The Pakistani Spectator

In his first interview to an Indian journalist after the Mumbai terror attacks, former Pakistani prime minister Nawaz Sharif spoke to HARINDER BAWEJA at his farmhouse in Raiwind on the outskirts of Lahore. In a wide-ranging interview over the span of an hour, Sharif says he is all for a no-war pact with India, an agreement that would include both conventional and nuclear attacks. Excerpts from an exclusive interview:

Why is that war clouds gather over India and Pakistan ever so often?
It is very distressing. It has become a fashion. You see, I’m not saying it in the present day’s context but this business of allegations and counterallegations has been devastating for both countries. I know when I was the prime minister of this country, diplomats from both sides used to get beaten up and there was this tit-for-tat bashing. I know that no civilised society will accept that — neither India nor Pakistan. Frankly, these are the only two countries I have seen in my life, acting like this. I hope we are able to learn lessons from our past mistakes. We did move forward but after the Mumbai attacks, the relationship has moved backwards. That is very painful.

Pakistan itself is under threat from the jehadis. To what extent have they become Frankenstein monsters beyond the control of state agencies who played a role in training them in the first place?
We are fighting elements within our country whom I regard as people who don’t believe in democracy. These elements are products of dictatorship and such forces multiply under dictatorial regimes. I haven’t come across a single incident during democratic periods. I was prime minister, but during my tenure, I never saw a suicide bomber. It was a phenomenon unheard of. They emerged after Musharraf’s takeover. He is responsible for grooming them.

So you are saying that jehad is a product of dictatorship?
You see, jehad is being projected wrongly. The definition of jehad is to fight against tyranny and injustice. This is the true meaning of jehad. Killing innocent people is not jehad. I fail to understand what these elements are achieving by killing innocents. Pakistan itself is in the grip of terrorism. We are victims of terrorism and I sympathise with India. I strongly condemn what happened in Mumbai. My heart goes out to the families of the bereaved. This is something that we should all take very serious note of. Given the situation India is confronting, Pakistan should go an extra mile to combat terrorism.

Would going an extra mile include handing over the 20 most wanted India has been demanding?
I don’t know what list has been handed over to the government. An all-party meeting was convened at my request, to take all necessary steps and take a united stand and provide all assistance to the Indian Government in a very transparent manner. It is important for Indians to see that Pakistan is sincere and also for the world to see that we are absolutely sincere in extending all cooperation to identify the culprits. This was my proposal and I still stand by it.

Both India and the US are of the firm view that Pakistani soil is being used to export terror into India. There is evidence to suggest the same even for the Mumbai attack…
If India has evidence to prove that, I think we should put our own house in order. We should ensure that our territory is never used for these kind of activities, not only for the rest of the world including our neighbourly country India, but even for Pakistan. We are having bomb explosions every day. There was a very severe blast that targeted the Marriot Hotel and even the day Benazir Bhutto returned to Pakistan, as many as 250 people were killed. She also lost her life in Rawalpindi. Terrorism is a very serious issue now and we’ve got to take it on with all seriousness. One or two steps here and there will not make any difference unless we are serious about curbing and combating this menace.

Do you think groups like the LeT and the Jaish-e-Mohammad threaten both India and Pakistan equally?
Whosoever is involved, no matter who and what the name is of any such organisation which is playing havoc both here and in India, or any other part of the world, nobody should be prepared to spare that organisation. That is my very strong view. I think we should now set an example.

