Press briefing by Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran

Washington, DC
July 18, 2005

MR.NAVTEJ SARNA: Welcome to the first briefing of this Prime Ministerial visit. We are very happy to have the Foreign Secretary here with us. You already have copies of the Joint Statement and may I make the usual requests. Please switch off your cell phones. After the Foreign Secretary has spoken, we’ll take questions.

FOREIGN SECRETARY SHYAM SARAN: Thank you very much. Good afternoon to all of you. 

Well, it has been a very exciting day. As you saw, we got off to a rather spectacular start with a ceremony for welcoming the Prime Minister and Mrs. Gursharan Kaur, which I think exceeded expectations in terms of the grandeur of the ceremony. You have by now also seen the joint statement which has been issued. I think you will agree that this represents a very substantive, a very significant outcome of this visit.

I would say that even in respect of the outcome of the visit, frankly it has exceeded our expectations. You will see from the joint statement how wide-ranging the relationship is. I had mentioned to some of you yesterday that it would be a mistake to hang this visit on just one peg. And I think you will see that there is, in fact, several pegs on which this visit can be hung. 

In terms of the important events of the day, I think, of course, the most important event was the meeting between Prime Minister and President Bush. I think it would be fair to say that the two leaders have by now established an excellent chemistry. They met for the first time in New York last year, you can remember, during the U.N. General Assembly session. They have had occasion to meet with each other in Moscow, and more recently in Gleneagles. By the time they met at Washington this morning, I think they were already very familiar with one another. And this personal chemistry, the comfort that they feel in each other’s presence, a sense of warmth, a sense of openness, I think this is really what characterized their meeting this morning.

What President Bush conveyed to Prime Minister was that it was no coincidence that a very special welcome had been laid out for the Prime Minister of India. He said he wanted to convey not only to the Prime Minister, but to the people of India what importance the United States attaches to developing its relationship with India. It’s a recognition of how far India has come in terms of its emergence as a very dynamic economic power. India, as a flourishing democracy, as a multi-ethnic democracy, how much of the stability of Asia, how much the stability of the world, in fact, hinges upon the role that India can play and the willingness of the United States of America to partner India in that quest. So I think this was really the theme of the meeting that came across.

President Bush also pointed out that he’s very averse to doing very formal dinners. He doesn’t like to get into his tuxedo. But, you know, again, this was a very special occasion and he was willing to and was very happy to put on this formal clothes in honor of the Prime Minister. 

In terms of the themes that emerged during the meeting, I think it would be fair to say that there were three or four important elements which the two leaders exchanged views on. One was, of course, the common and global scourge of terrorism. And this is not surprising because this meeting is taking place in the wake of terrorist bombings in India as well as the bombings in London. And I think it would be fair to say that the two leaders recognized that this is a challenge which has global dimensions. It is not confined within national boundaries. And if there is to be a hope for success in our struggle against terrorism, then you have to fight terrorism everywhere. And I think in that the President and the Prime Minister were unequivocal in the need for the United States of America and India with other countries, to work together really to get rid of this scourge from the planet.

We then turn to the question of our economic ties. And I think the sense was that India-U.S. economic ties, whether in terms of trade, in terms of investment, were really poised for a very, very major expansion, recognition of the potentiality that India really holds today, the fact that it is growing at the rate of six to seven percent per annum. And Prime Minister spent a little time explaining to President Bush, the parameters within which reform was taking place in India, growth was taking place in India. The fact that our saving rate today is 28% of the GDP. The demographic changes taking place favor India because the working population’s proportion to the total population is going to rise, and this would mean perhaps if other trends are to be any indication, that may be our saving rate could go even up to 33, 34 percent. And this means larger resources being available for investment. 

He also set out the need for India in a globalizing world, the need for India to be able to attract a large amount of capital and technology into the country in terms of sustaining our growth rate and the important role that the United States of America could play in that regard. And they spoke a little about the CEOs forum, which President Bush said was a very smart initiative, because, really, here are the major captains of industry of the two countries who know business, who know how to energize business ties. And he was very happy to join Prime Minister together in meeting the CEOs and pointing to the great potential that India holds in terms of economic and business opportunities.

