Krishna questions timing of Pillai’s ISI comments
Indian external affairs minister S M Krishna on Wednesday questioned home secretary G K Pillai’s remarks.
Indian external affairs minister S M Krishna on Wednesday said that home secretary G K Pillai’s remarks about the alleged role of the ISI in the 2008 Mumbai attacks should not have been made on the eve of his talks with Pakistan, reported The Times of India ().
“Pillai could have waited till I came back to issue a statement. Perhaps it would have been wiser if that statement had not been made just on the eve of my visit,” TOI quoted Krishna’s interview to a television channel. This was Krishna’s first public criticism of Pillai.
Pillai had said that the Mumbai attack was planned by the ISI “from beginning to end”.
“When two foreign ministers are meeting after the Mumbai attack, there was a special significance for this meeting,” Krishna said.
“Everyone who was privy to whatever was happening in the government of India ought to have known that the right kind of atmosphere from India’s side should have been created for the talks to go on in a very normal manner, but unfortunately this episode happened,” he added.
“Well, I have had some discussions with the prime minister,” Krishna replied when asked if he had conveyed his dissatisfaction over Pillai’s remarks to the prime minister.
After his talks with Krishna in Islamabad on July 15, foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi said at a joint press conference that the remarks made by India’s home secretary were not “helpful”.
Krishna was also critical of Qureshi’s interaction with the media.
“We should understand the spirit of Thimphu, and the spirit of Thimphu was to make an earnest effort to bring about reconciliation between two countries and I do not want that spirit to be eroded even by the remotest possible way,” he said.
Krishna’s criticism of Pillai shows differences of opinion within the Indian government over engagement with Pakistan. At a seminar in New Delhi, India’s national security adviser Shivshankar Menon openly endorsed Pillai’s stand.
“For us, it has been brought home most recently by what we learned from [David] Headley which confirmed many of the things we knew before,” said Menon. “And it is really the links with the official establishment and with the existing intelligence agencies ... it is that nexus which makes it a much harder phenomenon for us to deal with.
“I think we know what needs to be done and we also know who is responsible for terrorism,” Menon said.
Krishna also said on Wednesday that the evidence given by Headley could not be swept under the carpet.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 22nd, 2010.
“Pillai could have waited till I came back to issue a statement. Perhaps it would have been wiser if that statement had not been made just on the eve of my visit,” TOI quoted Krishna’s interview to a television channel. This was Krishna’s first public criticism of Pillai.
Pillai had said that the Mumbai attack was planned by the ISI “from beginning to end”.
“When two foreign ministers are meeting after the Mumbai attack, there was a special significance for this meeting,” Krishna said.
“Everyone who was privy to whatever was happening in the government of India ought to have known that the right kind of atmosphere from India’s side should have been created for the talks to go on in a very normal manner, but unfortunately this episode happened,” he added.
“Well, I have had some discussions with the prime minister,” Krishna replied when asked if he had conveyed his dissatisfaction over Pillai’s remarks to the prime minister.
After his talks with Krishna in Islamabad on July 15, foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi said at a joint press conference that the remarks made by India’s home secretary were not “helpful”.
Krishna was also critical of Qureshi’s interaction with the media.
“We should understand the spirit of Thimphu, and the spirit of Thimphu was to make an earnest effort to bring about reconciliation between two countries and I do not want that spirit to be eroded even by the remotest possible way,” he said.
Krishna’s criticism of Pillai shows differences of opinion within the Indian government over engagement with Pakistan. At a seminar in New Delhi, India’s national security adviser Shivshankar Menon openly endorsed Pillai’s stand.
“For us, it has been brought home most recently by what we learned from [David] Headley which confirmed many of the things we knew before,” said Menon. “And it is really the links with the official establishment and with the existing intelligence agencies ... it is that nexus which makes it a much harder phenomenon for us to deal with.
“I think we know what needs to be done and we also know who is responsible for terrorism,” Menon said.
Krishna also said on Wednesday that the evidence given by Headley could not be swept under the carpet.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 22nd, 2010.