Behind Powell-Modi Handshaeke Lies US need .... Power & Politics/The Sunday Standard/February 16, 2014

Behind Powell-Modi Handshake Lies US Need to Capture Money Market Called India

Politics and diplomacy are poles apart. The former is the art of saying nothing while doing something, the latter practices the game of expatiating more than necessary. While politicians shout at each other to make their point, diplomats score victories through unspoken words and visible postures. This maxim was quite evident when US Ambassador Nancy Powell, of tomboy coiffure and pugnacious build, drove to Gandhinagar to meet CM Narendra Modi, who her country had been treating like a pariah for a decade. She didn’t utter a word to the media. Nor did Modi. But political supporters and opponents exchanged high-decibel verbal fire. Foreign Minister Salman Khurshid dripped sarcasm while observing he would “be interested in knowing what Powell tells Modi. In the past, countries on human rights have lectured us. It would be interesting to know what the US makes out of what happened in Gujarat”. The Congress appears to be convinced that the Powell-Modi handshake at this crucial juncture would swing the mind of voters in favour of the saffron party.

Plenipotentiary tourism to India proves that even diplomacy has no permanent friends or foes.

It was clear that diplomatic expeditions to Gandhinagar were acquiring legitimacy and significance. For the first time, political parties are gloating over foreigners endorsing their policies and personalities. Though there is hardly any commonality between politics and diplomacy, both swear to protect national interests. If Powell and other envoys before her had flown to Gandhinagar, it was meant to protect and project only the interest of nations they represent and not to promote their host or his political philosophy. The BJP leadership was vertically divided over the impact of Powell’s visit. Only those who directly or indirectly represent the interests of Dollar Power projected her sojourn as a victory for Modi. It is true that Modi has been resisting meeting the US representative at a place and time of her liking. According to party insiders, some Delhi-based Modi acolytes attempted to arrange a meeting between the two in Delhi. The idea of hosting a dinner where Modi would “just drop in” was proposed. But the Gujarat satrap torpedoed the plan, which led to panic in the US establishment. Finally they instructed Powell to fly to Ahmedabad. Though Modi has been seeking endorsements from Western powers and global corporations, he never allowed them to dictate terms. Tech-savvy campaign managers surround him. He has been enjoying the company of corporate czars. Besides attending packed, choreographed public rallies, Modi has not thrown away any chance to be seen schmoozing with the chatterati, who would dump him the moment he doesn’t make it to 7 RCR.

But the Americans also didn’t want to give the impression that Powell had exclusively gone to meet Modi. Before and after her visit, the US government made it clear that Powell has been on many pre-poll exploratory visits to many states and Gujarat was just one of her many halts to meet leaders of political parties. Interestingly, the Indian media made a big splash of the Modi-Powell parley but ignored a similar pow-wow she had with Congress leader Shankarsinh Vaghela. If she spent 45 minutes with Modi, she gave 40 minutes to Vaghela, having driven down to his home as well. He was much more forthcoming in his interaction with the media, saying “she had questions about the human rights situation in Gujarat and also wanted to know the probable scenarios in the event of either a BJP-led NDA or a Congress-led coalition winning elections”. Obviously, Powell had treated both leaders as equals. The US also announced that it looks forward to working closely with any government that the Indian people would choose. It announced that its ambassador would be meeting West Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee. It is tragic that both the foreign establishment and Indian elite believe that voters can be swayed by green room interventions of a foreign hand. They seem to have forgotten that the power to influence the democratic verdict has moved away from metropolises to the caste-infested small towns and villages of India. It is obvious that foreign countries, particularly the West, are taking extraordinary interest in the 2014 Lok Sabha elections. While tourist traffic may have stagnated, there has been a sharp spurt in the number of known and unknown diplomats and lobbyists from many nations descending on India. Earlier they were totally dependent on local missions, which would confine interactions to a select group of opinion-makers with savoir vivre. The Delhi-based ambassadors are finding it difficult to gauge the mood of the people as a new class and breed of leaders have sprouted in various parts of the country. For Powell and her ilk, the rise of AAP and its leadership was an unforeseen miracle. Similarly they were living under the illusion that Modi and other regional leaders could be manipulated through self-appointed promoters in Delhi. Americans and their camp followers have been spending resources and efforts on sending some Indian regional leaders to Washington to be brainwashed, but these captive megaphones failed to deliver except for organising a few seminars and chatfests. Now, they are under pressure from their leadership and business lobbies to capture the real on-the-ground situation in India, which is a big money-making market. For America, it is more important to capture markets than territory. For this, it can go to any extent. If the US is willing to talk turkey with the Taliban, which is responsible for killing 3,000 American soldiers, it can walk the extra mile in any part of the world to protect its economic interests. Plenipotentiary tourism to India proves that even diplomacy has no permanent friends or foes. The only constant factor is getting more bucks using a fleeting fake smile accompanied by a tepid handshake.

prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla

Teekhi Baat with Salman Khurshid/IBN7/ August 17, 2013

'Nawaz had said openly Pakistan wants good relations'

External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid speaks about UPA2’s security policy and Indo-Pak relations during the Teekhi Baat  on IBN7. Excerpts:

I feel that in UPA 2, diplomacy rules over security policy.

You asked a very tough question. I am saying tough because I want to speak at length on it. I will have to tell things related to security policy which are not normally spoken about. Even the defence minister does not speak those things.

Because the defence minister does not say anything. One feels that the foreign minister is deciding everything.

No, he is very experienced and senior to us, we follow his path. We believe he will take a decision after great thought and deliberation.

You didn’t answer my question.

It is done with discussion and dialogue being dependent on one another. This cannot work separately because security is connected with foreign policy in a big way.

Who should call the shots in the country? Security policy or diplomacy?

Sometimes security policy or diplomacy is in national interest. But diplomacy does not have its own aim. Its aim is aligned with security policy. If foreign policy has a role in taking the country ahead, in the end, it stops as security policy.

With Nawaz Sharif, you felt new people have come with new thinking. You would have felt saddened with the reaction.

We have felt saddened. But something would or would not happen after that. Will they react, send message, will they close the gap between what they say and what they do? Will we see something ahead or not?

Is Nawaz Sharif better than Zardari saab?

What is the old talk on Nawaz Sharif saab? We have seen that a new thinking is awakening in Pakistan. I cannot say today whether it is wrong or right. And to talk about this thinking, Sharif has projection via his manifesto, campaign and talks, when it could be presumed that if he talks positively about India in campaign, then there would be a section of electorate which would oppose him. But despite that, he openly said that they want good relations with India.

Teekhi Baat with Salman Khurshid/IBN7, March 23, 2013

‘We gave a clarification that there won’t be death sentence’

External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid speaks on the Italian marines issue, Pakistan and other issues during Teekhi Baat on IBN7. Excerpts:

You got the Italian marines back from Italy.

We didn’t get them, they came back.

You gave a guarantee that the marines would not be sentenced to death.

No, we gave a clarification that this case does not fall in the category of the rarest of the rare. Hence, there is no chance of a death sentence.

This is the guarantee that you gave.

No guarantee but a clarification.

If government gives a clarification, it means you took over judiciary’s role.

Judiciary takes a decision, we read it, and we understand what our law is.

They demanded a special court. You gave a guarantee on that too.

Supreme Court said. They did not say it.

Supreme Court said, but they said that it should be constituted fast, but you are not able to do that for the past two months.

What is the problem in saying that the courts should be constituted early?

On issue of Italy you are tough. Why do you go soft on the issue of Pakistan? Dialogue with Pakistan is still on.

Not at all, we did not even stop dialogue with Italy. Hence, we are on this position today. Nobody in the world benefits by stalling dialogue.

Let them behead our soldiers, but you will not stall dialogue.

There is no question of them beheading, how can they do that? But it should be seen in the right perspective, with a balanced view.

But Pakistan is not stopping. You asked them to stop terror camps, they did not. You told them to hand over 20 people, they did not even one.

It would be unfair to say that we have not succeeded in any issue regarding Pakistan. We have gained success in many areas.

But why foreign countries should interfere in our internal affairs?

You want war?

To save country if you have to go to war, why wouldn’t you? If they keep on killing 5,000 to 10,000 of your people.

Will you kill 10,000 people to save two people? That is why diplomacy exists, to achieve your goal without suffering losses and I have been given the responsibility for it.

You will keep on having a dialogue with Pakistan?

Prime Minister said that it would not be business as usual and business as usual stopped.

What stopped?