Naturally, when you’re talking about economic development, you are talking about sustaining development, today you have to talk about energy. And I think this was another very major theme of the conversation, the fact that energy resources the world over are under strain. Global prices, prices of oil are going up. If we are going to have the kind of expansion which is taking place in India, in China, there is bound to be a strain, further strain on global energy resources. We have to turn to other sources of energy. We have to turn new ways of using existing sources of energy, more efficient ways of using existing sources of energy, using energy in a manner that is environmentally sustainable. And in this context, of course, President Bush said that he believes, personally, that nuclear energy is a very important source of clean energy, we must review the way in which we look at nuclear energy, and was entirely supportive of India’s efforts to develop its nuclear energy sector. And I think you will find that expression reflected very, very substantially and clearly in the joint statement. 

There was also a reference to the two countries working together on technologies for a cleaner future. 

Apart from the discussion on terrorism, on the economics situation, the energy situation, the two leaders, of course, also had a brief exchange of views on certain regional issues, the situation, for example, in West Asia, the situation closer to India’s own neighborhood. And I think there was a commonality of perception that it was necessary for us to work together in terms of promoting political stability, promoting economic recovery throughout this region.

I think in terms of the conversation which took place, I think I will stop here. 

Thereafter, of course, the two leaders had an encounter with the press where all of you were present. Thereafter there was this very, I think, unique and perhaps unprecedented meeting together with the Prime Minister and the President present with all the CEOs from the two countries. And this was -- I think the message which went out from this meeting, I think, was a very important message. I think it is going to be instrumental in bringing India and its economic opportunities onto the global radar screen. That is very important, and the kind of personal linkages, personal relationships which have been established between the business leaders of India, business leaders of the U.S., I think in the days to come you will see the substantial fruits that this would result in.

We also had in the afternoon a call on the Prime Minister by Vice President Cheney, another very important leader in the United States. They also focused attention on the common challenge that the two countries face from terrorism, what are the ways in which we need to work together to deal with the scourge of terrorism. Prime Minister also briefed him about the opportunities for economic cooperation between India and the United States. He gave him some idea about the liberalization which is taking place in the Indian economy, and, again, the need for people in the United States of America and our other partners to really be aware of the tremendous changes that are taking place on the Indian economic scene. I think this meeting also was a very, very positive and fruitful meeting. 

As I said, you have already seen the joint statement, and if there are questions on that joint statement, certainly I would be very happy to answer those questions.

I think you need to recognize that the substantive results that we have achieved is really the result of a lot of hard work and lot of preparation that has gone into insuring the success of this visit. I think one of the most important visits which took place in terms of building the foundations for this visit was the visit by the External Affairs Minister to Washington in April. I think his meeting with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, his meeting with President Bush himself, really set out the various areas in which we could carry this relationship forward. From that time onwards we have been working on several of the initiatives that the External Affairs Minister really brought to the table for this visit.

Closer to the time of the visit, of course we also had an extremely important visit by our National Security Adviser to Washington, and he had very extensive discussions here, particularly on some of the more sensitive issues. And that also has played a very important role in insuring the success of this visit. 

Of course, from the U.S. side, we had the visit of Secretary of State Rice herself when she made some very important policy statements with regard to where the U.S. wants to take U.S.-India relations to, what is their destination; set out a road map for our relationship. Then we had the visit of Defense Secretary Rumsfeld to India, and, of course, more recently there was a return visit by Defense Minister Shri Pranab Mukherjee to Washington. So, as you can see, in number of very, very important visits, important encounters, building up the foundation for the success that this visit has achieved, and also making sure that we have a very broad-reaching agenda that would emerge for this visit.

I would conclude by saying that we have been talking about a transformation taking place in India-U.S. relations. I don’t think it would be an exaggeration to say that the transformation is really here for everybody to see. 

