Congressional Statements

Lessons for U.S. diplomacy

India responds to Clinton message, but not Pakistan

Press Release
March 29, 2000

Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr., D-NJ, who took part in President Clinton's trip to South Asia last week, said that the widely disparate reactions from India and Pakistan to the issues raised by the American President should force U.S. policy makers to reassess their priorities in the region and to accord to India a higher status as a valued friend and partner.

In a speech in the House of Representatives on Tuesday, March 28th, Pallone said that the President's trip sends a message to our Administration and State Department "about which South Asian nation can be relied upon to be an effective partner for the U.S. in the years to come -- namely, India -- and which South Asian nation stands in direct opposition to America's interests and values B namely, Pakistan. President Clinton went to South Asia with an agenda of promoting peace, stability, regional integration, democracy, trade, market reforms and the settlement of disputes through negotiation. India's elected leaders embraced this agenda. Pakistan's military dictatorship ignored it."

"I hope this lesson is not lost on the policy makers in our State Department and National Security Council. During the Cold War, military and intelligence links were established between the U.S. and Pakistan. But we live in a changed world now. Unfortunately, there are many who are still set in the old ways B both here in Washington, as well as in Pakistan. I hope what we have witnessed in the past week will be taken seriously by our policy makers, and that we will see significant changes in U.S. South Asia policies," Pallone added.

Having participated in a significant part of the President's visit to India, as well as his visit to Bangladesh, Pallone reported that the trip was a valuable and productive one.

"One of the President's top priorities in making the trip to South Asia was to call for a peaceful solution to the Kashmir conflict that has divided India and Pakistan for decades," Pallone said. "India's elected leaders have long made it clear that they seek the same thing. Last Monday, on his first full day in India's capital of New Delhi, President Clinton and India's Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee signed a Vision Statement, outlining the direction of the partnership of the world's two largest democracies in the 21st century. In their joint appearance, Prime Minister Vajpayee stated that, 'India remains committed to resolving its differences with its neighbors through peaceful bilateral dialogue and in an atmosphere free from the thought of force and violence.' The Prime Minister stressed the need for neighboring countries to respect each other's sovereignty and territorial integrity, and base their relationship on agreements solemnly entered into."

"Unfortunately," Pallone continued, "President Clinton did not hear the same message during his brief visit to the Pakistani capital of Islamabad. President Clinton stressed to General Pervez Musharraf, the military leader who seized power in Pakistan in a coup last October, that there could be no military solution in Kashmir by incursions across the Line of Control, the de facto border between Indian and Pakistani controlled territory in Kashmir. Our President called for restraint, respect for the Line of Control, rejection of violence and return to dialogue.

"In marked contrast to India's elected Prime Minister, Pakistan's military dictator did not echo the call for a peaceful resolution of the Kashmir conflict. Instead, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, the General fell back on the old claim that Pakistan had nothing to do with sending forces across the Line of Control last year."

"On the eve of President Clinton's visit, in what I would characterize as largely a public relations move, General Musharraf announced a timetable for local elections between December of this year and August of 2001. But the General refused to provide a time frame for national elections. The bottom line is that the General appears intent on holding on to power for the foreseeable future," Pallone said.

"What a stark contrast between India and Pakistan in this regard. India again proved itself to be a thriving democracy with a free press and respect for what we Americans call First Amendment rights. While President Clinton's visit was widely hailed throughout India, there were opponents of the U.S., And peaceful demonstrators were allowed to express their views. During his speech to the Parliament, those of us who were part of the bipartisan delegation that accompanied the President had an opportunity to interact with our counterparts in India's Parliament. How different from the closed-door meetings with an un-elected General that took place in Pakistan."

Pallone also pointed to massacre of 36 innocent Sikh villagers in India's state of Jammu and Kashmir.

"I believe it is no coincidence that this massacre took place during President Clinton's visit to South Asia. I believe that these terrorist groups, and those who support them in Pakistan, wanted an incident that would draw attention to the Kashmir issue, while stepping up the campaign of fear intended to drive Hindus, and now Sikhs, out of Kashmir."

"As always, these actions backfire in terms of their intended propaganda effect. What is tragic, besides the loss of innocent lives, is the fact that Pakistan continues to squander resources on weapons and support for terrorism in Kashmir. Estimates have put the average income in Pakistan at about $1 per day. Democracy has been squelched. President Clinton tried to approach the Pakistani leadership with a message of friendship, but with serious expectations about what steps Pakistan must take to be a full-fledged member of the community of nations. That message was ignored or rejected by the Pakistani dictatorship.

"In India and Bangladesh, President Clinton outlined a number of programs for increased trade and investment with the U.S., as well as ways to increase cooperation among the nations of the region in the energy sector and other areas. Some day, it is to be hoped that Pakistan will be able to be a part of this newfound cooperation with the United States and with the neighboring countries. But this cannot happen under the terms Pakistan has set for itself. I regret that the current government in Pakistan did nothing to encourage the hope for progress -- but not for lack of trying by both the United States and India," Pallone concluded.