The Observer newspaper has established that the lone terrorist who was caught alive, is indeed Pakistani. Initially, the response of Pakistan President Asif Zardari was that it was not clear whether Pakistani nationals were involved. But now that there is evidence, isn’t it the responsibility of the government to accept that its soil was used, even if by a ‘non-state actor’?
If Pakistan is not directly involved, if the Pakistani Government has no hand in it, if the Pakistani Government is itself confronted with elements who are creating havoc, and if the Pakistani Government is being seen as fighting the scourge of terrorism, I think you should have sympathy for the Pakistani Government. You should also pave the way for it to successfully fight this menace and extend full cooperation to India to lay its hands on the culprits. I am sure of the present leadership of the government — it is not involved and they cannot afford to be involved. The political leadership of Pakistan has no such agenda. Although the government in Islamabad is of a party that is opposed to our party, and we are political rivals, I can say without any fear of contradiction, that they are innocent, they are not involved and are very serious about taking action against such elements. So, I think we should strengthen each others’ hands. And if a Pakistani name is being taken, a man who belongs to a place called Faridkot or any other place, I think we should take very, very serious notice of that. Not just notice, we should take serious action and we should let India know that, here, the action is now being taken against such elements. And it should also be a source of satisfaction to the Indian Government, that yes, Pakistan is taking action. Pakistan must take action in a very transparent manner.

It is sometimes possible — as you know from the Kargil experience — for the prime minister of Pakistan to not know entirely what the ISI and the army are up to. Am I right in making that assessment?
On Kargil, I was not completely in the picture and that was Musharraf’s fault. I hold him fully responsible. The Indians were absolutely justified and so was Prime Minister Vajpayee, when he said that they were stabbed in the back by us. I agree with Vajpayee — he was stabbed and shouldn’t have been stabbed. But then, I too was stabbed by Mr Musharraf, but a day will come when there will be accountability. I wish this man, Asif Zardari, had taken note of this and carried out some accountability, but that has not happened. India held an inquiry on Kargil, why can’t Pakistan do that? I hope one day the facts will come to light.

You’re rightly saying that you blame Musharraf but he was the army chief and you were the prime minister. Is national security more a domain, then, of the army and the ISI than of the civilian government?
The ISI legally and technically comes under the civilian government and there are no two opinions on this. But our problem has been that Pakistan has seen some adventurers in the past who have been derailing democracy, who have been responsible for overthrowing governments and abrogating the Constitution. Musharraf even went to the extent of arresting the judges. So, our agenda is to end this derailing of democracy. Mr Zardari is getting late moving on this one. Rather than them approaching us, we are approaching them to say, it’s important to move on this. We want to see that this adventurism doesn’t happen again because it has been devastating for the country. I am being very frank with you on this.

Do you think the DG, ISI should have been sent to India or not?
What I do know is that the Prime Minister of India wanted someone senior from here. I think, if needed, a full delegation can visit India or vice-versa. There is no harm in doing that — not just to satisfy the world, but because it’s the need of the hour. Of course, we have to satisfy India. We also have to satisfy our own conscience. We also have a conscience — I cannot approve of what happened in Mumbai. I was very pained.

Do you think an opportunity has been lost because the PPP and your party could have engaged in a strategic dialogue on how to take the army along, especially on relations with India?
It should happen now if it hasn’t happened yet. Because of Mr Zardari’s other priorities, we are late. This is what the people of Pakistan voted for in February and this is the real agenda. We must engage the military and formulate a national policy on such issues. There is no doubt about it.

Do you agree with Mr Zardari’s recent offer of a no-first-use and a nuclear-free South Asia?
I would go a step further. I would say that there should be a no-first-attack pact, a no-war pact between the two countries and this includes both conventional and nuclear. I think that is the best for both countries and this is what we should be focusing on.

Will the Pakistani army agree?
We all have to agree and today we have a responsible army leadership. I think they will go along with the political leadership on this.

Do you agree with Zardari that there is a bit of an Indian in every Pakistani and a bit of Pakistani in every Indian?
(laughs) You eat the same food as us, we wear the same dress. You speak Hindi which I can understand very well. You speak Punjabi, I speak Punjabi. We have the same culture and traditions. Of course there is a bit of an Indian in every Pakistani and vice-versa.

But the Mumbai terror attack has set the peace process back, hasn’t it?
Who is more keen to promote our relations than a man like me? I am the one man who started saying this more than 10 years ago. For the first time, I broke tradition and in the 1997 election, we won a two-thirds majority. My main slogan was better relations with India. The Mumbai attack has set the peace process back and that’s a misfortune. Nazar lag gaye hai. It’s a misfortune.