I would just refer to a very important point that Prime Minister made to President Bush, that we are really opening a new chapter in our relationship, India-U.S. relationship. And he said that – quoting Shakespeare, he said that there is a time and tide in the affairs of men, which taken at the flood, leads on to fortune. And I think this really characterizes, the nature of this visit. An opportunity has emerged in taking our relationship, our partnership forward. And I think if you look at the results, I think it would be fair to say that that opportunity has, in fact, been grasped by both sides.

Thank you very much.

MR.NAVTEJ SARNA : First question. Yes, Aziz?

Q: Notwithstanding telling us there was not a single peg to attach this visit onto, the civilian component, about civilian nuclear reactors was significantly one heck of a peg. In terms of the agreements that – in terms of the reciprocity by India, are these things that India can live with very comfortably in terms of NSG, MTCR, et cetera? And do you think hopefully that they should satisfy the nuclear nonproliferation gurus, both within the administration, as well in Congress?

And one other question. Nick Burns, at his briefing, said that once again the President had reiterated the U.S. stand in terms of U.N. Security Council membership for India, saying that India has all the attributes, et cetera, but not at this time. And it also spoke about the fact that they would hope that the G-4 proposal won’t come to fruition. Any comments on that?

FOREIGN SECRETARY SARAN: That’s a long question. [Laughter.]

I had mentioned to you that civilian nuclear energy cooperation was a very, very important element, both in terms of the outcome of the visit and also in the conversation which took place between the two leaders. I think what we have really achieved is a recognition by the United States of America that, for all practical purposes, India should have exactly the same rights and same benefits as any other nuclear weapons state in terms of civilian nuclear energy cooperation. That is, given India’s impeccable record in non-proliferation, India should not be denied access to the full range of technology for developing its civilian nuclear energy sector. 

Now, you spoke about, “Are we paying too high a price?” Well, I think if you have the principle that I will do nothing more and nothing less than any other nuclear weapons state, what are we giving away? We are not undertaking any obligation. We are not undertaking any kind of responsibility which is even a little more, maybe not less, but certainly not more than any other nuclear weapons state is. 

So I think this is in terms of our principle that we will not be discriminated against, in terms of our principle that there should be equality amongst partners. Why should there be any kind of – any kind of misapprehension that we are somehow – you know, have given away more than we have got. I don’t think so.

So the basis is very clear. The basis is that we are undertaking responsibilities which are nothing more than anyone else, a nuclear weapons state, and the others who are, I mean, substantially developed in nuclear technology have undertaken. So this, I think, is very important for everybody to understand, because there may be sometimes a misperception that somehow we have taken on responsibilities or we have taken on obligations which are going to be very onerous. Not at all. We are taking only those obligations which others have. And I think this has been always our principle. We will not accept any kind of conditionality that others are not willing to accept. Not to say that we will not accept any conditionality at all, but we will not be discriminated against. And I think this comes out loud and clear that whatever we are doing, we are doing exactly what the United States of America and other countries are doing. Nothing more. This is, I think, fundamental.

Now, what are we getting in return? We are getting the whole range of civilian nuclear energy cooperation open to us, including – many people have been talking about, are you going to get fuel for Tarapur. Well, fuel for Tarapur is there in black and white, and not only fuel for Tarapur. It says not limited to fuel for Tarapur. So you are getting more than just fuel for Tarapur. 

So I think dispassionately, if you look at this, I think this is a major breakthrough for India. Look at the kind of restrictive regimes we have faced for the last several decades. What does this mean? It means that those restrictive regimes are now going to be evolved. And I think that’s a very important gain for India.

Not only that, you’re looking at India being projected for the first time as a partner, a full partner in what we are looking at as the future. The ITER project, for example, the International Thermonuclear Energy Research Project. Or the generation for nuclear reactor project that the United States of America itself has initiated and has many other partners. India is being invited to be part of both those very important initiatives, which have a major implication for the future. You know, if we are looking at our energy future, we have to be a part of all this. 

So I think having those two as well in the joint statement, I think it is a recognition of, again, as I said, the distance that India has traveled. 


