06 September 2001
Text: Ambassador Blackwill on Shared US-India National Interests
(Says Bush admin. seeks unprecedented engagement with India) (6350)
U.S. Ambassador to India Robert Blackwill said the Bush Administration
plans to work "more intensely than ever before" on a broad range of
shared national interests between the US and India.
Addressing the Indo-American Chamber of Commerce (IACC) and the
Indo-American Society (IAS) in Mumbai September 6, Blackwill said,
"US-India relations will stand on their own during the Bush
Administration. They will not be directed against any third party."
The ambassador said the Bush Administration will "speak to our Indian
colleagues with honesty and candor about Administration judgments
regarding the policy alternatives being considered by the Government
of India for US-India relations, the region, and the world."
Blackwill said areas where the Bush Administration would like to see
"more intense" cooperation include fighting international terrorism;
greater military collaboration, especially in military sales and
technology; safeguarding the flow of oil and gas from the Middle East;
and climate change.
Blackwill stated that in order to promote shared US-India interests,
both countries need "high and sustained rates of economic growth...."
Blackwill said that the Bush Administration hopes that India will
continue its progress on economic reform and the dismantling of trade
barriers.
Blackwill said the Bush Administration is pleased with its "common
ground" with India on nuclear issues, including opposing nuclear
proliferation, reducing nuclear forces, and pursuing the creation a
new nuclear framework.
Regarding South Asia, the ambassador emphasized India's significant
role in "helping secure stable, peaceful conditions" and said the US
applauded the Indian Government's decision to "reinitiate
India-Pakistan talks at the Agra summit." He stated that "sustained
engagement at a senior level between India and Pakistan is essential."
On US economic sanctions against India, Blackwill stated that the Bush
Administration "will continue to consult with Congress on the waiver
of the 1998 sanctions." He said that the Bush Administration "wants to
be sure that no step it takes with respect to India and sanctions
undermines the global non-proliferation regime."
Following is the text of the Blackwill speech:
(begin text)
The Future of US-India Relations
Ambassador Robert D. Blackwill
September 6, 2001
Mumbai, India
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I am honored to be here today. It has been a remarkable journey,
actually two remarkable journeys: one which brought me from my roots
in my family's small farming community in Kansas (picture 1), through
two years in Africa as a Peace Corps Volunteer, to a 22-year career in
diplomatic service and stints at the White House, to fifteen years as
a Professor and Dean at Harvard University, to almost two years
working on George W. Bush's campaign, to New Delhi and 12 million new
neighbors. What a wonderful ride.
And the second journey, by train, from the ancient lands of Rajasthan
(picture 2), through the farmlands of Gujarat, to the cultural and
commercial capital of Ahmedabad and the devastated landscape of Bhuj,
arriving finally four days later -- in this exhilarating city, the
economic powerhouse of India. After this journey of 2,400 kilometers,
encompassing 4 languages and numerous dialects, but traversing only
three of India's 28 states, I have an inkling of just how many
different faces of India remain for me to experience, study, and
enjoy.
After speaking to the subject of "Bush Administration Foreign Policy"
in New Delhi on Monday, I am pleased to be here in Mumbai to present
my first major address on US-India relations to the distinguished
members of the Indo-American Chamber of Commerce and the Indo-American
Society. Nawshir and Brian -- thank you for your warm words of
welcome.
I know that both the IACC and the IAS have a long history in Mumbai
and that those of you who have chosen to be members of these
organizations have a firm commitment to improving relations between
our two countries. In short, you believe that India and the United
States should be fast friends and international partners. I am here
today to tell you that President George W. Bush agrees with you.
A BIG IDEA
Ladies and Gentlemen,
President George W. Bush has a big idea about US-Indian relations.
My President's big idea is that by working together more intensely
than ever before, the United States and India, two vibrant
democracies, can transform fundamentally the very essence of our
bilateral relationship and thereby make the world freer, more
peaceful, and more prosperous.
As I stressed in New Delhi on Monday, President Bush does not intend
only to accelerate cooperation with India on purely bilateral matters,
although that will be important. He does not want his Administration
to engage more actively with the Indian government and people here
solely in the context of the challenges of Asia, although that too
will be consequential.
Rather, he is seeking to intensify collaboration with India on the
whole range of issues that currently confront the international
community writ large. In short, President Bush has a global approach
to US-India relations, consistent with the rise of India as a world
power.
