Chandigarh, July 3 (IANS) Congress leader Manish Tewari on Friday reiterated Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s statement regarding the Indus Water Treaty (IWT) following the deadly Pahalgam terror attack last year, saying “Blood and water can’t flow together”.

His response came after the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) on Friday reminded Pakistan that the IWT will remain in abeyance until it stops backing cross-border terrorism.

“India’s position on the Indus Waters Treaty is consistent. IWT stands in abeyance in response to Pakistan’s continued sponsorship of cross-border terrorism. Pakistan must credibly and irrevocably abjure its support for cross-border terrorism,” MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal told reporters.

Speaking to IANS, Manish Tewari said: “From 1993 till today, two parliamentary resolutions have been passed—in 1994 and in 2013. Following India’s action against Pakistan in May last year, resulting from the Pahalgam terror attack, the all-party delegations went to various countries, stating that Pakistan sponsors terrorism and that terrorism and dialogue cannot go together.”

“Blood and water cannot flow together. So, there is a common consent regarding it in the country, which should be maintained by the government,” he asserted.

Meanwhile, responding to questions over the alleged embezzlement of funds at Ayodhya’s Ram Temple, the Congress leader backed party MP KC Venugopal’s letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, seeking a Supreme Court-monitored probe.

“The reality is that the alleged embezzlement did take place there, and it should be investigated impartially because it is a matter connected to people’s faith. The birthplace of Ram Lalla has its own sanctity, and while preserving that sanctity and respecting the sentiments of millions of people associated with it, an impartial Supreme Court-monitored probe should be conducted into whatever has taken place,” he said.

When asked about the implementation of the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) in BJP-ruled states, Tewari said: “There is a difference between Uniform Civil Code and Common Civil Code. The Constitution mentions the former. The last time this issue was discussed, when the Union government tried to take some initiative, it had itself said that minorities and Scheduled Tribes would be kept outside its ambit.”

“So when a large section of society, like the Scheduled Tribes and ethnic minorities, who have their own customary laws…when they will be kept out, then how is it called the Uniform Civil Code. It is a delusion,” he remarked.

–IANS

cg/uk