Where do the talks stand now?
Nawaz Sharif and I.K. Gujral have met several times—in Male, in New York and most recently in Edinburgh—but we seem to be at the same position on the two main issues, the security aspect and Kashmir. Unless there is progress on that, the others are just peripheral issues.
What is the problem?
I would say the Indian leadership should look at it realistically, it should take history and geography into view.
What do you want and what does the Indian government say? How do you interpret the agreement signed in June?
It is a dispute. For the Indians to say there is no dispute and to have fought two wars, and in one they just got away with it in 1965, anything can happen.
But India does not deny that it is a dispute. The problem is over the interpretation of all those clauses—working group, etc. How do you see the problem?
Once we get the working group going and discuss this issue, then I think we can make progress...