FOREIGN SECRETARY SARAN: On UN Security Council reforms the United States of America has taken a certain position with regard to the U.N. reforms, particularly U.N. Security Council reform. They are welcome to have that opinion on United Nations Security Council reform. I think what is important is that the principle that India has a central role to play in international institutions, that is recognized. And I think that is a very important principle. We don’t really have to look for certificates from other people. But I think the U.S. has recognized that we have a central role to play, and that is important.

Now, we are going ahead with our initiative. You know the External Affairs Minister was recently in New York. We had a meeting of the G-4 foreign ministers, along with ministers of the African Union. The External Affairs Minister played a very important role in terms of bringing about a mechanism for the discussions between the African Union and the G-4 countries. A coordinating group has been set up. This coordinating group is currently meeting in New York. Hopefully, it will result in a harmonization of positions between the two sides. So the game is on. We have not let our relationship with the U.S. or the U.S. position on this issue in any way constrain our intention to go ahead with this initiative.

So I don’t think you should have any apprehensions in that regard.

Q: Considering the complex nature of this issue, I will need further help. You talk of reciprocity. And I was wondering whether this will enable us to carry on or simulate explosions, and also to go in for mini nukes, because if you are talking of putting us on level with the United States, I’m afraid we’ll have to have these two facilities. 

The second point is in terms of balance between our atomic program and theirs. It is presumed here that while they are a founding member of the international community and we are a kind of major power, we can take the decision on our own, but as far as they’re concerned, the President is hampered by the Congress. He is beholden to the international multilateral groups you just described

So how do you compare the two sets of obligations? 

FOREIGN SECRETARY SARAN: The answer to your first question. This is not about mini nukes. This is not about nuclear weapons. As I said, this is about civilian nuclear energy cooperation. So the military aspect is completely outside the ambit of what we are talking about here.

There is no reference to our engaging in any kind of military cooperation in the sector.

With respect to civilian nuclear energy cooperation.Why are you looking for implications which are not there? As I told you, this is an agreement between the two sides with regard to civilian nuclear energy cooperation. Please do not read into it what is not there. I think it is very clearly mentioned [that] what we are doing is in the context of the energy crisis that we are facing, which affects both countries. We have decided to engage in the full range of civilian nuclear energy cooperation. Please leave it at that.

What was your second question?

Q: [Inaudible.]

FOREIGN SECRETARY SARAN: The President of the United States of America with his, full authority, has made a public commitment that he is going to go to the Congress and seek an adjustment of its laws and procedures and is going to also seek similar kind of changes in the international regime in order to make this full-scale nuclear energy cooperation, civilian nuclear energy cooperation with India possible.

Now, he has undertaken that commitment. We are reciprocally taking commitments. If these commitments are not fulfilled on one side, there is no fulfillment of commitments on the other side. So the word “reciprocally” is very important here. So there is a very good balance. We will – we have committed ourselves to do exactly what other nuclear states with advanced technology are prepared to do. Nothing more, as I said. Nothing less. But this is dependent upon whether or not the action of opening up the intentional regime for such cooperation also happens.

So it is not that we are committed to doing something irrespective of what happens on the other side. That’s not true.

MR. NAVTEJ SARNA : I think let’s move on. Yes, please.

Q: Just a matter of clarification, the joint statement talks of responsible states that has nuclear technology. Do you mean that you’re suggesting that it means the same as a nuclear weapons state? 

And second, in terms of our obligations, is there a commitment to place all reactors under safeguards? All our reactors: would they be placed under safeguards? 

FOREIGN SECRETARY SARAN: With regard to responsible nuclear weapon states, I don’t think there is a reference to responsible nuclear weapon states.

FOREIGN SECRETARY SARAN: Sir, could you repeat the first part of the question.

Q: Yeah. When we are talking about responsibility, I mean in terms of responsible nuclear weapons state –

My thought is, does this mean the same as a nuclear weapons state?

FOREIGN SECRETARY SARAN: I think you should read the sentence before that, because what the President of the United States of America is saying is that India has an impeccable record with regard to nonproliferation. So it is a responsible state in that respect, that even though India is not a party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, India’s record on nonproliferation is impeccable. That is why India is a responsible nuclear state.

With regard to placing our facilities under safeguard, as you will see, this is only limited to civilian nuclear facilities. And that is also voluntary. 

