New Delhi:
The blast at Pune's German Bakery on Saturday gave India a horrific sense of déjà vu - 15 months after 26/11 - making it that much tougher for the Government to defend its decision to go ahead with the India-Pakistan talks as planned.
Underlining the tragedy, is the chilling fact that almost all the victims were in the their twenties - young lives snatched away by senseless terror.
Top leaders of the UPA went into a huddle on Monday evening to discuss the strategic and political aftermath. For the moment, the Government says talks with Pakistan scheduled for the end of the month will go ahead. At the high level meeting, which included a detailed briefing by the Home Minister on the Pune attack, the Government decided to instead put more pressure on Pakistan regarding terrorist activities in the country. (Read: Pune conspiracy: Lashkar plan implemented by Mujahideen?)
But can terror and talks co exist? That seems to be the dilemma before the Congress.
Online videos of what some have billed as a Jehadi Mela - different rallies to mark what Pakistan calls Kashmir Solidarity Day - only harden public opinion against talks. The provocative video shows Jamat-ud-Dawa chief Hafiz Saeed and his deputy Abdur Rehman Makki issuing an ugly and ominous warning of impending bloodshed: "At one time, jihadis were interested only in the liberation of Kashmir. But the water issue had ensured that Delhi, Pune and Kanpur were all fair targets." (Read: Jihadi speech in Pak mentioned Pune 'attack')
A recent inflammatory speech by Pakistan's Foreign Minister adds to the uncomfortable situation created by recent reports that David Headley has told investigators that a serving ISI officer was in the control room during the 26/11 strikes.
Here's an excerpt from Union Home Minister P Chidambaram's chat with NDTV's Barkha Dutt on September 7, 2009.
Barkha: You referred to Hafiz Saeed being accompanied by a Major General Sahib. Is it the assessment of the Home Ministry that this was a serving officer of the Pakistani Army?
Chidambaram: We dont know.
Barkha: It could be.
Chidambaram: It could be serving, it could be retired.
Barkha: But definitely an army officer? Or is it just a name, a nick name?
Chidambaram: Very unlikely. He should have been a Major General at some time.
Barkha: But doesn't that concern you more, because that is then directly finding some kind of link to someone, who at some point in time according to you, was part of the Pakistani Army?
Chidambaram: That can only be revealed by the investigation. We have never ruled out state actors, although Pakistan has always maintained that there are only non-state actors involved. We have never accepted this distinction between state actors and non-state actors as both operate from Pakistan soil.
But sources have told NDTV that the Prime Minister and his new National Security Advisor believe that not talking only strengthens the terrorists, instead of weakening them.
The aim, say sources in the Prime Minister's office, is to keep the focus on terrorism. These talks are not a resumption of the composite dialogue, but a mechanism to voice India's concerns - and not talking would be to allow the terrorists to derail peace.
But can the government carry along public opinion and its own party? Publicly, the Congress says its backing the Government.
"The Government in its wisdom has taken a decision to talk on February 25, and we are not opposing the talks. Whatever decision the Government takes, we will welcome it," said party spokesperson Shakeel Ahmed.
But privately, senior congressmen admit that talks with Pakistan are a gamble, and the path to dialogue could be littered with political landmines.
Underlining the tragedy, is the chilling fact that almost all the victims were in the their twenties - young lives snatched away by senseless terror.
Top leaders of the UPA went into a huddle on Monday evening to discuss the strategic and political aftermath. For the moment, the Government says talks with Pakistan scheduled for the end of the month will go ahead. At the high level meeting, which included a detailed briefing by the Home Minister on the Pune attack, the Government decided to instead put more pressure on Pakistan regarding terrorist activities in the country. (Read: Pune conspiracy: Lashkar plan implemented by Mujahideen?)
But can terror and talks co exist? That seems to be the dilemma before the Congress.
Online videos of what some have billed as a Jehadi Mela - different rallies to mark what Pakistan calls Kashmir Solidarity Day - only harden public opinion against talks. The provocative video shows Jamat-ud-Dawa chief Hafiz Saeed and his deputy Abdur Rehman Makki issuing an ugly and ominous warning of impending bloodshed: "At one time, jihadis were interested only in the liberation of Kashmir. But the water issue had ensured that Delhi, Pune and Kanpur were all fair targets." (Read: Jihadi speech in Pak mentioned Pune 'attack')
A recent inflammatory speech by Pakistan's Foreign Minister adds to the uncomfortable situation created by recent reports that David Headley has told investigators that a serving ISI officer was in the control room during the 26/11 strikes.
Here's an excerpt from Union Home Minister P Chidambaram's chat with NDTV's Barkha Dutt on September 7, 2009.
Barkha: You referred to Hafiz Saeed being accompanied by a Major General Sahib. Is it the assessment of the Home Ministry that this was a serving officer of the Pakistani Army?
Chidambaram: We dont know.
Barkha: It could be.
Chidambaram: It could be serving, it could be retired.
Barkha: But definitely an army officer? Or is it just a name, a nick name?
Chidambaram: Very unlikely. He should have been a Major General at some time.
Barkha: But doesn't that concern you more, because that is then directly finding some kind of link to someone, who at some point in time according to you, was part of the Pakistani Army?
Chidambaram: That can only be revealed by the investigation. We have never ruled out state actors, although Pakistan has always maintained that there are only non-state actors involved. We have never accepted this distinction between state actors and non-state actors as both operate from Pakistan soil.
But sources have told NDTV that the Prime Minister and his new National Security Advisor believe that not talking only strengthens the terrorists, instead of weakening them.
The aim, say sources in the Prime Minister's office, is to keep the focus on terrorism. These talks are not a resumption of the composite dialogue, but a mechanism to voice India's concerns - and not talking would be to allow the terrorists to derail peace.
But can the government carry along public opinion and its own party? Publicly, the Congress says its backing the Government.
"The Government in its wisdom has taken a decision to talk on February 25, and we are not opposing the talks. Whatever decision the Government takes, we will welcome it," said party spokesperson Shakeel Ahmed.
But privately, senior congressmen admit that talks with Pakistan are a gamble, and the path to dialogue could be littered with political landmines.
Track Latest News Live on NDTV.com and get news updates from India and around the world
