The Prime Minister, I.K. Gujral made the following opening remarks at the breakfast Meeting with the Council on Foreign Relations, New York on September 23, 1997
"About this time, last year, I had the privilege of addressing you as the Foreign Minister of my country. This morning, I am before you as the Prime Minister. My position may be different, but my great appreciation for the work of the Council, and its increasing and constructive engagement with India, remains unchanged. May I, at the outset, also say that I have gone through the Report of the eminent Independent Task Force so ably chaired by Dr. Haas. I am glad that the Council has taken the initiative for this comprehensive study. I count some of the members on the Task Force as my personal friends, and I was delighted that some of them are originally from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.
Mr. President, in India, a nation of nearly 960 million people has been celebrating the Golden Jubilee of our Independence. Our joy on this occasion is laced with a mood of introspection, not only about the fifty years of freedom, and our successes and failures during those years, but also about the new millenium that is at our doorstep. As I look ahead, I am reminded of the words of Daniel Webster -- "We see before us a probable train of great events."
Indians today are engaged with India as never before. In the last 5 decades democracy has entrenched itself in an unassailable manner all over the country. There is a pervasive sense of change, at a faster pace and for more pointed results. The pulse-beat of the economy has picked up. The mood of our businessmen, industrialists and farmers is upbeat. Social change, empowering the hitherto backward and oppressed sections in the country, has accelerated. The myriad diversities and pluralism of my country have found mature expression. One reflection of this is the existence of a coalition Government at the Centre. Our experience of coalitions is relatively new, but the learning process, as befitting a mature democracy, responsive to the mandate of the people, has been both agile and fast.
India is now one of the most participatory democracies in the world. Two million democratically elected people govern the country from the Panchayat (Village Council) level to the Parliament. At the apex level, single-party rule is now regarded as outside the realm of possibility, as coalitions have become more the norm rather than an aberration. Some of the largest states have coalition governments of two and more parties.
The Union Government is in the hands of the United Front, a coalition of 13 parties with a Common Minimum Programme for development and social justice, supported from outside by the Congress and the Communist Party of India (Marxist) parties. This has accelerated the process of decentralisation of resources and power from the Union to the States and from the States to the Panchayat system.
The election of 1996 clarified several central issues relating to the shape and substance of Indian democracy in the years to come. Three of these are defining issues - relations between the Union and the States, definition of national identity, and rapid entry into the political arena of hitherto politically and socially peripheral segments of society. The question of national identity has assumed aspects of a nation-wide battle, conducted through words and elections, between two streams of thought -- one exclusivist, the other pluralistic. The pluralistic school is seemingly winning. It is spearheaded by the United Front that holds power at the Union level.
Social elements that were not adequately represented in Parliament's Lower House, known as the Lok Sabha, forcefully asserted themselves in the 1996 elections. Approximately half of the members of the Lok Sabha are drawn from the backward castes and hitherto oppressed classes representing mainly small and middle farmers and landless workers. The backward castes now rule in seven States either by themselves or in coalition with one or more parties. Among these states are Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh, the most important States by virtue of industrialisation and population, and Gujarat and Bihar.
India's economic reforms, in accordance with our needs and priorities, are an ongoing process. Any reform process must carry with it the people of the country and help serve the interests of the less privileged. Such sensitivity is only natural for democracy. Democracy itself allows such priorities to find due reflection, and provides the only real foundation for enduring, irreversible change.
Our economic reforms have significance for the United States, which is India's largest trading partner and its single largest source of foreign investment. Many multinational corporations are already in India. In certain sectors, which are of particular interest to the US, India is forging ahead. There are over 500 computer software companies in India, and India's software exports have grown over 30 times in the last eight years. The Indian market is growing, and will continue to grow significantly in the years to come.
A new generation of Indian industrialists and entrepreneurs has emerged. In a number of industries, Indian companies now enjoy global ranking. The changes in the Indian economy offer significant opportunities for our friends and partners. In the coming years, India must be one of the few countries in the world where every year there is a need to add tens of thousands of megawatts of power, thousand of kilometres of roads and highways, millions of telephones and millions of tonnes of nitrogen or cubic meters of gas. In this sense, India is the world's pre-eminent development frontier, and the opportunities for further Indo-US cooperation are obvious.