If I may borrow a phrase from Dean Acheson, I was present at the
creation, or at least at one of the earlier expressions, of this big
idea when I worked for the President during his campaign, and
witnessed first-hand his respect for and fascination with India. As a
politician and as a graduate of the Harvard Business School, the
President thinks of long-term American national interests and values,
concrete operational objectives, and the necessary strategies to
further both. I said earlier this week in New Delhi, the President is
not interested in a limited overs approach.
And, unlike some of his former Yale University professors, he is not
particularly drawn to abstract academic theories. Those are also the
province of my former Harvard faculty colleagues. This is decidedly
not President George W. Bush's approach.
When I asked then Governor Bush in Austin, Texas, in early 1999 about
the reasons for his obvious and special interest in India, he
immediately responded, "a billion people in a functioning democracy.
Isn't that something? Isn't that something?" The concept of democratic
India, a billion-strong, heterogeneous, multilingual, secular, and --
in the words of Sunil Khilnani -- a "bridgehead of effervescent
liberty on the Asian continent" -- with its vibrant press and respect
for the rule of law, has powerful attraction for every American, and a
very particular appeal for this President.
Our shared heritage of pluralist federalism, born in a struggle
against colonialism, bestows America and India with a profound common
interest in seeing democracy flourish worldwide. History tells us that
democratic nations are less likely to go to war with one another, and
that mature democracies are more capable of weathering differences in
a bilateral relationship. The United States government may disagree
with this individual policy or that put forward by democratically
elected leaders abroad, but we respect and honor the fact that these
leaders base their pronouncements on the freely expressed will of the
people. How could it be otherwise?
Then Texas Governor Bush singled out democratic India in his November
1999 campaign address at the Ronald Reagan Library as "a force in the
world," a speech I was privileged to witness. After the election, the
Bush Administration moved quickly to intensify dramatically the level
of US engagement with the Government of India. Prime Minister
Vajpayee's invitation for President Bush to visit India was among the
first he received and one of the handful of bilateral invitations the
President has accepted. When I saw the President in the Oval Office
just before coming to India, he told me how much he is looking forward
to his visit to this country.
Similarly, the Prime Minister's upcoming meeting with the President at
the UN General Assembly was one of the first to be agreed upon. Since
I worked on the White House transition team, I can confirm that
Jaswant Singh was the first Foreign Minister scheduled to be invited
to Washington after the inauguration and, as you know, he had an
extended and unprecedented meeting with the President in the White
House.
In another indicative move, India was one of only a few nations to
which President Bush sent a personal high-level envoy, in this case
Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, to discuss the President's
new strategic framework. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General
Henry Shelton and US Trade Representative Robert Zoellick have also
already come here, listened, learned, and expressed US views on the
President's behalf.
The tempo of this US-India high-level interaction will not let up. In
addition to Indian policymakers who will go to Washington, the
following senior American officials are already scheduled or likely to
visit India in the period ahead:
Secretary of the Treasury Paul O'Neill, Secretary of State Colin
Powell, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, National Security
Adviser Condoleezza Rice, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz,
Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Kenneth Dam (he will be in India next
week and will visit Mumbai), Deputy Secretary of State Richard
Armitage, Assistant Secretary of State for South Asian Affairs
Christina Rocca, and Supreme Court Justices Sandra Day O'Connor and
Stephen Breyer (the Justices will also be arriving in India next week)
are among the US leaders who will be coming here. A half dozen
Undersecretaries from various agencies in the Bush Administration and
numerous senior military officers will join this stream of high-level
official visitors from Washington in the next several months. And we
are just getting started.
In sum, you will see under the Bush Administration a quality and
quantity of high-level US government interlocutors visiting India that
is unprecedented in our bilateral relationship. Gone are the
off-putting days of US-India consultations that most often occurred
outside of India -- on the fringes of multilateral meetings in Europe
(witness the frequent American aside, "I hope to see you at Davos") or
in the coffee shop at the United Nations, or on the margins of IMF and
World Bank meetings in Washington.
The President told me before I came to India that he wanted to get the
big relationships right, and India is certainly one of the big ones as
he sees it. Bush Administration senior policymakers will travel to
India in unprecedented numbers because the President has directed that
they do so, in the spirit of his big idea, and because they are eager
to learn more on the ground here about the range, the details and the
domestic, regional and global contexts of Indian perspectives and
opinion.
