed:

We have seen these reports. Gwadar is a purely commercial port, being developed on commercial basis. It is open to international companies. The disinformation that surfaces from time to time is perhaps aimed at creating misunderstandings. Gwadar port is open to all Pakistani journalists. You can go there and see it.

- When asked about the reported deportation of Pakistanis from Spain , the spokesperson said:

Such deportations take place from time to time from various countries. The deportees are normally people who travel on fake visas or and deemed to be in violation of some local laws. This leads to their deportation in certain cases.

- In response to a question about the latest developments in the investigations into the death of Amir Cheema in custody in Germany , the spokesperson said:

You might have seen the reports that a questionnaire prepared by the FIA team that went to Germany was given to the German authorities. We have been advised by the German authorities that the communication should be between the judicial authorities of the two countries. This is their procedure and we are now following it. Our Ministries Law and Interior will be communicating with the German legal department.

- When her attention was drawn to a statement by former BJP Minister for Finance and External Affairs Yashwant Sinha, who during a recent visit to Pakistan , stated that there was no document to prove that Jammu and Kashmir was the core issue or dispute between the two countries, the spokesperson stated:

Pakistan considers Jammu and Kashmir as the core dispute between Pakistan and India . In the Simla agreement, there is a specific reference to Jammu and Kashmir . Article VI of the Simla Agreement specifically talks about the final settlement of the Jammu and Kashmir issue. It doesn't mention any other issue. So does the Tashkant Declaration. Those who have read the history of Pakistan-India relations and have followed the conflicts and tensions between the two countries cannot escape the conclusion that it is indeed the Jammu and Kashmir dispute that lies at the heart of problem - that lies at the heart of tensions between the two countries. We consider Kashmir the core dispute between Pakistan and India because of its gravity, because of its implications for the political environment, because of its implications for Pakistan-India relations. More importantly, the Jammu and Kashmir dispute relates to the fundamental rights of Kashmiris and their sufferings.

- To a question regarding Mr. Yashwant Sinha's assertion that there was no investigation that the killings in Chattisingh Pura which established that Indian security forces were responsible fort the killings, the spokesperson said:

Initially, there were no investigation and the killings were blamed on the so called “militants”. Later, on the insistence of the community whose members were on the receiving end and were killed, an inquiry commission was established, which concluded that the killings were carried out by the Indian security personnel and not by the so called “militants” as was claimed. The findings of this inquiry were seen by people the world over and had also been referred to by many international human rights organizations. In fact, recently some officials of the Indian security forces have gone on trial for those killings.

- To a question with regard to killing of four “Pakistani” employees of an Indian company in Afghanistan , the spokesperson said:

The nationality of the four people killed is not confirmed. The Indian company, the employer of the four persons who were killed, has made a statement that as a matter of policy they do not employ Pakistanis. We also have indications from the Afghan Government that the victims were Afghans. We are still investigating. At the moment, it is not possible to confirm their nationality.

- When asked about Pakistan ' response to Indian proposals to resolve the Kashmir issue and recent statement by the Indian Foreign Secretary about Indian proposals, the spokesperson said:

We have already confirmed that some proposals have been received. Pakistan has proposed ideas like self governance, demilitarization and joint management and these ideas have found resonance among the Kashmiris. We can proceed further on the basis of these ideas.

- To another query again related to Mr. Yashwant Sinha's statement that Kashmiris could not be party to the negotiations between Pakistan and India , the spokesperson said:

Our preference has been that Kashmiris should be part of the process and dialogue. Since this is not acceptable to India , we are comfortable with Kashmiris being associated with the peace process in some form. Kashmiri leaders, from both sides of the Line of Control, are interacting with each other. They are interacting with the Government of Pakistan. They are interacting with the Indian Government. There are three parties to the Kashmir dispute and they all have to be on board for any resolution of the Kashmir dispute.

- Asked as to why Kashmir was described as “issue” in the joint statements and not as “dispute”, the spokesperson said:

We call it “the Jammu and Kashmir dispute”. It is an internationally recognized dispute. The joint statement language has to be acceptable to both sides. Since India does not agree to the use of word ‘dispute', the word “ Kashmir issue” is used. Issue also means a subject about which there is a dispute or difference. Since the word ‘issue' also conveys something on which there is disagreement, something that needs to be resolved, we accept it in the joint statements.

- When her comments were sought to the notion that the cut in the US aid to Pakistan proposed by the US House of Representatives signaled a shift in the US policy towards Pakistan , the spokesperson said:

We do not agree with this interpretation. Let me clarify that the cuts have been imposed by the House of Representative. It has yet to be considered by the US Senate. I have few facts regarding this procedure in the US :

•  The U.S. Congress is currently considering the Foreign Operations Appropriations Bill 2007 submitted by the Bush Administration.

•  In June 2003, President Bush had announced US$ 3 billion in economic and military assistance package for Pakistan .

•  This assistance was to be provided over a period of five years (2005-09) in installments of $ 600 million per year. One half of it was meant for economic support (ESF) and the other for military assistance under Foreign Military Financing (FMF).

•  Under this package, the U.S. provided $ 701 million in FY (fiscal year) 05, including $ 300 million each as ESF and FMF, and $ 101 million as ancillary assistance.

•  In FY 06, the U.S. provided $ 698 million including $ 300 million each for ESF and FMF, and other ancillary assistance.

•  For FY 07, the Administration proposed $ 738 million, including $ 300 million for FMF and $ 350 million for ESF (including $ 50 million for earthquake relief announced at Donors Conference).

•  (Separately, the Administration is seeking $ 126 million for Pakistan earthquake relief assistance as part of the FY-06 Emergency Supplemental Bill (overall, the U.S. has pledged $ 510 million for earthquake relief and reconstruction assistance).

•  During consideration in the House of Representatives, the Administration's overall request of $ 23.7 billion for Foreign Operations Appropriations for FY 07 has been reduced to $ 21.3 billion.

•  This decrease includes cuts in various programmes and allocations for a number of countries.

•  In respect of Pakistan , the House has proposed a cut of $ 100 million in FMF (thus envisaging $ 200 million for FY 07) and a cut of $ 50 million in ESF (thus envisaging an allocation of $ 300 million for FY 07).

•  The proposed cuts in Pakistan-related programmes amount to $ 150 million.

•  In a report accompanying the House bill, some issues have been raised relating to human rights, women's rights, democratic governance, and the rule of law. Our position on these issues has been made clear on numerous occasions.

•  It may be underlined that the House bill is part of a longer Appropriations process, in which a few steps have been taken so far.

•  The Senate is considering the bill on its part and is yet to pronounce itself on the Administration's request.

•  In case of differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill, the Conference Committee meets and evolves a mutually agreed text.

•  The issue of proposed cuts for Pakistan has been raised with the Administration.

•  We understand that the Administration would work to ensure that the commitments made by President Bush are fulfilled.

•  It may be recalled that similar reductions were made in 2006 and 2005 but were restored in conference stage. ( $ 80 in 06)

•  While recognizing that the overall Foreign Operations Appropriations bill is being reduced, impacting several countries, we hope that the Administration's original request for Pakistan would not be significantly altered.