Mushahid Hussain

Mushahid Hussain, the secretary-general of Pervez Musharraf’s Pakistan Muslim League (Q), and the chairman of the Senate’s foreign relations committee, is one of Pakistan’s better-known political faces in India. A one-time journalist, he has written columns for several Indian newspapers and journals, including The Telegraph.

Hussain became a full-time politician during Nawaz Sharif’s premiership and later joined Musharraf’s political team. Earlier this year, he was among those who contested the presidential election. He is the first politician from across the border to visit India after the Mumbai terror attacks.

In New Delhi to participate in a peace conference focused on South Asia, Hussain had a chat with Jayanth Jacob on the fallout of the terror strikes on bilateral ties.

He said both Pakistan and India should stop running to the US and the West for sorting out their problems. Noting it was a war of words that is being waged now, he said the tension was being defused diplomatically.

Hussain said the civilian authority in Pakistan means political supremacy over the army and the ISI. He said India should hand over evidence to Pakistan on the attacks to help it complete the investigations.

Excerpts from the interview:

Q: What do you make out of the current stand-off between India and Pakistan over the Mumbai terror strikes? Are you ruling out India exercising a military option?

A: Well, now it’s a war of words between the two countries more than anything else. I think the tension is being defused diplomatically. I am happy to note that India has recognised the importance of the UN on the issue of the ban on the Jamaat-ud-Dawa. And we hope the same attitude will be there to the UN resolution on Kashmir, which is some 50-plus years old. Terrorism is a common threat to both countries. There was the Marriott attack before Mumbai, and there was a blast in Peshawar after Mumbai.

Q: So, the pressure from the US is working on Pakistan. What do you think the role of the US will be in defusing this tension, considering the slew of high-profile US visits to Islamabad and New Delhi starting with secretary of state Condoleezza Rice?

A: Starting with Kargil, whenever there has been a problem or tension between the two countries, they have run to the US. After the Indian Parliament attack and now in the aftermath of the Mumbai attacks, it is the same situation.

Why can’t these two South Asian neighbours sort out their issues on their own? India says it shared the evidence with the Americans, the Germans, etc. Why this affinity to the “gora” people? Let us address the issue of terrorism together. Pakistan suggested a joint probe headed by the national security advisers of both countries. But the suggestion was not heeded to by India.

Q: Doesn’t India have reasons to be wary of trusting Pakistan? In the past the evidence shared at joint anti-terror mechanism meetings or the demand of getting people who are wanted in India and based in Pakistan didn’t get any results. This time, you have a Pakistani national caught alive for the incident, and your media, too, say he is from Pakistan.

A: The reports said this person in question was not at his home for many years. Then, shouldn’t India hand over evidence to Pakistan for taking the probe further? You had Maulana Azhar in your jail for three long years, and you did nothing for expediting his trial. Even on the Parliament attack case verdict, we can put a question mark. In India, there is a Pakistan link and targeting Muslims over any terrorist attacks. In the Mumbai case, if the evidence is so overwhelming, why doesn’t India share the same with Pakistan to take the probe further?

Q:When Pakistan says an armed conflict with India means moving troops from the Afghanistan border, many would see it as a blackmail tactic aimed at the West (52,000 Nato forces are waging a war on terror in Afghanistan).

A: Well, it’s a strategy Pakistan has to use. You can’t fight wars on two fronts, and anyone who knows military strategy can understand that. Let us talk about peace with a smile. I have come here to talk about peace.

Q:How serious is the crackdown on the Jamaat-ud-Dawa? Many here believe Pakistan does such things half-heartedly. For example, the Lashkar-e-Toiba could park its money elsewhere before the ban and the freeze on its accounts happened only after the Parliament attack.

A: Pakistan is taking action. And you have seen the action against the Jamaat-ud-Dawa. But the key point here is why is India unwilling to co-operate with Pakistan to get the probe into the Mumbai attacks go further by sharing evidence.

Q: Considering these people and organisations the Pakistan government is taking action against are very powerful in your country, how far will the civilian government go before the ISI or the army exerts some pressure against these moves?

A: The civilian authority in Pakistan includes the army and the ISI. There is political supremacy over the institutions. There is a democratically elected government in Pakistan. And also I am not from the government and I belong to the Opposition party.

Q: How do you see the media coverage about the situation in both countries?

A: I was a journalist before I became a politician. So I understand their pressure and compunctions. Whenever I was faced with questions, including the war cry, from some Indian media, I answered with a smile (I think I was the only one who was smiling while answering any such question). But it would be better if media follow some guidelines on reporting such incidents and tensions.