I want to stress that in pursuing this accelerating US-India dialogue,
America will not be a nagging nanny. I know of nobody who likes one of
those. Not among families. Not among nations. Thus, the Bush
Administration does not intend to lecture India on its national
interests. This is because my government does not presume to know
India's national interests better than the democratically elected
representatives of this country. India's choices must remain India's
choices.
What the Bush Presidency will do is to treat this country with the
greatest respect.
What we will do is speak to our Indian colleagues with honesty and
candor about Administration judgments regarding the policy
alternatives being considered by the Government of India for US-India
relations, the region, and the world.
What we will do is constantly solicit Indian views here, in
Washington, and in international fora about possible American policies
that will affect India, Asia, and, more broadly, the international
system.
Ladies and gentlemen, even as I speak to you today, this intensifying
diplomatic interchange is underway, and I am confident that it will
further accelerate in the weeks, months and years ahead.
LISTEN, LEARN, AND ACT IN CONCERT
When my close friend Bob Zoellick, the US Trade Representative,
visited New Delhi last month, he set a very high standard for future
US-Indian dialogue. He came to listen, to learn, to discuss, and to
try to identify common ground for Washington and New Delhi on an issue
of preeminent global importance -- the agenda for November's WTO
meeting in Doha and the future of the international trading system. I
believe Ambassador Zoellick succeeded in all four objectives.
We have to replicate this concerted discourse across the board in the
US-India relationship. Our two governments must get out of our
historical ruts of the past. We need to strive harder together to
produce a more substantive and sustained dialogue. Airy abstractions
and deflective discourse have no place in this new relationship.
Rather, substantial and candid exchanges on major regional and
international issues need to occur between the United States and
India, every day.
What are we going to talk about in all these bilateral exchanges? I
spoke at some length in my New Delhi speech on the subject of American
values and the transcendent connections between democratic nations.
This enduring democratic connection applies powerfully to the United
States and India, which, of course, was implicit throughout that
speech.
Today, let me primarily concentrate on an assessment of national
interests shared by our two countries, but begin with the burial of
some old international shibboleths that should no longer burden the
US-India relationship.
A FAREWELL TO OLD DOGMAS
In this new world in which we live, geography is less and less
destiny. Information technology, globalization and ballistic missiles
have seen to that. Many of the foreign policy dogmas of the past seem
like historical shards, whether they are bi-polar nuclear
confrontation; the globe divided conceptually into East versus West,
and North versus South; the false attractions of Soviet communism;
frontline states in the center of Europe armed-to-the-teeth; Bandung
style non-alignment; and India systemically absent from the
international head table.
In the Bush Administration's view, the irrelevance of these antiques
of the international system is all to the good, and represents
significant opportunities to propel the US-India relationship forward.
In fact, this new strategic paradigm still is sinking in. I saw a news
story on our bilateral relations a few weeks ago by the noted analyst,
C. Raja Mohan. Its headline read, "US, India on the Same Side." I was
waiting for someone to shout, "Stop the presses." If the United States
and India can together fundamentally redefine our relationship, such
headlines will no longer be a surprise, but an unexceptional
supposition. (As a former newspaper sports writer, I would guess that
Mr. Mohan did not write that headline.)
Within this contemporary -- and not Cold War -- international context,
and as I said earlier, President Bush is intent on cooperating with
India to address the entire range of global challenges. As the
President put it a few months ago to Ambassador Lalit Mansingh in
Washington, "After years of estrangement, India and the United States
together surrendered to reality. They recognized an unavoidable fact -
they are destined to have a qualitatively different and better
relationship than in the past."
As two large democracies in a globalized economic order, our
overlapping national interests, in my judgment, include -- at a
minimum -- economic reforms, liberalized trade and reducing poverty;
counter-terrorism; a new strategic framework; promotion of peace and
regional stability; energy security; and environmental protection. Let
me briefly address each of these in turn.
ECONOMIC REFORMS, TRADE AND REDUCING POVERTY
For a President who is both a Harvard Business School graduate and
Texas oilfield entrepreneur, the state of the international economy is
clearly a vital American interest. From my discussions here, the same
seems to be true of India. Today, the United States is India's largest
trading partner, with two-way trade in 2001 expected to exceed $14
billion; double what it was a decade ago. America is also the largest
cumulative investor in India, both in foreign direct investment
(approvals and actual inflows), and portfolio investment. According to
the American Chamber of Commerce, approximately 1000 US companies are
presently doing business in India, more than a fourteen-fold increase
over 1991. Nearly 40 percent of America's Fortune 500 companies now
outsource their software needs to Indian companies. Opportunities for
our two countries to expand collaboration in the knowledge-based
sector are vast.
