Stressing that Indians doing reconstruction in Afghanistan are soft targets for terrorists, the external affairs minister, Mr S.M. Krishna, has indicated that the February 26 attack in Kabul that killed seven Indians was the work of Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Tayyaba.
Denying that India was being marginalised in the emerging US strategy in Afghanistan at Pakistan’s behest, Mr Krishna said in an interview that the US had never asked New Delhi “directly or indirectly” to reduce its presence in the violence-torn country.
“We have in our interactions with the US administration at various levels not got the impression that the US is trying to convey directly or indirectly to the Indian government that our presence in Afghanistan should be minimised,” Krishna said.
“We have absolutely no evidence otherwise. I think it has been the handiwork of those forces who are out to see that the relationship between India and Afghanistan is jeopardised,” Mr Krishna said on Sunday.
He was replying to a question on whether the attack on Indians was the work of LeT.
“It is for everyone to see that the network that you find operating from the soil of Pakistan — the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba, the other terrorist outfits and all — they are fused both ideologically and operationally,” he said.
“They cannot come to any other conclusion other than to accept that it was the handiwork of these terrorist organisations,” Mr Krishna said, when asked if the US has accepted that the Kabul attack was perpetrated by the LeT.
Mr Krishna stressed that Indian aid workers in Kabul have become “soft targets” for terrorists. The minister added that there was a warning that Indian missions and volunteers on humanitarian work “are going to be under attack because what India has been doing in Afghanistan is the visible symbol of what India intends to do in building up Afghanistan.
“The Indians who have gone there to Afghanistan on humanitarian purposes are unarmed. So, naturally they become easy targets, soft targets,” Mr Krishna said. The Indian government was taking “some additional measures”, for their protection, he said.
0 comments:
Post a Comment