Question: Sir, last week in an interview with Indian journalists in Washington, President Bush said in response to a question on Kashmir dispute that it should be settled between India, Pakistan and "citizens of Kashmir". Do you have any comment on that?
Shyam Saran: Our position is very clear. The issue of Jammu and Kashmir, insofar as it relates to the relationship between the State of Jammu and Kashmir, which is an integral part of India, and the Government of India, that is being is already addressed in the dialogue that is taking place. The Prime Minister recently had a roundtable on Jammu andKashmir. As far as the issue between India and Pakistan is concerned, that issue too is being addressed. We have a Composite Dialogue taking place in which the issue of Jammu and Kashmir is being addressed. So, if this matter is raised in the talks between our Prime Minister and President Bush, this is the position which will be explained to him.
Advertisement
Question: He has called them citizens of Kashmir....
Shyam Saran: Citizens of Kashmir are citizens of India.
Question: It is quite apparent that US is very keen on India dropping out of the proposed India-Iran gas pipeline project. You have said that we should expect some very important announcements during the visit. Should we expect some announcement which is going to balance the loss of energy that we are going to have in case India drops out of India-Iran gas pipeline project?
Shyam Saran: India has no intention of dropping out of the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline project.
Question: A question on the nuke deal. The Prime Minister told Parliament yesterday that the fast breeder reactors will not be a part of separation plan. But he did not actually indicate whether the Americans have accepted this. Have they accepted our position or does it continue to be a stumbling block?
Shyam Saran: As I said, we have not concluded the negotiations yet with the United States of America. We still have some distance to go. So, what the Prime Minister spelt out in his statement was the Indian position.
Question: Has there been any kind of response to the Prime Minister’s statement yesterday from Washington?
Shyam Saran: The response has been that we need to continue to negotiate and we need to tie up various loose ends before we can announce that we have a deal. As I mentioned to you, while we have come fairly close but we still are not there yet.
Question: Of late there have been three case of visa denial to Indian scientists. I was just wondering that has the Ministry of External Affairs taken up the issue of the kind of treatment that has been meted out to an Indian scientist by the US Consulate inChennai?
Shyam Saran: The American Ambassador has spoken to, I think, at least one of the scientists and, if I am not mistaken, has also approved the visa to him. We have, as a matter of course, taken up with the United States of America the need to have a very liberal and creditable visa policy with regard to exchange of scientists between the two countries because without such a visa regime it is difficult to see how we can promote our scientific and technical exchanges.
Question: Before coming to India Mr. Nicholas Burns last week said that 90 per cent of the deal has been concluded. How do you describe it now - Ninety-five per cent, ninety-six per cent?
Shyam Saran: I do not like to get into the percentages or a numbers game. The fact is that until we have all the loose ends tied up, unless we have a deal, we do not have a deal.
Question: The American Ambassador yesterday again expressed confidence that we will be able to clinch this deal before Bush comes to India. Similar, is a message from Washington also. What are the sticking points twenty-four hours before he comes here, and forty-eight hour before the two leaders talk?
Shyam Saran: Let me begin by saying that there is a very keen interest not only on the part of India but also a very keen interest on the part of the United States of America to have this deal as early as possible. That is because this is an agreement which has very far-reaching benefits for both countries, not just for India. Therefore, there is a very strong commitment to try and get this agreement through quickly. But, at the same time, there is a recognition that this is a very complex issue. There are many complicated elements to this agreement. It is not at all surprising that in sitting down and negotiating on each one of these elements we find that it is complex. So, we have to continue to work hard, continue to see how we can bridge some of the remaining gaps. What are these gaps? These gaps are on a number of technical issues which relates to, for example, the nature of the separation to be carried out, the nature of the safeguards that would be applied. There are these kind of issues which we need to still find closure on.
Question: I just wanted to know about two particular issues. Keeping in view that US is not ready to consider India a nuclear power, and is not ready to let India enter into the Security Council as a permanent member, and at the same time compelling India to bring its fast breeder reactors under the safeguards, what is India going to do if the nuclear agreement is not signed?Secondly, yesterday evening Mr. El Baradei has given his final report on Iranian nuclear activities. He has certified that all the activities in Iran have been considered peaceful and there has not been single evidence to show that Iran is intending to produce nuclear weapons or that technology. Keeping that view, what would India be doing if there is a voting on the 6tth March?
Shyam Saran: Let me take your last question first. How India will vote if a certain Resolution comes up before the IAEA on the 6th of March will be determined by the contents of the Resolution which is brought up for vote. I do not think it is worthwhile for us to speculate on how India will vote without India knowing what the contents of the Resolution are. So, let us wait and see. There will be an occasion for the Board of Governors to debate and to consider the report which is being put forward by the Director General, and then the Board will take a decision. When the time comes, and if and when there is a draft Resolution, we will, as always, judge it on its merits.
With respect to what will we do if the India-US Civil Nuclear Energy Agreement is not concluded, as I explained to you, there are very many other aspects of cooperation between India and the United States. Therefore, while we would certainly like to see the Civil Nuclear Energy Cooperation Agreement also concluded, if for whatever reason they cannot be concluded before the visit, we will, I presume, continue to negotiate on them and then move ahead with the other areas of cooperation on which there is no difference of opinion or no doubts in our minds.
Question: You have been …(inaudible)…negotiations. How do you personally feel that there is not an announcement that you can make …(inaudible) … simply evidence that the two sides are doing very hard bargaining?
Shyam Saran: I think you would not need evidence. It is true that we are doing very hard bargaining. And it is the nature of the subject which requires very hard bargaining between the two sides. It is, as I said, at the risk of repeating myself, a very complex issue. So, it was always obvious that it would be difficult for both sides. We are making a lot of effort. Let me say we have made a considerable amount of progress as well. But we are not there yet. We need to still put in some hard work.