A great deal of our foreign policy is now tuned to our economic and infrastructural needs. You may be aware of the success we have achieved in the short span of 16 months in improving our relations significantly with our immediate neighbours in South Asia. A mood and a climate for cooperative development and security prevails in most of South Asia. India's relations with Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal have never been so good. What is more important is that the policy of good neighbourliness, labelled by foreign affairs analysts as the ‘Gujral Doctrine', is built around a broad national consensus and will, I am sure, survive the ups and downs of the fortunes of political parties in future elections.
The 30-year river water Treaty with Bangladesh has paved the way for an extended river water development system between the two countries. The Chakma refugees have resumed their homeward passage from north-eastern India to Bangladesh, and trade is flourishing between us. With Nepal, the Mahakali River Agreement has satisfied all sections of the Nepalese, while the opening of a 61 km trade route from Nepal to Bangladesh across the Indian territory is the first inter-state transportation linkage between the two countries.
Our principle that India does not ask for reciprocity in building ties with the smaller nations has caught the imagination of people far beyond South Asia. A sub-regional Growth Triangle has been formed with Bangladesh, India, Nepal and Bhutan and Thailand for faster development cooperation in the eastern flank of the sub-continent. Sri Lanka wishes to join a similar group in the South. Indian investment is flowing into Sri Lanka. Our commitment that no country in South Asia will lend its territory to any elements for use against the interest of another country has evoked very positive reactions in the island Republic. Its President, Mrs. Chandrika Kumaratunge, paid rich tributes to India on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of our independence, and these gladdened every Indian and Sri Lankan heart.
May I now turn to the very important issue of Indo-US relations. I had a most constructive meeting with President Clinton yesterday afternoon. As the world's largest and oldest democracies, we share certain basic beliefs, as in the Rule of Law and in the essential, inviolate and equal dignity of all human beings. An active engagement between us can only serve the interests of peace, stability and maintenance of man- kind's democratic rights and freedoms in an increasingly uncertain world. We have a heavy schedule of bilateral visits ahead of us, leading up to the likely visit of President Clinton to India in 1998, and it is important that we took this time to appreciate each other's views and approaches.
We value your understanding even in matters where differences have existed. India began its campaign for a nuclear weapon free world, almost as soon as it was born. Our disarmament credentials need no clarifications. We have been in the forefront of discussions leading to the Chemical Weapons Convention because we regard this as a genuinely non-discriminatory multilateral disarmament treaty. India was among the first countries in the world to support the Treaty. We actively participated in the decade-long negotiations, and became an Original State Party. Indeed, India was elected unopposed as the first Chairman of the Executive Council of the Organisation for Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.
The initiative for banning nuclear weapon tests comprehensively is a four decade-old Indian initiative. However, we were obliged to refrain from signing the CTBT as it emerged in 1996. Likewise we have not signed the NPT because it is a Treaty that makes an arbitrary and discriminatory distinction amongst nations. Moreover, these Treaties, in their present form, do not address our security concerns in creating forward movement towards a nuclear weapon-free world but tend instead, to perpetuate a discriminatory nuclear order. Now, with the end of the Cold War, the role and utility of nuclear weapons is being reconsidered even in the United States. Many distinguished Americans have in recent months highlighted the diminishing utility of nuclear weapons and the need to do away with them in order to prevent future proliferation and enhance global security. This welcome development could provide our two countries an opportunity to work together in an area where understanding has so far eluded us.
Our peaceful nuclear experiment in 1974 has not been followed by any subsequent test. We have scrupulously refrained from weaponisation. This voluntary restraint is unique in the nuclear age. However, we are also surrounded by nuclear weapons and we cannot remain indifferent to the threat posed to our security. We do not wish to be a nuclear weapon state, but, in the present circumstances, the need to keep our nuclear option open is unavoidable.
We want our friends in the United States to understand that we cannot lower our guard as far as security is concerned. However, let me also say that we are not pathologically obsessed by security. We wish to strengthen the atmosphere of cooperative development and security in our regions, and do not wish to carry the dubious baggage of the 20th Century into the 21st.