Many things have stopped, hockey stopped somewhere, somewhere cricket stopped, somewhere visa stopped, many things have stopped. And when will we move ahead will be on the directions of the Prime Minister.

Pakistan Understands only... Power & Politics /The Sunday Standard/March 17, 2013

Pakistan understands only one language, turn it into a social and economic pariah

Only a weak host gets hostility in return. While India serves bread, Pakistan responds with bullets. These were Pakistan’s main course in return for the warm and sumptuous lunch served to the outgoing Pakistan Prime Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf when he came to India for a pilgrimage last week. India’s erudite and affable External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid was led more by the euphoria of Stephanian-Oxford fake liberalism than by the earthy political instincts of Farrukhabad. Ignoring the political fallout, Khurshid travelled all the way to Jaipur to make Ashraf’s visit to Ajmer Sharif a peaceful and rewarding event. Little did he know that he was hosting a political leader who was invoking divine blessings for dangerous games. Three days afterwards, Ashraf was leading his Parliament in a venomous attack on his gracious host for hanging a criminal who led the murderous assault on Indian Parliament. Ashraf even chose to forget that Afzal Guru was the creation of the part of the Pakistani mindset that preaches bloody jihad and intolerance. Ironically, the Pakistan assembly—its symbol of democracy—was engaged in justifying an attempt to destroy the Indian Parliament, which is a powerful and vibrant symbol of true democracy.

It is well known that Pakistan is part and parcel of the global terror machine. But its belligerence and gall to directly interfere and condemn India’s democratic structure was blatantly shocking to those who continued to hope that normalcy could be restored through seven-course dinner conclaves in Lahore, London and New Delhi. Last week’s action by Pakistan’s Parliament has proved that India’s diplomatic adventurism has failed to tame or silence the AK-47s that keep targeting innocent Kashmiris in Jammu and Kashmir and people living in India’s cities. Despite over 500 incidents of ceasefire violations and deaths of over 100 Indian soldiers and officers during the past few months, our diplomats still carry white flags and file-folders, waiting for their Pakistani counterparts to reciprocate. From Sharm-el-Sheikh to Jaipur, Indo-Pak dialogue is a sordid saga of deceit, deception and decadence.

During the past few months, India has moved heaven and earth to ensure cordiality between the two nations. It agreed to open trade, grant bulk visas and facilitate Pak business with visas on arrival; permitted Pakistani cricketers to play in India and earn dollars; facilitated the Pakistan women hockey team to practice in India; and encourages Pakistani artists to stay in Delhi and Mumbai to earn huge money. But all these gestures have been contemptuously ignored by Pakistan. Yet, Indian peaceniks holding flags and candles are conspicuous by their absence at venues of tele-opportunities to protest the uncivilised conduct of Pakistan’s political hierarchy. They would have been beating their chests if such a resolution aimed at interfering in the internal politics of Pakistan was adopted in India. Even the leaders of all Indian political parties were subdued in their retaliatory speeches against Pakistan. Taking advantage of India’s liberal establishment firing from the lip, terrorists aided by Pakistan continue to fire at will at our jawans in Jammu and Kashmir. Others are busy selecting future targets for bomb attacks in various parts of India.

For the past two decades, India hasn’t shown any steely resolve to teach Pakistan a lesson in civilised conduct. It has been mostly engaged in dialogue and discussion in the hope that Pakistan would see some reason in reining in the terror camps. Pakistan’s leaders have received red-carpet welcomes in India, soon after its forces and rebels maimed our soldiers and violated ceasefire restrictions. Even the brutal beheadings of Indian soldiers were forgotten after throwing a couple of paper bombs at the Pakistani leadership. Never before since Independence has the nation’s diplomatic fraternity pleaded to place such deep trust in an enemy that considers civility as India’s weakness.

