Editorial: Jumping the gun on Indian ‘dossier’

Pakistan’s high commissioner to the UK, Mr Wajid Shamsul Hassan, told an Indian TV channel on Friday that Pakistani investigation into the Mumbai attacks has shown that they were “not planned in Pakistan”. The high commissioner said that “Ajmal Kasab’s nationality did not necessarily prove the hand of Pakistan in the attacks”. This, under international law is correct since the criminality of a state’s national does not make the state either culpable or complicit. While admitting that the investigation was still not final, the high commissioner insisted that Pakistan’s examination of the Indian dossier would show its “non-involvement” in the attacks. He also “questioned the veracity of the Indian information”.

For his part Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi told the press that Pakistan’s high commissioner in India had informed the government there that Pakistan’s investigation was in its final stages and its results would soon be presented to New Delhi. Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani also stated in Davos that “Pakistan is still investigating the Mumbai terror attacks”, and “we will share our findings with the world”. Then, when asked about high commissioner Hassan’s comments, he said, “The diplomat has spoken too soon”.

On the Indian side, Foreign Minister Mr Pranab Mukherjee once again complained that Pakistan was relying on the media to communicate with New Delhi and not using the “official” channel. Twice in a matter of weeks, Mr Gilani has had to deal with people in his administration who jumped the gun on decisions to be made at the highest level. High Commissioner Hassan could have waited to see the final shape in which Pakistan formulated its comment on the India “dossier”.

Pakistan’s comment when it comes will be restricted to the Indian dossier. What if Pakistan’s conclusion that the Mumbai attack was planned outside Pakistan is contingent because Pakistan is unable to adduce new evidence to prove that the planning was done outside Pakistan? (Mr Hassan was glad it was done neither in Pakistan nor the UK!)

Already the discussion of the Mumbai attack has become muddied because of the nature of India-Pakistan relations and the technical difference between evidence and information. India’s veiled and not-so-veiled threats to use force also did much damage, forcing Pakistan to harden its stance. Nonetheless, Pakistan has taken steps necessary to address the issue including accepting that Kasab was indeed from Pakistan. At this stage both sides need to refrain from taking positions that could throw them back to square one. Simultaneously there is need for India to accept that cooperation cannot be a narrow agenda but must include the broader spectrum of relations and the disputes that remain unresolved.