Q: -- We always maintained that we are a responsible nuclear state. In this statement, can we read the fact that the United States has given Indian that recognition formally?

FOREIGN SECRETARY SARAN: Why try to interpret what the United States has accepted or not accepted?. What the President has said about India is very clearly mentioned here. So I don’t think it is very productive to really try and interpret that as meaning this or implying that. What it means is that the United States of America has decided, because we have such an impeccable record on nonproliferation, we are a responsible nuclear state, that India should enjoy exactly the same benefits and advantages as others. 

I don’t think it is necessary for us to then try to read something more into it which is not there.

Q: Good afternoon, Foreign Secretary. I represent from TV Asia. 

You just mentioned that the fuel on the way to Tarapur is written in black and white. Is there any time frame, and does this suggest that India would be in the global market with shopping bag to get the fuel from some other countries, too?

FOREIGN SECRETARY SARAN: I think you have to see this, and, again, this is something which I have said before. This is part of a process. And the process is very clearly laid out in the joint statement. And that is, as the regime under which India will be doing civilian nuclear trade with other countries, as that regime opens up, not only fuel for Tarapur, but fuel for other civilian nuclear reactors would also become possible for India. This is what it is saying. 

Q: So perhaps you’ve said this before. Just a clarification. Is India going to separate its civilian reactors from its military ones?. And, you know, looking at this wonderful joint statement, why is America doing this?

FOREIGN SECRETARY SARAN: Number one, I think as far as the question of separation of military and civilian facilities are concerned, this is clearly spelled out in the joint statement. What it says is these responsibilities and practices consist of identifying and separating civil and military nuclear military facilities and programs in a phased manner and filing a declaration with regard to the civilian facilities with the IAEA. I think the meaning is quite clear. And this is precisely what other nuclear weapons states have done. 

What was your other question?

Q: Why is the U..S doing this?

FOREIGN SECRETARY SARAN: Why is the U.S. doing this? Well, isn’t this a question that you should ask the United States of America. But I think as far as we can see, I think it is a recognition of India coming of age. As I said, the President of the United States says that India is an emerging economic power, that India has a very major role to play in terms of promoting peace and stability, not only regionally, but globally, and that is why the United States of America looks upon India as a partner. I don’t think we should be skeptical about the intentions behind such things.

MR. NAVTEJ SARNA: There is only time for one more question. Mr. Gupta

Q: Sir, you’ve mentioned about the CEO forum being a very important thing and the fact that the Prime Minister and the President of the USA together had a meeting with them. Has the forum set up a concrete agenda for moving forward, of having good relationships, joint manufacture, or things of that type, or is it just a question of whether they’ll remove bottlenecks to the present situation….?

FOREIGN SECRETARY SARAN: You know, this was the very first meeting of the CEO forum. And it was really, in a sense, the inaugural meeting where President Bush and Prime Minister, Dr. Manmohan Singh were present, in a sense, to launch the forum. I think we have to leave it to the business leaders themselves to decide how they want to carry this initiative forward. 

Certainly, the idea is to energize business ties between the two countries, really make both sides aware of the tremendous possibilities which are opening up for economic cooperation. It is not so much linked to dealing with obstacles or dealing with roadblocks. We have various fora for that. You know, we have the economic dialogue, India-U.S. economic dialogue, which is headed by the deputy chairman of the planning commission on our side and the economic adviser to the White House on the U.S. side. Its role is not only promotional, but its role is also to see that whatever is being turned up as roadblocks or as irritants by business communities on both sides, the commission will take note and try to remove them. And it provides a high-level forum at which these kind of issues can be addressed.

But, you know, the CEO forum is something different. It is something much bigger than that. You are really talking about some of the most important business leaders of the two countries coming together. They are looking at the relationship from a strategic angle. They are looking at the long-term partnership in terms of a very, very rapidly growing economy and a mature economy, which is a very important source of capital. It can be a very important source for technology for India.

So this is at a different level. That is what its importance is.

Thank you.

MR. NAVTEJ SARNA:Thank you very much.