From the Prime Minister downwards, the Indian establishment has supported and encouraged numerous known and unknown Track-II rendezvous. The UPA has allowed the home minister, foreign minister, commerce minister and prominent businessmen and politicians to visit Pakistan and humour them with concessions, and invited them to India for less work and more leisure. During UPA’s nine years, Pakistan has regained its credibility on the global stage. Earlier, India was able to isolate it through sustained efforts by mounting pressure on the international community to act against the nefarious activities of ISI-led terror operations. Hardly any democratic country did business with the rogue nation. No cricket-playing country has withdrawn its ban on team visits to Pakistan. Earlier, Pakistan was seen as a failed state, which was divided into various regions and sectional interests. In reality, Pakistan’s poor have fallen into the hands of extremist elements while its elite enjoy a global lifestyle. It is the coalition of wealthy leaders from both India and Pakistan who are promoting dialogue, because it makes them acceptable to the West and the US. Since America needs the Pakistani army to contain the Taliban to save Western troops in Afghanistan, India has been under US pressure not to escalate diplomatic and strategic crises by pushing Pakistan into a corner. But after its recent act of defiance, even the doves in India are running for dignified shelter. Pakistan understands only one language. It has to be turned into a social and economic pariah. For Manmohan Singh, the time has come to prove that when he says it is “not acceptable”, he means it. After all he has everything to gain and nothing to lose if he strikes back. As they say, a leader is measured not by his words but by his deeds.

prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla

Teekhi Baat with Salman Khurshid/IBN7/January 19, 2013

‘India is not influenced by anyone on Pakistan’

Union Minister of External Affairs Salman Khurshid speaks  on India’s response to recent killing of Indian soldiers by Pakistan and India’s foreign policy, during Teekhi Baat on IBN7. Excerpts:

You look worried. Is it due to the Chintan Shivir or due to Pakistan?

Well, it’s because of Teekhi Baat. When you invite to the show, one has to be wary of the hot spice.

But considering what Pakistan has done and the reactions it has evoked from across India, you must be worried.

It is worrying and we have raised the issue.

You spoke with Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Ms. Khar...

We have spoken to Pakistan. We raised the issue of murdering two Indian soldiers and beheading one of them. We also said that no matter what, there is no need of any intermediary.

You are clear that no third-party intervention is needed.

We have maintained this stance for years. And today we have reached a stage where people say that our bilateral relations can be normal. So, there must be dialogues.

You said that till now the dialogue had a peculiar tone, tenor and style. Would you review that?

The prevailing condition has impacted the dialogue. If the condition is normal, then the dialogue will be good.

Your party spokesperson wants to snap cultural and business ties with them.

This is what some people in the party and public think. It has no connection with the decisions. People exchange ideas and the government gets a sense of it. But, it is the government’s job to decide.

Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha Sushma Swaraj has demanded 10 heads of Pak soldiers. Was it  an appropriate statement?

We understand the pain of the family of murdered soldiers. Every party understands that. Earlier too, when defence personnel sacrificed their lives, we recognised them in whatever way we could. It is not someone else’s decision to support the bereaved families.

After this incident, Pakistani hockey players were sent back. They felt insulted. Why did you invite them in the first place?

When there is an incident, the reaction will reflect the prevailing condition.

But is it right to invite players from Pakistan to play here, earn money?

Even our people go there. It is the society’s decision, and the government accepts that.

For some time, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Maldives have been snubbing us. Do we have weaknesses in our policies?

In the recent years, Bangladesh and Myanmar have cooperated with us in combating terrorism. Such cooperation was not there for decades. I recently went to Bhutan. The talks were from heart to heart. But, the world is changing. We must adjust our relations with the whole world accordingly.

You had said that policies will be decided under Prime Minister’s leadership. But I now see you reading statements from papers. It seems that someone else writes them.

It is not so.

The Pakistan policy is written somewhere else and read at somewhere else.

No. We are part of the same place where policy is formulated. Why shouldn’t the policy be formulated with the one who is leading us?

Do you speak about Pakistan in a soft manner under international pressure?

We have to do our duty, and carry out our responsibilities. 

What is your duty?

It is to keep the nation safe; to maintain peace around us and in the whole world. No allegation of disturbing peace should ever be levelled against us.

It seems you are influenced by America or somebody else regarding Pakistan.

We are not influenced by anyone.

There is no American pressure on you?

America is not pressurising us. But we talk to all the nations, be it Russia, China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, the neighbouring nations, Canada.

But now there is no war.

We are not in war time.

When you are attacked, you would go to war...

If there is an attack, we will protect ourselves. Now we want an answer to the pain that has been inflicted upon us.

But if such incidents are frequent, then at least you would not keep quiet...

Why are you talking about the future? We will talk about what has happened today and what we are doing today.

And you are satisfied?

We are fulfilling our responsibilities. The society has to get satisfied, the public has to get satisfied.

Thank you for coming to our studio.

Thank you Prabhuji!