Both India and the US need high and sustained rates of economic growth
in order to reach our domestic societal goals and promote our national
interests. With respect to India, the Bush Administration hopes that
the engine of economic reform and liberalization of trade is not
permitted to falter. While the United States is India's largest trade
partner, America's annual exports to India are stagnant at $3.7
billion, and foreign direct investment in India from all sources is
only a tenth the amount that is flowing to China.
As you well know, many multinational investors in the power sector are
facing serious problems, including those connected to the Dabhol power
plant here in Maharashtra. I want to be frank. These disputes have
darkened India's investment climate. I know this personally from
speaking with some of the premier American business executives with
major investments in Asia.
We look forward to an equitable solution among all the parties to this
issue soon. As Ambassador Zoellick told reporters while in India,
"capital is a coward" -- it seeks a home where the regulatory
environment is transparent, predictable and fair, and the political
and economic risks are reasonable.
While India has made significant progress in dismantling its trade
barriers over the last decade, the level of protection remains high.
In our view, India can be among the big economic winners if there is a
development-oriented trade round that brings down trade barriers in
both developed and developing countries. I had a good conversation on
this subject with Commerce Minister Maran, the day of his departure
for last week's informal trade Ministerial in Mexico. I emphasized the
Bush Administration's continuing desire that India join with us in
shaping the agenda for a new trade round. In the final analysis,
Indian economic statistics - of GDP growth, of foreign direct
investment, and of exports - will tell the government here whether it
is on the right track.
Not for a second do I imagine that second-generation Indian economic
reforms will be easy or painless. Yet many Indian entrepreneurs with
whom I have talked since arriving in this country believe that these
reforms are imperative and will, over time, bring India ever closer to
developed economy status, while substantially reducing the proportion
of India's population that lives in poverty.
The Bush Administration wants to be a partner with India in this
systemic economic transformation, through USAID programs that
currently reach those most vulnerable -- providing, for instance,
meals and basic health care to over 7 million women and children in 22
Indian states. US-India collaboration also extends to India's
securities and exchange board, where we have supplied technical
assistance for financial institutions' reform and expansion. As the
Mumbai business community well knows, this program has helped create a
transparent regulatory environment that not only has attracted foreign
investment to India, but also has assisted in mobilizing domestic
savings.
India's high technology sector offers a striking example of what the
people of this country can accomplish when private sector innovation
flourishes. Imagine Bangalore, Hyderabad, and Chennai multiplied
throughout this great land. Imagine if 60-70% of your IIT graduates
did not feel compelled to travel to the West to conduct innovative
research, reach their entrepreneurial potential, and satisfy their
desire for high-quality infrastructure and public services. Imagine if
Infosys were the norm, rather than the exception. What then could hold
India back?
Only India can decide.
COUNTER-TERRORISM
Both America and India have been the victims of international
terrorism, from the bombing of the World Trade Center to the December
1999 hijacking of Indian Airlines 814. All members of the US Mission,
Americans and Indians alike, are deeply appreciative of the Indian
security services' vigilance in protecting the American Embassy in New
Delhi, a vigilance which has been justifiably praised by the US State
Department.
My 87 year old Danish mother-in-law who is living with us at Roosevelt
House also has in this respect nothing but good things to say about
the New Delhi police. As she puts it, she is having a wonderful time
in India and does not want anything to spoil it.
The international terrorist Usama bin Laden calls for a holy war
against America and India in the same breath. Societies like ours that
are based on freedom, tolerance and the rule of law are a constant
repudiation of those who pursue their political objectives through
fanaticism, hatred and the murder of innocents. America and India have
never allowed the perpetrators of violence to undermine our democratic
values, and we never will. To soften our stand on terrorism is to
invite more killings.
There is a much broader and more intense anti-terrorism agenda that
the Bush Administration hopes the United States and India can take up
together in the context of our transformed bilateral relationship. We
have already embarked on that path. The US-India Joint Working Group
on Counter-Terrorism is rapidly expanding cooperation and dialogue
between government officials, agencies and the military. Our
collaboration ranges from exchanging and analyzing a variety of
sensitive information to interdicting terrorists and their networks.
