Speech at the United Nations University Tokyo on 29 May 2002 at the International Conference on South Asia  Mr. Chairman, Distinguished speakers, Ladies and Gentlemen, May I compliment the UNU, specially Dr. Ramesh Thakur, an eminent scholar himself, for assembling in this forum many internationally acclaimed academics and foreign policy experts for an extremely useful and timely discussion of issue in South Asia. The discussions were honest, free and unrestrained. I would just pick up two themes for my concluding remarks - the India-Pakistan relations and the issue of terrorism. In Pakistan’s own interest, as well as in that of regional peace and stability President Musharraf has taken some bold and far-reaching steps against religious militancy and forces of extremism in the country. There is a paradigm shift underway in Pakistan. He assured the international community in a major speech last night that Pakistan was not involved in any infiltration into Kashmir and condemned unequivocally terrorist acts there. Earlier, the National Security Council and the Cabinet on May 23rd, reiterated President’s assurances of January 12 and categorically stated that Pakistani territory or any territory whose defence was the responsibility of Pakistan would not be used for terrorism. Nobody in Pakistan would be allowed to carry out terrorism in the name of Kashmir. Any seminal changes in a nation’s history start with ideas translated into words and then deeds and the consequences. It is a process not an event. It is not an issue of deadlines or ultimatum. President Musharraf has already come a long way. Any other leader would have taken many years to travel the same distance. India must acknowledge it and help the process of change along because forces of extremism, whether in India or Pakistan, are a common enemy of both the countries. India talks of cross border terrorism. This is a misnomer. Terrorism has no borders. Just as Pakistan is coming to terms with many of its own internal realities, India has to do the same instead of remaining in a constant denial mode. The dispute about Kashmir is real. History is a witness to it. India is attempting to re-write the history by claiming that Kashmir is its integral part. If it really were an integral part of it, would India have needed three quarter million soldiers to back it. India must acknowledge the contribution that its own repression in Kashmir has made to the rise of violence. Violence breeds violence. A speaker mentioned that the problem is India aspires to be a dominant power in the region but does not have military power to have this claim validated. But he went on to suggest that Pakistan should stop denying this right to India and if it did so there would be peace and stability in the region. Instead I would ask why does India not try to accept the limitations of power and seek peaceful and good neighbourly relations with the countries in the region? Her unrealisable big power ambition is at the heart of tensions in the region. India refuses to talk to Pakistan and has instead opted for a coercive diplomacy and military solution to the problems. It is opposed to big power involvement in the region. But the fact is in a globalizing world India cannot hope to keep great powers out of the region. It is time for India to assess whether such a policy is sustainable and whether there are not alternative ways, such as cooperative inter-state relations of stabilizing the Sub-Continent. Pakistan would never accept any country’s dominance. We need serious diplomacy, where the two countries could sit down and discuss each other’s differences. India talks about cross border terrorism. We talk about freedom struggle and state terrorism in Kashmir. India describes anything that happens in Kashmir as terrorism and blames Pakistan. These are issues on which we obviously disagree. We need to enter into a process of interaction and negotiations in which it may eventually become possible to address and solve the issues on which we dispute and differ very substantially. President Musharraf genuinely seeks normalization of relations with India on the basis of principled resolution of the Kashmir dispute. He recognizes that the present positions of India and Pakistan on this issue are almost mutually exclusive and that it will take considerable time to narrow differences sufficiently for visible progress towards a mutually acceptable settlement possible. He does not say that Kashmir is the only issue between the two countries. He does, however, say it is the most important issue and he is prepared simultaneously to discuss any other issue that India may wish to raise. But avoidance of dialogue is only strengthening suspicions in Pakistan that India is not interested in a peaceful solution but in dictating the solution, taking advantage of the current international sentiments against terrorism. Tempted by the possibility of seeking larger political and strategic objective, including settlement of Kashmir on its terms, the entire relationship between India and Pakistan has been translated by India into one word, “terrorism”. This will not be sustainable. Present posture of India is making very hard for the government of Pakistan to make any concessions that it seeks from Pakistan. Give and take is possible only through dialogue. The reliance on military solution remains dangerous specially for two nuclearized powers. We must try to avoid a conflict. It will be disastrous for us and for the rest of the world. I end on a personal note. Let me point out that it is amazing how in a span of about last three years the India-Pakistan relations have, with remarkable unpredictability, rotated in and out of conciliation and confrontation. Of course, I refer to the bus diplomacy, Kargil, Agra and the present tensions. Rarely in recent history, picture of relations between any two countries could reverse so dramatically. This enigma could be explained in many different ways but let me put a positive interpretation on it. I would say that the leadership of the two countries is perhaps still capable, and even desirous, to search for peace, and release their countries’ very considerable human development and quality of life potential in pursuit of a shared and achievable aspiration to make South Asia a 21st Century success. They owe it not only to their own peoples but also to the humanity.