Teekhi Baat with Salman Khurshid/IBN7/November 10, 2012

" When a mosquito bites, one feels irritated, but that does not mean that one will leave all work and run behind him," 

Salman Khurshid on Kejriwal 

 

 

 

Teekhi Baat with new External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid. 

PC: Earlier you were law minister, you used to defend the government well, but the language has to be changed for diplomacy. So will the language remain the same or change now.

SK: The language use depends upon the responsibility given to the person.

PC: Will you do less Teekhi Baat now.

SK: Will do less Teeki Baat now, even if my mind is “ Teekha” over some issue. You know how diplomatic language is.

PC: Which means your will be something inside, and something outside.

SK: Will be a same inside and outside. But it is true when one has to choose words, one should see who is sitting in front. Like the way I speak when you sit in front of me, is not the same when is speak to others. And I don’t speak to others the way I speak with you. But you call yourself Teekha, but speak smilingly, that is why I also smile and reply.

PC: Kejriwal again has alleged that your government compromises on sovereignty, foreign banks decide policies here. Don’t you think your credibility is falling and it is difficult to defend when Kejriwal levels allegations?

SK: There is no need to defend everything. Sometimes, people start killing themselves. They are themselves getting exposed and the reality is coming to light, let that happen. We don’t have less resources of give right and spicy replies, am talking about the party, the answer to questions raised Digvijay Singh have not been received as yet. Till his questions are not answered, in don’t think they have right to say anything.

PC: Kejriwal commented that the party is in Ambani’s pocket, no action is taken against them, about corporate control over government.

SK: There is no corporate control over government. Then wouldn’t there be an all round feeling that the corporate sector is very happy with us. Even from them we get to year questions.

PC: From such people who have nothing to do with the government

SK: Before levelling allegations on corporate, first let them tell how much money they have got from corporate, that news is tickling out, whether that money has been deployed rightfully? Wrongfully? We are told that whatever policy decisions we take, we should take that issue to all the panchayats in the country, and take their opinion whether we should go ahead with it or not. I want to ask, before they took money from corporate, did they ask people in villages, that should we take money from him, from this foreign person. Where should we spend this money? Do they send the accounts to every village and show it.

PC: Do you mean to say that team Kejriwal is as tainted as you

SK: I don’t say we are tainted; there may be possibility of some mistake in our functioning. It comes, even if you work this happens, we work this happens. And every mistake has some solution and responsibility. We don’t have worries out some questions being levelled against us in the system, if they have been levelled, we have made the system, we have faith in it, and the system has the right to ask us questions.

PC: They said that you did not investigate Mukesh Ambani, should put HSBC staff in jail.   

SK: Who are we to investigate, there is a criminal procedure code, IPC, FEMA, banking laws, authorities, courts, adjudicatory bodies. Now the bodies under whose jurisdiction these issues are, they have right to ask questions, take appropriate action.

PC: But the government did not reply to the allegations made by them

SK: Why would government reply to them, government replies to parliament.

PC: Earlier you used to go to them to answer questions, now you say parliament.  

SK: That is right to, If in our country, somebody says that they represent civil society, in a democracy they have right to ask questions, like I answer you, we answer them. But when one turns it into a political stage, when anyone talks of making a party, then why should we answer, then our party will answer. Out party workers will answer, when our party workers answer, they run away, are not ready to face them.

PC: Do you think corporate should explain about the money.  

SK: The government is accountable to parliament.

PC: But the income tax department took action against businessmen.

SK: We will answer any questions regarding those in parliament. If anybody feels there is any wrongdoing, they can go to court, we will answer there. But if we answer every person, every day regarding us, and he will refrain from giving any answers regarding himself.

PC: In the whole campaign, Kejriwal is listened to because he has credibility and people think what he says it is truth.

SK: We don’t think the people think it is the truth. We are amongst people, we have seen who people trust. It is true that efforts were made to spread rumours, and we also felt that the rumours may taken to be the truth.

PC: You don’t agree that their credibility is more than yours

SK: We don’t. Thousands and lakhs of time, it will be tested and the truth would be known.

PC: In Congress party Samvad Baithak, it came across that there is a disconnect between the government and the party. In Ms. Gandhi speech it comes across that the party would have to make the government understand this step.

SK: It is true that the main aim of the party is inspired from the party’s thought and the experiences of the party. But in a government, especially a co-alition government, there are many expectations.

