NEW DELHI, 28 April 2008 — Seldom has any head of state's India visit aroused so much diplomatic controversy as the impending trip of Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad here tomorrow. Since it is not a state visit, "no official programs are slated, nor would there be any agreements signed. But it would provide both the Indian prime minister and the Iranian president an opportunity to exchange views on various international and bilateral matters," sources said.
The visit has been planned at short notice, following a request from Iran for the president's plane to make a refueling stop on a flight home from Sri Lanka. India took little time in giving its nod and moving on to turn the routine refueling stop into an official visit of the Iranian president. Earlier, it was supposed to be a six-hour stopover, now the Iranian delegation is expected to arrive here tomorrow evening and wrap up the visit on Wednesday.
During his short stay, Ahmadinejad is expected to meet President Pratibha Patil and have talks with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.
This would be Ahmadinejad's first visit to India. The last Iranian president to visit India was Mohammad Khatami as the chief guest at the Republic Day parade in 2003. The last Indian prime minister to visit Teheran was Atal Behari Vajpayee in 2001.
The visit, however, took a controversial turn after a US comment last week that Washington hoped India "would call on (Ahmadinejad) to meet the requirements that the Security Council and the international community has placed on him in terms of suspending their uranium enrichment activities and complying with the other requirements regarding their nuclear program."
The US comment raised a storm in the Indian Parliament with leftist leaders condemning it as "audacious" and "arrogant." They also demanded that the foreign minister summon US Ambassador David Mulford to convey India's "strong displeasure." Asserting that India is not under any obligation to take decisions on Iran's nuclear program, External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee said: "It is not for me or for Iran to certify... it is for the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) to convince themselves whether (Tehran's program) is peaceful.
"We are advising Iran that since it is a signatory of NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty), it has some obligation to international treaties. We tell the US, do not take on yourself the responsibility whether Iran was manufacturing weapons or not. Leave it to the IAEA, the designated authority."
Earlier, the official spokesperson of the External Affairs Ministry said: "India and Iran are ancient civilizations whose relations span centuries. Both nations are perfectly capable of managing all aspects of their relationship with the appropriate degree of care and attention... Neither country needs any guidance on the future conduct of bilateral relations as both countries believe that engagement and dialogue alone lead to peace."
Stunned by the strong reaction from India, the United States took prompt steps to defuse the situation. Richard Boucher, assistant secretary of state for South and Central Asia, said the US had only stated its policy by making the suggestion to New Delhi regarding Tehran. "I don't think it was pointing a finger at India. I don't think it's as big an issue as it's made out to be. It is up to every country to determine for itself how it's going to organize its bilateral relations," Boucher said.
