NEW DELHI: India publicly ‘dismissed the U.S. Government’s ‘Stand on major political issues such a8 violation of human rights by Delhi, the U.S. offer of mediation on Kashmir and the question of nuclear proliferation, The U.S. Positions were explained during his stay in Dethi last week by the US. Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, John Malott. Significantly, the reactions to the various issues were not given in a consolidated form by Indian government authorities. Instead, some reactions were given by the home minister and others by a spokesman of the external affairs ministry. On Kashmir, India offered no comment on the substantive issue of the territory being disputed and the people of Kashmir seeking freedom from India. The Indian Spokesman, on the other hand, claimed that India is a democratic country and that the U.S. administration should understand the ground situation better. India also said that the problem in Kashmir had been created by Pakistan’s interference and there was incontrovertible evidence to suggest that ‘those trained by Pakistan had been ‘whipping up chaos in the valley.

‘Commenting on Malott’s suggestion that India permit genuine access to international human nights groups to Kashmir, home minister Chavan Said: “He should not have said that. We are shocked that an officer like him was so ignorant about India’s track record on human rights. India’s record had been excellent which could be compared with any country’s record; The Parliament already started legislation on a Human Rights commission.”

Chavan dismissed Malott’s advice as “Unsolicited.” The Indian government was quite competent 19 judge whether to allow any group access to Kashmir or not. Chavan claimed that Amnesty International during the visit of its representative recently was “fully convinced” about India’s stand, The government was of the view that while human rights groups were free to have any opinion on the human rights situation in Kashmir, they should approach the state concerned for verification of the information in possession of the groups.

The violation of human rights by Indian security forces and his commients’on the Bombay bomb blasts in which Malott questioned India’s conviction of Pakistani involvement in the serial bombings drew fresh flak from South Block. While the spokesman expressed “surprise” at the U.S. onesided view on human rights, he characterized as “irrelevant,” Malott’s observations doubting India’s “incontrovertible proof” of Pakistan’s involvement in the Bombay blast episode.

Malott’s references to the excesses by security forces were put across during his address on May 19 at the India International Center here. “India must take steps to curb the abuses by its security forces” Malott told his audience during his much publicized speech.

This reported that during a luncheon meeting with a group of journalists on the same day, he highlighted the “negative impact” which Indus relations would experience if India did not check excesses carried out by its security forces. Since the US, foreign policy had made human rights a Cardinal Principal, human rights violations by uniformed personnel could lead to the obstruction of the ongoing Indus cooperation, highlighted in the spheres of military training, joint naval exercises and economic relations.

On the violations of human rights, the spokesman said that if the U.S. were to play a constructive role,” it must take into account all the “relevant factors.”

He chided Washington for discarding India’s democratic polices, secular norms and open society in the formulation of its Stance. Official resentment was also reflected when New Delhi reiterated the “problems created by State sponsorship of terrorism in Kashmir” created by Pakistan.

The spokesman drew attention to the “proxy war” being waged against India, and the “abnormal conditions” which prevailed in the State of Jammu and Kashmir in his remarks on human nights.

Press reports suggest the U.S. is at variance with India’s understanding. Washington feels that the citing of circumstantial information except for the purpose of cross verification was not basis sufficient to implicate Pakistan in the bombings. The U.S. is of the view that only information which could stand independently as conclusive evidence in a U.S, court, would sec India and the U.S, on the same side of the fence on this issue. Thus, it has expressed its preference from drawing evidence from its independent sources.

On the question of nuclear proliferation also, India was ¢evasive. It suggested further talks between the two countries in July but gave no indication that it was writing to draw closer to the international community’s Stand that the nuclear menace should be eliminated from south East Asia.

An observer in India commented that the real purpose of Malott’s visit was 0 reassure Pakistan that the democratic administration would not be harsher on Pakistan than the Republican administration. No wonder, Malott disbelieved India’s charges against Pakistan for engineering blasts in Bombay in January as not substantiated. The indication given by the U.S, official was that his administration was not thinking in terms of declaring Pakistan a terrorist state. Also, the U.S. official talked of his government’s “no tilt” altitude cither towards India or Pakistan.

Article extracted from this publication >>  May 28, 1993