04 January 2002

U.S. Working to Keep Pakistan and India From Armed Conflict

State Department spokesman Richard Boucher told the press on January 4 that the situation between India and Pakistan, following the December 13 terrorist attack on the Indian Parliament, is still "very dangerous."

But, he said, U.S. ambassadors in the region and Secretary of State Powell have been working hard to urge a peaceful, political resolution of the issues between India and Pakistan. The U.S. is "trying to keep these two countries from entering into armed conflict with each other over this terrible bombing and the attacks that have occurred," he said.

Questioned about the Kashmir conflict, Boucher said the U.S. has always encouraged the parties to engage in direct dialogue on the subject. Boucher said the key to defusing the current tension is to end the violent activity of extremist groups, and to get a political process between India and Pakistan.

In response to a question about the possibility of sending a special envoy to the region, Boucher said, "We have people out there working on it; the Secretary's been working on it by phone. We may, indeed, send someone from Washington to continue our activity, to continue working on the situation. I'm not sure I would describe that as a special envoy. It may be one of the officials in Washington who is responsible for the crisis."

Following is the excerpt of the January 4 State Department briefing.

Mr. Boucher: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I don't have any statements or announcements for you, so I would be glad to take your questions, if there are any.

Question: Yes, sure, well, we're all so keen on India and Pakistan because of the Secretary's interview with the BBC. He cited -- stated --

Mr. Boucher: I hope you're being keen on it because of the obvious importance of the situation to the fate of the world.

Question: That, too. That, too. And when you get the Secretary speaking on a subject, of course that focuses your attention. He spoke of both sides making positive moves.

And I wondered if you could elaborate on that, so far as what India has done. Has it pulled back sufficiently for the US?

Mr. Boucher: I think, without getting into what we know or don't know about particular military movements, you have seen statements from the Indian side, including from Prime Minister Vajpayee and others, that they were looking for a political and diplomatic solution to the crisis, that they preferred that, that they did not wish to engage in military confrontation. At the same time, we know they have mobilized. They have made some statements about not putting troops on the front lines, but rather keeping them in assembly areas. I will leave it to them to talk about their military status in various places.

Obviously, we keep a very close eye on this situation. Our ambassadors in the region have been working very hard on it. The Secretary has been working hard on it, and others as well. As you know, Prime Minister Blair is there. We keep in close touch with the British. So I think it's clear the international community wants to see a peaceful and political resolution of these issues, and of the crisis. And many of us are working hard toward that goal.

Question: Could I ask something that may sound almost ingenuous? But after 50 years, does the US really believe there is a solution to the Kashmir conflict that will satisfy both sides? Isn't that one of these things that will be with us forever? Generation unto generation?

Mr. Boucher: Nothing is with us forever. There is clearly --

Question: The Arab-Israeli conflict is with us forever.

Mr. Boucher: I have worked on crises that you can trace back 2,000 years. But it doesn't mean that France and Germany have to perennially go to war with each other, to put it bluntly. But that's not the question.

The question is sort of where -- how does one address this issue? How does one address this issue? First and foremost, you address it by trying to keep these two countries from entering into armed conflict with each other over this terrible bombing and the attacks that have occurred.

Second of all, you try to get at the sources of violence and the sources of terrorism. Each of these countries has a role in the fight against terrorism, and we have seen them step up to the plate and take steps against the terrorism generally. And we have seen President Musharraf take steps to take actions against militant groups and against the sources of -- the violence expression of political views.

And so he is taking steps against extremism, taking steps against militant groups, and he is committed to dismantling those groups, which threaten the stability of Pakistan, as well as of the neighbors.

And then, third of all, yes, there is a fundamental issue over Kashmir and we have always encouraged the parties to engage in direct dialogue on the subject and to try to resolve the political issues in a political manner.

So I would say the approach we have taken has been on those sort of three different levels. And obviously the level of ending the rush toward confrontation is the first and foremost now, and ending the violent activity of extremist groups is obviously the key to defusing that and getting a political process between the two countries, eventually.

Question: How does the Secretary stand now on the possibility of sending an envoy to the region and what does he think that would accomplish?

Mr. Boucher: I wouldn't couch this in terms of an "envoy" towards the region. We have people out there working it. The Secretary has been working it by phone. We may, indeed, send someone from Washington to continue our activity, to continue working on the situation. I am not sure I would describe that as a special envoy. It may be one of the officials in Washington who is responsible for the crisis.

Question: "Envoy" with a little N is just somebody going over?

Mr. Boucher: It's a little "e" but, yes. (Laughter.)

Question: Little "e". How embarrassing.

Mr. Boucher: You're right. And a little "n," too.

Question: Richard, just to follow up, Indian ambassador (inaudible) thinks that in Washington that the clouds of war are not over yet until Pakistan meets the demand of -- list of 20 demands by India, that those 20 people should be handed over to India. And what -- do you have any comments on that list India presented to Pakistan, because they are not satisfied yet, whatever Musharraf had done before? They are saying whatever he has done so far is under US pressure, not his own will.

Mr. Boucher: I would say a couple of things on that. But first, let me say I don't think I am going to try to address a specific list or a specific action requested by one government or another that doesn't involve us directly. But let me say a couple things.

First of all, we've seen I think clear statements from President Musharraf that he intends to move against extremism. He intends to move against the sources -- those who would engage in violence. This has been a subject of discussion with him since September 11th, a subject that he has discussed, that we discussed with him, for example, during the Secretary's visit in October. Second of all, he has taken concrete action to back up the very firm statements that he has made.

So we have seen action. We expect to continue to see action from him in terms of moving against militant groups, because fundamentally we think he has made the strategic decisions after September 11th to move against terrorism and violence. And, second of all, he has fundamentally made the strategic decision to move Pakistan towards a more moderate course.

That presents opportunities and, obviously, we want to see him pursue that. But the situation is very dangerous. There -- we are not claiming that it is over or that we can all breathe a sigh of relief. It is still a very dangerous situation. And it is still a situation where people need to keep moving forward, need to eliminate the violence and need to look for direct dialogue and other political ways of resolving the issues.