“The Kashmiris are agitating for their right to self-determination in accordance with United Nations resolutions, whereas in Balochistan there is only a small group working on the behest of the enemy country”, Zehri said, referring to suspected Indian involvement.
Advertisement
Underlining India’s position in an address to journalists, the Foreign Secretary also referred to the “centrality of the issue of terrorism” when discussing India’s difficulties in dealing with Pakistan within South Asia.
Responding to Pakistan’s claim that India has crossed the red line, Swarup said, “Pakistan recognises no redline in conduct of its own diplomacy”.
In his speech that day, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi spoke of Pakistan’s restive Balochistan province after Pakistani President Mamnoon Hussain talked about India-administered Kashmir.
“Access to UNHCHR has been denied by India” to Kashmir.
Sartaj Aziz, Advisor to Pakistan’s Prime Minister on Foreign Affairs said his statements were proof of Pakistan’s contention that India is fomenting terrorism in Balochistan. “They are also based on the assurance given by President Musharraf in January 2004 that he will not permit any territory under Pakistan’s control to be used to support terrorism in any manner”, he said.
“The letter highlights the global obligation of both the countries, India and Pakistan, to resolve the Jammu and Kashmir dispute, in accordance with the U.N. Security Council resolutions”, the statement said.
He alleged that India was involved in subversive activities in Balochistan and Karachi.
Given this vast difference in perception, at least one analyst wasn’t sure that the newly proposed talks would actually take place.
Jaishankar also wanted a discussion on closing down terror camps in Pakistan where militants like Bahadur Ali, who was recently arrested in the state, continued to be trained for attacks against India. And this isn’t just India’s view.
This comes a day after Foreign Secretary S. Jaishankar expressed his willingness to visit to Islamabad to have consultations with his Pakistani counterpart Aizaz Ahmad Chaudhary provided they discuss cross-border terrorism issues and not Kashmir.
Advertisement
Meanwhile, the Pakistan Foreign Ministry claimed that PM’s reference to Balochistan during his Independence Day speech was violation of United Nations charter. It’s for the good of both countries; it’s for the good of the region.