In addition, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Shelton,
during his recent meetings in New Delhi, expressed the US interest in
exploring together how best to deal with the catastrophic consequences
of accidental or terrorist nuclear, chemical and biological incidents.
It should be clear that anti-terrorism is a subject in which the
United States and India have vital and congruent national interests at
stake. Let's work harder together on this abomination.
THE FUTURE OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS
The Governments of the United States and India both have a vital
interest in the future of nuclear weapons in the international system.
This is no surprise given the unimaginable destructive power of these
devices. India will naturally be interested in the future of US
nuclear policy. Hence the welcome by the Indian Government of the
visit of Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage to India in May,
and other bilateral discussions here and in Washington regarding
President Bush's new strategic framework.
My country has an equal interest in the shape and substance of India's
nuclear policy. This mutual preoccupation by our two countries seems
entirely natural since each capital wants to be sure that the other
takes no steps in the nuclear arena that could destabilize strategic
and regional stability.
It is heartening that our two governments have already found more
common ground on nuclear matters since President Bush took office.
Both the United States and India strongly oppose the further spread of
weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver them.
Both the United States and India want dramatic reductions in the
number of nuclear weapons on the globe.
President Bush has declared:
"I am committed to achieving a credible deterrent with the lowest
possible number of nuclear weapons consistent with our national
security needs, including our obligations to our allies. My goal is to
move quickly to reduce nuclear forces. The United States will lead by
example to achieve our interests and the interests for peace in the
world."
The Government of India has responded:
"India particularly welcomes the announcement of unilateral reductions
by the US of nuclear forces, as an example."
Both the United States and India also agree that the 30-year-old
nuclear paradigm of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) has thankfully
been overtaken by history.
President Bush has stressed:
"To maintain peace, to protect our own citizens and own allies and
friends, we must seek security based on more than the grim premise
that we can destroy those who seek to destroy us. This is an important
opportunity for the world to rethink the unthinkable, and to find new
ways to keep the peace."
The Government of India has the same view:
"India believes that there is a strategic and technological
inevitability in stepping away from a world that is held hostage by
the doctrine of MAD to a cooperative, defensive transition that is
underpinned by further cuts and a de-alert of nuclear forces."
Both the United States and India wish to leave behind the deadly
elements of bi-polar confrontation.
President Bush has stated:
"Today, the sun comes up on a vastly different world. The Wall is
gone, and so is the Soviet Union. Today's Russia is not yesterday's
Soviet Union. Its government is no longer Communist. Its president is
elected. Today's Russia is not our enemy, but a country in transition
with an opportunity to emerge as a great nation, democratic, at peace
with itself and its neighbors."
The Government of India has the same view:
"India also lauds the desire expressed by the US President to make a
clean break from the past and especially from the adversarial legacy
of the Cold War."
Finally, the Bush Administration continues intense discussions with
our Indian counterparts on the issue of missile defense.
President Bush has said,
..."We need a new framework that allows us to build missile defenses
to counter the different threats of today's world. To do so, we must
move beyond the constraints of the 30 year old ABM Treaty. This treaty
does not recognize the present, or point us to the future. It
enshrines the past. No treaty that prevents us from addressing today's
threats, that prohibits us from pursuing promising technology to
defend ourselves, our friends and our allies is in our interests or in
the interests of world peace."
PEACE AND REGIONAL STABILITY
The United States agrees with Prime Minister Vajpayee that India has a
special responsibility and a role to play in helping secure stable,
peaceful conditions in South Asia, not least because India's vital
interests are obviously engaged in the future of the region. The US in
turn has a crucial interest in minimized tensions that could otherwise
lead to an outbreak of hostilities or, in a worst-case scenario,
nuclear conflict.
We applaud the Indian Government's decision to reinitiate
India-Pakistan talks at the Agra summit, and to continue the process
of engagement through SAARC ministerials and in a follow-on meeting
between the Prime Minister and President Musharraf at the UN General
Assembly. The United States believes that sustained engagement at a
senior level between India and Pakistan is essential.
Some people assert that the Agra Summit was a disappointment. My
Government does not. A hard lesson the United States has learned from
other conflicts of great and historic complexity is that process is
important even when substance falls short of expectations. Engagement
does not imply weakness much less the endorsement of the other side
's perspective, but rather a recognition that military might alone is
insufficient to resolve differences between nations, including those
with a declared nuclear capability.
