Rajnath Singh’s attitude at Saarc meet

Indian Home Minister Rajnath Singh was recently here to attend the South Asian Association for Regional Coop­eration (Saarc) Interior Minis­ters’ meeting in Islamabad but left in a hurry and distasteful manner.

This came after Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar, after relinquishing his position as chairman of the meeting, issued a rejoinder to Rajnath Singh when he indirectly accused Pakistan of sponsoring terrorism.

Nisar aptly termed the use of torture against innocent children and violence against civilians as terrorism and added there was a need to "take time out to reflect and sit together to try and work out the problems and reservations that we might harbour towards each other" instead of engaging in blame games and taking swipes at each other.

It was not Pakistan that closed its doors to talks, said Nisar. “Pakistan is ready to engage in any dialogue process based on mutual respect and dignity with no strings attached. It is for those who have put conditions and sub-conditions for initiating dialogue to reconsider and realign their position.”

Meanwhile, one day after his visit Mr Rajnath told the Indian parliament: "All of our prime ministers have done their best to improve relations with our neighbours, but this neighbour never learns.” Should he not clarify that one Indian prime minister decided to invade Pakistan in 1965 and the second one trained and armed rebels and dismembered the country in 1971. Then there were others who brought the Indian forces to the Pakistan border but did not get an opportunity or had the nerve to invade Pakistan. Now they don’t have the capability to do so in lieu of the N-word.

Then the Indian minister had the cheek to claim that "Pakistan is the biggest violator of human rights." Really, the people of Kashmir, the Sikhs, Nagaland residents and 300 million plus religious minorities among others would certainly disagree. So would numerous castes living in the mainland India. The Human Rights Watch and Amnesty have no hesitation in revealing the human rights violations of the so-called largest democracy in their frequent reports. 

Then he claimed that journalists accompanying him were not allowed to cover his speech. "I will not comment on whether Pakistan was right or wrong in not allowing coverage. I did not register any protest there. I will need to ask the foreign ministry about protocol of past occasions," he told the Indian lawmakers. He was less than candid here. It has been reported that “it is standard Saarc practice for the host country's opening statements to be made public and open to the media, while the rest of the proceedings are in camera, which allows for a frank discussion of issues.”

The reality is that India has no claim on Kashmir and cannot defend its position in the valley. Why a panicky Indian interior minister would otherwise abruptly leave instead of producing a rejoinder to Nisar’s remarks or face the Pakistani press afterwards to defend his statements. Chaudhry Nisar only observed that equating the movement for Kashmir’s liberation with terrorism was ‘dishonesty with history’. He said that Saarc countries could not be hostage to a certain country’s agenda.

But you can only face the press if you have credible answers and nothing to hide. In India’s case it seems that is not the case.