There are other areas in Indo-US relations that we want to reinvigorate. I have in mind cooperation in the frontier areas of science and technology. Our Green Revolution benefited greatly from US assistance as well as cooperation with American scientists. Now, as we are on the threshold of a quantum leap in our economic possibilities, we remember that period with nostalgia. Some of our existing mechanisms for cooperation in science and technology, and education and culture, need to be revitalised. We need to jointly look for innovative ways to facilitate these contacts. Our bilateral cooperation in combating narcotic trafficking and terrorism is another area in which useful and effective work is already being done, and could be further strengthened. In economic matters, it is my view that any points of friction need to be juxtaposed to an appreciation of long-term benefits, and the perception of enduring priorities.
Another area on our broader canvas must necessarily be our interest in joining other nations in the task of reforming the UN. This is an issue on which we have had some degree of dialogue. India's claim to a permanent Security Council seat is based on the strength and the global reach of our foreign policy, our commitment to the UN processes, including peace- keeping operations, and on the strength of our conviction in the democratic functioning of multilateral arrangements. We believe that we qualify on the basis of any global, objective and non-discriminatory criteria. We look forward to working closely with the US on this critical aspect of UN reform, as we have in the past on various other facets of UN functioning.
We are concerned with other aspects of UN reform as well. We do not see such reforms merely as an exercise to trim the budget of the world body. Instead, we feel that reforms should contribute towards a strengthened UN and its capacity to respond effectively to the priorities identified by the overwhelming majority of its membership. The concept of security should not be narrowly viewed. A world in which underdevelopment, poverty and social alienation persist, can never be at peace with itself. It has been said, very truly, that "poverty anywhere is a threat to prosperity every- where". Preserving international peace and stability, likewise, will require an environment where all countries are allowed a certain minimum of economic opportunity and well being. We believe it is in the interests of all nations to ensure that the pivotal role of the UN, as the truly global forum for the promotion of peace, security and development, should be suitably reinforced.
To sum up, Mr. president, I believe that there exists, today, an objective basis on which Indo-US relations can enter a qualitatively new phase in the years to come. This revitalised, re-invigorated and strengthened relationship will be moulded, I believe, by three distinctive realities:
First, the commonalities that we share - democracy, an open society, rule of law, pluralism and the dignity of the individual. These, I believe, must become a dynamically influencing factor in strengthening our relations. It has been said that England and the US are two countries separated by a common language. Sometimes, it appears that the US and India are two countries separated by a common political system ! The time has come for us to look beyond what Freud has called "the narcissism of minor differences" and build on those factors which so uniquely constitute both our heritage and our commitment.
Second, a nation of 960 million people is today firmly on the path of economic reform and progress. We are committed to the goal of bringing India into the forefront of the global economy. This endeavour opens up infinite possibilities for a new dimension to Indo-US relations. The opportunity should not be lost.
Third, the role of India as a factor of peace and stability, in its own region and beyond, must find due recognition in forging a re-evaluation of the scope and direction of Indo-US relations, in the interests of both countries.
Mr. President, I believe that these factors, taken together, can give a new content and thrust to the friendship between our two nations.
It is a good augury that our countries will have significant opportunities for continuing the dialogue at the highest levels in the near future. I had the pleasure of meeting Mrs. Hillary Clinton when she was recently in India to attend the funeral of one of the greatest humanitarians of this century, Mother Teresa. For us in India, Mother, as she was known to millions of Indians, was a symbol of compassion. Her persona transcended merely religious definitions. Indians, whatever their religion, saw her as a lady of mercy, a living incarnation of divinity, and a beacon of love, hope and care. India and the world have been orphaned by her death, and Mrs. Clinton's presence in the moment of our grief is a gesture that we will always remember. I am also looking forward to the visit of President Clinton to India next year. His visit, I understand, will be preceded by the visits of Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and Commerce Secretary William Daley.
Let me conclude, Mr. President, by hoping that our two friendly nations will continue to be partners for mutual benefit in these great events, and the opportunities they offer.
I have consciously kept my opening remarks brief to leave more time for interaction with all of you.
Thank you."