America would like the Kashmir issue to be resolved peacefully. We
fully understand the Prime Minister's aspiration, when he said on
Independence Day this year, that India would prefer to battle poverty,
unemployment, disease, and underdevelopment, instead of preparing for
the possibility of war with its neighbor. The Bush Administration is
willing to be helpful but we are convinced that this is an issue that
only India and Pakistan can work out between them, taking into account
the wishes of the Kashmiri people. As Deputy Secretary of State
Richard Armitage has stressed, a solution "won't be imposed from the
outside and it is not going to be the United States that is going to
get in the middle of it." In short, you will see no blueprints from
the Bush Presidency.
US-India relations will stand on their own during the Bush
Administration. They will not be directed against any third party.
And, under this American President, there will be no hyphenated
linkages emanating from Washington regarding South Asian nations.
An essential component to our regional and global efforts to promote
peace will be greater collaboration between American and Indian
military forces. Since coming to office in January, the Bush
Administration has initiated discussions with the Indian Government on
peacekeeping operations, search and rescue, disaster relief and
environmental security. Regionally, we want to work with the Indian
military services to protect energy supplies and sea-lanes, to
increase naval exercises and port visits, and to unite our military
efforts against terrorism and piracy.
Another area for bilateral collaboration in the not too distant future
is military sales and technological cooperation. Within the next
twelve months, we expect US general officer visits to India and Indian
general officer visits to Washington to become commonplace. We look
forward to the participation of more than 100 Indian officers in
American military training courses this year. These activities create
new bridges between two military cultures that honor -- first and
foremost -- civilian control. We also look forward to the upcoming
resumption of the Defense Policy Group, in which the civilian
leadership of the two countries will erect the conceptual scaffolding
of this new bilateral military relationship.
The Bush Administration's vision is of an expanding, intensified,
focused, and mutually beneficial military relationship between the
United States and India that promotes our common national interests
and values, and regional and global stability.
ENERGY SECURITY
The United States and India have common vital interests with respect
to energy security. Both our countries are hugely dependent on foreign
sources for our energy needs. Fully 50% of the crude oil imported by
America and its allies is from the Middle East. 90% of the crude oil
imported by India comes from the same location. These facts speak for
themselves: the Persian Gulf, and the lines of communication
connecting that region with the rest of the world, remain critical for
the security of both our countries.
Consequently, the flow of oil and gas from the Middle East must be
safeguarded and free of threats stemming either from military
aggression or from acts of terrorism. Parallel with efforts by the
international community, the United States and India can work more
closely together to achieve this objective. Our national interests
certainly converge: we both seek reliable access to energy resources;
we both seek well-ordered energy markets; and, we both seek stability
in energy prices.
American and Indian national interests also come together on three
broader issues pertaining to energy security. First, both nations
recognize the critical importance of increasing the global supply of
energy. Current energy production levels are insufficient to meet
growing demand and they will become a drag on India's ambitions to
sustain high growth rates in the future. This implies that there will
be increasing joint opportunities to exploit new technologies to
increase energy supplies.
The Bush Administration supports exports of US clean energy
technologies and encourages their overseas development; it wishes to
engage bilaterally and multilaterally to promote best practices in
energy conservation; it is committed to exploring collaborative
international basic research and development in energy alternatives
and energy efficient technologies; and it will support innovative
programs to promote the global adoption of these technologies.
Finally, both the United States and India recognize that we must
strengthen the energy sectors in our respective countries. A market
system that has clear and transparent rules increases the incentives
for greater investment in energy production. American energy firms
remain world leaders, and their investments in the US and abroad
enhance efficiencies and market linkages, while increasing
environmental protection. Despite current difficulties, we hope those
US firms can thrive in India.
THE INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENT
The United States and India agree that energy issues are inextricably
linked with climate management. As I stressed in my speech earlier in
the week, there are no unilateral solutions to global climate
problems, and we hope both developed and developing countries will
make fair contributions to address this issue. With respect to the
Kyoto Protocol, President Bush has had this to say: "America's
unwillingness to embrace a flawed treaty should not be read by our
friends and allies as any abdication of responsibility. To the
contrary, my Administration is committed to a leadership role on the
issue of climate change."
In the view of the Bush Administration, the environment and climate
change are another potentially fruitful area of discussion between the
United States and India.
WHAT ABOUT ECONOMIC SANCTIONS?