Question: The Prime Minister in his statement yesterday admitted that the US is yet to translate its commitment into reality about the supply of fuel to Tarapur Nuclear Thermal Power Plant. What are the chances of the US meeting this commitment in the forthcoming visit? Is an announcement on that topic expected?
Shyam Saran: I do not think so because I think what the US has said is that as soon as US laws are adjusted, it would become possible to make the supply of fuel toTarapur.
Question: Yesterday the Prime Minister’s statement said … (inaudible)… assurances …
Shyam Saran: The Joint Statement if you recall, after setting out the commitments that the US will adjust its laws and it will work together with friends and allies in the Nuclear Suppliers Group to bring about a change, then said in the meantime the US will… Our interpretation of ‘in the meantime’ was until the above has been achieved there would be an effort made to supply fuel toTarapur. There is a difference of opinion on that interpretation. What the US says is that it would be not possible for them to make that exception without bringing about a change in the law because a supply of fuel to Tarapur without that law being changed would in a sense be illegal.
Question: You talked about announcements that will be made. How many agreements are going to be signed?
Shyam Saran: These are not agreements which are going to be signed in the format of the two principals sitting and various agreements being signed. Essentially what we would be doing is there are certain MOUs or certain agreements which will be signed amongst concerned agencies at the time of the visit. Some of them will be reflected in the Joint Statement which we hope to also announce. There will be also fact-sheets which will be released giving details of the various decisions which have been arrived at. As I mentioned to you, there are several in the works.
Question: There was a mention in the July 18 document about the US including an Indian astronaut in the trainingprogramme. Has there been any progress? If there has been no progress, why has there been no progress?
Do you think you have embarked on this separation plan business a little too late in the day?
Shyam Saran: Training of the Indian astronaut, or putting an Indian astronaut on a US mission entails a certain cost to us. Therefore, we have to determine whether or not for our space programme and for our space agency this was something which we should be making a financial outlay for. Given the priorities for their space plans, they came to the conclusion, our space agency came to the conclusion, that this was not something which really could fit into their perspective plans for our spaceprogramme. Therefore, we have not pursued this.
Your second question was, ‘Did we embark on the separation plan at a very late stage?’ No, we have been working on it since July 18, immediately after that. We have been working on all aspects of the Civil Nuclear Energy Cooperation Agreement between the two sides since then. As I mentioned to you, a considerable amount of progress has been made on all aspects of this proposed agreement. Separation plan is only one aspect. There are many other aspects of the agreement. We have been having very intensive negotiations on each and every aspect. But, we still have some distance to go as I said.
Question: …Inaudible… (On Civil Nuclear energy, President Bush’s second term)?
Shyam Saran: As I mentioned, it would certainly have made us very happy if we had the agreement in place for it to be announced during President Bush’s visit to India. This initiative is not something which is episodic. It is not something which is a sort of an event. Its significance lies in terms of the process that it sort of opens up. If it is a process, and if it is something which is of long-term significance, then I think its relevance will remain even after the visit has been concluded.
Question: My question pertains to the five talking points which President Bush had listed out at the Asiatic Society speech. Interestingly he was pretty okay with the rest of the talking points apart from the one on agricultural products and services. According to him, India should raise all its subsidy on agricultural products and services. Services was not the main agenda. How are we posturing ourselves on this particular demand which might come up?
Shyam Saran: Our position on these issues is very well known. We have taken certain very well considered positions in theWTO. I think we will continue to take those positions. There is a certain logic to the position that we have taken on agricultural products. So, with regard to the issue of subsidies, with the exception of what applies to a country like India which has a very large population engaged in agriculture, where there is still a component of subsistence agriculture, there is a need for certain defence measures. If that is conceded, then we are looking at much freer trade in agriculture. We have no ideological sort of resistance to that.
But I think the reality of where our agriculture stands today still remains. In fact, if we really make success of the Knowledge Initiative in Agriculture, to which the United States is willing to contribute, we will see in the years to come a much freer access to the Indian market as far as agricultural products are concerned. Already I think there is a considerable amount of liberalization in this respect, something which would have been unthinkable a few years ago. I think people should appreciate that we have come this far. But our ability to go forward has to be in fact related to the reality of the Indian economy and Indian agriculture. I think we can explain this very persuasively to President Bush.
Question: The Prime Minister was supposed to have spoken to the Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice last night. What did he speak to her? What was the conversation about?
Shyam Saran: There was a conversation between the Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Prime Minister last night. I think the conversation, if I am not mistaken, related to how President Bush and the Secretary of State were looking forward to President Bush’s visit to India, that there was great expectation and anticipation with regard to this visit. On the specific issues, of course, they touched upon…
Question: Did she refer to the Prime Minister’s speech?
Shyam Saran: She did refer to the Prime Minister’s speech but she also said that with regard to the Civil Nuclear Cooperation Agreement that we are close and we need to work hard in order to close whatever gaps there are. And she said that the Foreign Secretary Mr. Shyam Saran should put extra effort with Under Secretary Burns in order to achieve closure.
Question: You just said that you will take sometime to cover this. How much time do you think both sides will take to cover and come to the deal?
Shyam Saran: As long as it takes.
Question: Hamas movement has won in the Palestinian elections and formed the Palestinian Government. The US has stopped the financial assistance to the Palestinian Authority and Palestinian people. What role India can play in the peace process in the Middle East? Would you support the Hamas movement forming the Palestinian Government?
Shyam Saran: It is for the people of Palestine to decide how they are governed. We will respect the wishes of the people of Palestine. That is our position. We have always supported the legitimate struggle of the Palestinian people and we will continue to do so.