PC: It is a Congress government, barely three ministers are from outside.

SK: Even then.

PC: Even they are with you; one should presume that it is a Congress government this time.  

SK: If you think this, I thank you, also for your farsightedness. And everybody has one goal, to see a Congress government.

PC: I did not say that, I said that currently it seems the government is a Congress government and not a coalition. Speaking of goals, there is no single goal in your party, everyone speaks a different language.

SK: In a living party, it is not everybody to speak one language and walk in one line. But our perception and boundaries are the same as is of our leadership.

PC: The party top brass said that the ministers should tell how much of the manifesto as been implemented. But one can see many things mentioned in the manifesto have not been implemented.

SK: Not been able to implement some things.

PC: 90 per cent of things have not been implemented.

SK: That is not true. But there are some things which we did not thought would happen, that there would be a global slowdown. Hence the good and bad  effects of it.

PC: You take credit for good things but for bad ones

SK: We take responsibility for everything.

PC: Kejriwal also alleged that black money is being allowed to come via FDI and FII route.

SK: We earlier made how many attempts to convert black money into white. We gave exemptions, told people if they get unaccounted money from abroad, questions would not be asked. Pay tax on it up to a limit and get that money back and use it, because in our country, we needed crores and crores to be pumped in.

PC: Which means you will tell all the thieves who took away money to come back. But you raid poor people.

SK: It is not so, when action is taken again poor people, it is taken into consideration whether the act was committed due to helplessness.

PC: Small tax evaders are caught, the ones who took away 25 lakh crores, are not taxed.

SK: Where ever it is possible we act. We cannot send army abroad to do this work.

PC: But you can close accounts, like HSBC was given notice by America for doing wrong things.

SK: HSBC in India as done no wrong thing.

PC: Those who were raided, gave a statement that HSBC’s local employees were contact point to manage HSBC, Geneva accounts.  The local employees used to do all deposit and withdrawal work.  

SK: If I say in a statement that Kejriwal has kept all this money, would you believe it. Any issue that is silly and just an attempt to create a platform for oneself, that I don’t think you or me should take seriously.

PC: I don’t agree, because the way you are liberal with foreign investment

SK: That is not true, what is GAAR, why did we raise issues regarding Mauritius

PC:You are not implementing it as yet, reviewing it.

SK: In this country many things are passed by parliament, and we again go to parliament.

PC: Your economic policies are based on what will happen in America, New York Stock Exchange, what will industrialists there think, even in diplomacy

SK: What is diplomacy today, the economic diplomacy, the global economic system and our contribution, right and participation in the same.

PC: Will you sell the country’s interest for that

SK: We don’t sell the country’s interest.

PC: On the terms that India allows money, does America allow money on those terms, that you don’t pay tax

SK: The basic thing is reciprocity. What you allow us to do in your country, we will allow you to do in our country.

PC: They don’t allow you to do outsourcing, and here you are saying telling them to come here

SK: We are also not doing outsourcing

PC: You are telling do FDI, take money

SK: We will talk of our interest, they will talk of their interest. We have to see that our neighbour China is receiving many times FDI than what we are. If we don’t do it, where would be growth opportunities for us.

PC: The China tax regime is not like the one here.

SK: China democracy and ours is different.

PC: China does not give the tax concessions that you give

SK: China’s foreign minister does not come for Teekhi Baat, when you get China’s foreign minister for it, I will agree to all that you say.

PC: Many of your ministers are not ready to do Meethi Baat, let alone Teekhi Baat.

SK: All our ministers are ready to speak

PC: As foreign minister you have to deal with Pakistan, and you allowed the players to come, BCCI to make money, ads will come and Pakistani players will take home some dollars. Then the terrorists from there will come and start killing.

SK: We will not allow terrorists to come.

PC: Till date they have not accepted your condition.

SK: Let them accept it or not, but see the condition is not the same which was 10 years ago, five years ago. Today we are successful that America, and all European countries, agree that we have been unfairly attacked and had to face trouble. What we used to say about our problems and feeling of insecurity, that has spread to the whole world now.

PC: But America is keeping on giving aid to Pakistan, like earlier. There are no economic sanctions on them and what transformation happened for you to allow the Pakistani team.

SK:  Those who want to play will them will play

PC: But what love happened between us and them that they were called.