I know many of you are wondering about the status of US economic
sanctions against India. To again quote Deputy Secretary of State
Armitage, "I think it is quite clear the direction in which we are
heading." My advice is to watch this space. Until that moment, the
Bush Administration will continue to consult with Congress on the
waiver of the 1998 sanctions.
This Administration's discussions on this subject with Congress are
crucially important because we want the Senate and the House of
Representatives to be full partners with respect to the President's
big idea regarding US-India relations. In addition, the Bush
Administration wants to be sure that no step it takes with respect to
India and sanctions undermines the global non-proliferation regime.
That is decidedly in America's vital national interest and my Indian
interlocutors have said that your country too opposes any increase in
the number of nuclear weapons states.
CHALLENGES TO TRANSFORMING THE US-INDIA RELATIONSHIP
We in the Bush Administration know that the transformed US-Indian
relationship the President envisages must transcend many of the
bilateral patterns of the past fifty years. It is anomalous that we
have not cooperated more since the end of the Cold War, which, after
all, was ten years ago. Old bureaucratic habits die hard.
For instance, it is difficult to understand why our two democracies
end up on the opposite side of important UN resolutions more often
than not. To move beyond "old think" in both the United States and
India, we will rely on the enormous talent of the career civil
servants of both our nations, who -- I am confident -- will
increasingly not be guided by their old and dusty files.
To put it differently, I am not interested in discussing who was right
and who was wrong on any particular issue between India and the United
States -- in 1956, 1965, 1971, 1979, 1998, or any other previous year
of your choice.
Ladies and Gentlemen, can we please leave those arguments to the
historians?
I know that we have to understand the history of the US-India
relationship. But let us please not live in that past when there are
so many opportunities before us today.
THE INDIAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY
The Administration has a strong domestic constituency to support the
President in his objective to transform relations with India. More
than 1.5 million Americans of Indian origin provide a new energy to an
old relationship. Professionally and politically savvy, this
well-educated, intellectually charged, affluent and organized
community has emerged as the highest per capita income ethnic group in
the United States. Members and advocates of this community range from
the 4,000 businesses comprising the Confederation of Indian Industry,
through the 50,000-strong Indian American Friendship Council, to the
140 Members of the House of Representatives who are members of the
India Caucus. Together with organizations like the Indo-American
Society and the Indo-American Chamber of Commerce here in Mumbai, they
have added a substance to our bilateral relationship that could only
be dreamed of a decade ago.
With this in mind, I will be giving dinner speeches to Indian American
organizations in Los Angeles, Washington DC, and Boston when I return
soon to the United States for President Bush's meeting with Prime
Minister Vajpayee.
Let me show you only two more slides.
This picture (picture 3) evokes at least two challenges. The first is
one that I can do something about. I will reduce the wait for a US
visa to the shortest time possible and eventually eliminate visa lines
for all practical purposes.
Here in Mumbai, many of you already will have noticed the opening of a
new Visa Processing Center at a location near the Consulate, where
some categories of applications are being accepted and from which
passports will be returned by courier. It is our intention to expand
this service, so that eventually all applicants can either come to the
Consulate according to an appointment system or not have to come to
the Consulate at all. Either way, the ultimate result will be an
elimination for all practical purposes of the lines outside the
Consulate -- something that you, the Indian applicant, and we in the
US Mission in India -- earnestly look forward too.
The second challenge is one that you and I need to work on together.
The Bush Administration wants to increase political, legislative,
economic, academic, and scientific exchanges between the United States
and India so that not hundreds of thousands, but millions of Indians
and Americans will visit each other's country every year, again
helping to redefine the very nature of our relationship.
I recently had the pleasure of meeting with a group of 21 young
Americans, mostly of Indian origin (picture 4), who came to help for
three months this summer in the ongoing earthquake recovery projects
in Gujurat, under the auspices of the American India Foundation. As I
talked with these young people about their experiences, I recalled my
own Peace Corps days in Africa many years ago, and how many basic
truths about life I had learned from the villagers with whom I then
lived. The young Americans in this picture came here to do something
for India, but we can see in their faces - filled with gratification,
strength and resilience -- what the people of India did for them.
OPPORTUNITY CALLS
I have described in this speech President George W. Bush's big idea
about US-India relations.
The President's transforming vision is based on common democratic
values; and on the overlapping national interests I have enumerated
here.
The past, however powerful its pull, is just that, the past. Today,
and tomorrow, opportunity calls in this relationship. Together, let
the United States and India seize it.
Thank you for your attention.
(end text)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
