COVER STORY

'Fernandes could have helped avoid controversy'

The A.B. Vajpayee-led caretaker government's handling of the crisis in the Kargil sector has come under fire from Opposition parties. In particular, it has been assailed for its complacency in the face of Pakistan's attempts to violate the Line of Contro l (LoC) in Jammu and Kashmir. In an interview with V. Venkatesan, Bharatiya Janata Party vice-president Jana Krishnamurthy defends the government's actions before and during the crisis. Excerpts:

The BJP-led government's handling of the Kargil crisis has given rise to a controversy over its apparent failure to stop the Pakistani aggression across the LoC. What led to the current crisis?

To me it appears that whatever has now happened in Kargil is in line with what has been happening in Kashmir all these years. In a sense, it is only a continuation of our earlier experiences. It has been clarified that ever since the Simla Agreement was signed, neither side has tried to occupy any space across the LoC in this particular sector (Kargil) during winter. When the winter ends, the Indian troops move back to their posts nearer to the LoC. This year the Indian defence forces had no indication that something different would happen. Hence, to accuse somebody of having been lax in their vigil in the area is improper.

VINO JOHN

It is another thing to argue that although a particular type of situation has prevailed in this sector for the past 28 years, our intelligence wing should have continued to keep a vigil. Our defence forces have taken note of this. They are now planning t o have advanced, technologically-improved surveillance arrangements to keep vigil along the LoC.

The Border Security Force had sounded a warning about possible infiltration across the border as early as January. In October 1998, the Ministry of Defence too had information suggesting that Pakistan would launch an offensive in April in the Kargil a rea.

We did not have any such information. If there was a lapse on anybody's part, the truth will come out after the present mission is accomplished. But keeping in mind what little I know of our defence forces, I am not prepared to accept that anyone would h ave disregarded any vital, definite information about the intrusion from any source. That is why I said that there has to be a discussion on all these matters after the present issue is settled. It will be at that time that responsibility will be fixed. The Prime Minister has rightly stated that the government has taken full responsibility for the crisis. This is not the time to find fault with anyone or accuse those at the helm of affairs.

For example, the attack on Defence Minister George Fernandes seems to be totally unwarranted. He had stated that the Pakistan Prime Minister seemed to be unaware of the preparations made by the Pakistan Army for aggression against India. We now find that the telephonic conversation between the two top army officers of Pakistan reveals exactly this. Therefore, I request the people of India and the Opposition to refrain from attacking the government in this context, until the matter is settled successfull y. We know that our opponents (in India) will try to make an issue of these events during the election campaign. Then it will be our turn to expose our opponents' double standards. However, George Fernandes could have refrained from making such comments. He could have helped avoid unnecessary controversy, when the entire country's attention is focussed on Kargil. But it is a fact that in Pakistan, the Army has the upper hand in the country's politics.

Fernandes reportedly advocated "safe passage" for the Pakistani intruders.

It has been totally misunderstood. Perhaps Fernandes wanted to say that if, during the talks between India and Pakistan, the Pakistani representatives admit that they have illegally intruded into Indian territory and crossed the LoC and promise to withdr aw beyond the LoC to their side, then India could allow these intruders to go back to Pakistan. Anticipating this, perhaps Fernandes would have meant to say that it (safe passage) would be considered. In diplomacy, considering something does not mean con ceding it.

Does the BJP consider unpatriotic people who are critical of the government's role in the Kargil crisis?

No responsible person in our party has said so. Any government has to have the freedom to take steps to meet a given situation. The opposition should convince the people that they too are responsible parties. They should extend full cooperation to the go vernment. There may be disagreements over the effectiveness of the government in handling the episode, but the Opposition parties should take it up after the contingency ceases to exist.

Why is the government unwilling to call an emergency session of the Rajya Sabha as demanded by some Opposition parties?

It is not a demand made with good intentions. It is obvious that the ruling coalition is a minority in the Rajya Sabha. The Opposition wants to settle political scores in the forum when the nation is poised for a mid-term poll. The motive behind the dema nd is suspect. The heavens are not going to fall if the discussion on the government's role in the crisis is delayed by a few months.

How effective has Pokhran-II been in ensuring our security and territorial integrity? The Pakistani aggression in the Kargil sector has shown that Pokhran-II has not been able to prevent aggression on India.

Pokhran-II was in line with our National Agenda for Governance. It led to a new-found self-confidence. However, the lapses on the part of our defence forces have been accumulated over the past several years, under previous governments, whereas this gover nment was racing against time. However, we have pledged that we will not make first use of nuclear weapons. The government will exercise the option only if the situation warrants it.

Was it proper to ask the Deputy Director General of Military Operations to brief the BJP's National Executive?

It is necessary to educate our partymen about the Kargil crisis. We called an emergency meeting of our party's National Executive a day after the all-party meeting. We requested the Defence Minister to depute someone from the Ministry to explain to our N ational Executive members the army action in Kargil. It was necessary to educate members of the National Executive first, so that they can explain to the party cadres in their respective States. At the all-party meeting held before our National Executive meeting, a similar briefing by army personnel took place. Our party president Kushabhau Thakre told the members of the National Executive that they should listen to the army briefing without asking questions. If other parties request the Defence Ministe r to organise separate briefings for their partymen, such requests will also be accepted.

Should the diplomatic effort to solve the crisis continue after the brutal killing of six of our defence personnel by the Pakistan Army?

Our efforts for peace should continue. But Pakistan should be made aware that there shall be no compromise regarding any part of territory. The Kargil episode has exposed Pakistan to the world community. Now the world has a clear understanding that the P akistan Prime Minister is kept in the dark by the country's army on an important issue like relations with its neighbour. This is the first time that many countries, including the United States, have come to realise that Pakistan is in the wrong. They wi ll exert pressure on Pakistan to stop the aggression. This will open the eyes of the intelligentsia in Pakistan. The spirit of the Lahore Declaration will remain. Pakistan has to see reason and stick to the Lahore Declaration.

What will be the domestic political fallout of the Kargil crisis?

The Kargil crisis will be successfully concluded before the elections in September. We will give the credit for our victory to our armed forces and to the people of this country. But if our opponents try to attack us for the steps taken by the government during the crisis, the BJP will definitely retaliate with sound arguments. It will be for the people to decide. If the Opposition is bent upon making it an election issue, we will not shy away.

What is the preliminary lesson that could be drawn from the Kargil crisis?

Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. This should always be kept in mind.