SK: Out main aim with respect to Pakistan is that we want to increase our security. The people who have attacked us from Pakistan soil, and killed innocents here, responsibility should be fixed on them and they be punished.

PC: Recently, home minister said that there are people in Pakistan who are shielding people and not helping us. Do you agree with the home minister, are things state sponsored?

SK: We cannot say we got full co-operation from Pakistan, we hope that we will get co-operation on that path that we are going on.

PC: You agree with the home ministers statement.

SK: Certainly, we speak to each other.

PC: Even after that Prime Minister says he will go to Pakistan, provide legitimacy.

SK: The Prime Minister has received an invitation.

PC: Every year it comes, it is a formality. You invite, they also invite.

SK: But the Prime Minister has not taken any decision as of now. What decision the PM will take will be well thought of. At the moment, even I have not met anybody, not even the foreign minister. It is true I met their Prime Minister in Laos, for two-three minutes and he said that I want India and Pakistan to look ahead and not behind. But the issue which we have problems, pain and expectations, we have put it before them.

PC: You mean to say that the PM has not taken a decision on going

SK: When the decision is taken, we will tell you. Such decisions cannot be hidden, when the decision happens, then we will tell you.

PC: Atmosphere is there, if elections are going to happen there in 2013, you would like to go to save their government

SK: I can answer this question to the Prime Minister behind closed doors. It will not be right for me to say anything before the Prime Minster observes things from all angles.

PC: Today you cannot take any decision on today’s date.  

SK: Today I will just speak to you

PC: That this is an invitation like all others which are lying

SK: No, it is not merely lying, we are thinking on it. And seeing the system, environment and conditions we take decision, and the most important thing is that the decisions is in the interest of the country and we fulfil the country’s expectations.

PC: Now that Obama has been re-elected and he is considered pro-Pakistan, don’t you think your position would become weak.

SK: They have a well understood policy and we think that they have got great sympathy for us.

PC: Just sympathy

SK: Especially President Obama.

PC: Sympathies with you, money with them.

SK: No the issue of money is different; we are not in need of money.

PC: You said trade is important, aid is not important.

SK: Till when we will spread hands before others, now we are giving, we have given our neighbours, leave Pakistan, we have given to Bangladesh, Sri-lanka and Bhutan, we are giving whatever assistance was can and would keep on giving in Asia and Africa.

PC: Neighbours are not ready to listen to you, you have unsettled relationship with neighbours. Be it Sri Lanka

SK: But they are facing tough times, what has happened in front of them in the past 20 years, we cannot take benefit of the deep scars that have left on all the three sides.

PC: You are not getting permanent membership of UN security council, you did everything to get it

 SK: When there will be an atomosphere of change there, then we will become. India cannot go and make new laws.

PC: What is the biggest threat for you, like now Americans are going away from Afghanisation, there is going to be a big problem.

SK: I believe that we have not been directly affected with what happened in Afghanistan. But can affect in our neighbourhood. Our problem is not regarding Afganistan it is somewhere else. You know it is from somewhere else, but because they are all each other’s neighbours. Afganistan, Karzai saab is coming this week, has such great large hearted thoughts about us. He has taken education here, speaks good Hindi and likes seeing Hindi films, but even he is facing very tough situations. Our good wishes and co-operation are with him.

PC: With respect to India’s sovereignty and  other issues, what do you see are more of a problem, China or America

SK: No, we will not accept anybody questioning our sovereignty. But one will have to understand that those days are gone when one used to think that by putting oneself behind closed doors, one will think that it is sovereignty. Today all over the world, people have to sit with each other and talk. That is also an indication of sovereignty, if people are sitting across and talking he is talking of equality. You and me are talking about equality, neither my sovereignty is gone, neither yours.

PC: Now you have to fight two battles, outside the boundary of India, and one inside the boundary with Kejriwal type of people, then there , America, Pakistan.

SK: On one hand you are talking of President Obama and President Karzai and where are you talking about Kejriwal.

PC: Kejriwal can spoil your politics, they can spoil your economic system

SK: Sometimes a mosquito bites, one feels irritation, but this does not mean that a person is reading a book, speaking to somehow, doing some work he will leave that and run behind the mosquito, that will be wrong.

PC:You mean you just get minor irritation.

SK: I used to, now don’t even get that

PC: Thank you for coming to our show

SK: Thank you, Prabhuji!