India’s response to Doklam more reasonable than China’s: Ex-White House official to India Today
Exclusive interview with Joshua White, former White House chief
Joshua White has been a member of the White House as a consultant and director of South Asian Affairs on the National Security Council in the Obama administration. He is currently associate professor of education in South Asia at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies.
Question. There was an increase in terror from Pakistan. In your experience, what is the importance of the State in supporting terrorist organizations and terrorism?
Years. We are concerned about the series of attacks we have seen in Pathankot, Gurdaspur and then Uri and we are very sympathetic with what India has to do in this regard.
Each of these attacks was attributed to groups operating in Pakistan and it was the evolution of the US position that I fully support that, at the end of the day, we believe that if these attacks can be assigned to groups based in Pakistan, Pakistan Is in what is perhaps to blame for these attacks may not be for their active participation, as it is unclear whether some parts of the official establishment were involved, but Pakistan’s continued failure to cope with these groups to limit its operations, Force their fundraising, their public activities if Pakistan has any responsibility for the behavior of these groups and has been changing the US position, regardless of what we think direct direct complicity.
Question. The appointment of Syed Salahuddin was a great diplomatic victory for India, but the measure was rejected by Pakistan and Salahuddin was hailed as a freedom fighter. What do you do in Pakistan openly support global terrorism?
Years. It is unacceptable. I have greatly supported the designation of the United States in this regard. The United States has called on Pakistan to restrict the activities of these groups, but also to force its public space, its demonstrations, its meetings, its public spaces and work to delegitimize these groups.
My experience in Pakistan was that every time the Pakistani government really wants to deal with a problem group, it finds a way to do that and often starts delegitimizing sending a message that these groups are not acceptable, that their activities and their meetings Are not acceptable.
These are the types of messages we have not seen from Pakistan on targeted groups in Kashmir in Lashkar-e-Taiba, a number of other groups.
This leads us to think that, despite the rhetoric, they are not however serious in limiting these groups and treating them substantially.