Opinion - Interviews   

It is a negotiated draft: Pranab

— Photo: V.V. Krishnan

We do not like any amendment because it was an agreed text, says External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee

A few days before Prime Minister Manmohan Singh left on a visit to the U.S. and France, External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee interacted with The Hindu. Excerpts from the interview:

It depends on the [U.S.] Congress. Whatever has to be done from our side we have done. Now it is for them to decide: How the President and the Administration will be able to get it done through the Congress. There is bipartisan support but the Congress has its own way of functioning. It is difficult to predict. It is possible, the Prime Minister will be there till the 26th. He is going to Washington on the 25th. So let us hope.

Our position is very clear. We have some agreed texts, including the 123 Agreement. Of course, unless it is ratified by the U.S. Congress it is not a legal document. But we have presumed it to be a legal document, that is why we have sought the ratification of that document. We do not like any amendment because it was an agreed text. That is the way all international negotiations take place. That you agree upon the language, initial the text and thereafter it goes through the ratification process. We do hope it will be possible to have the ratification, as the language has been agreed upon and has been initialled — the 123 and two other documents, the India-specific safeguards agreement and the NSG clearance.

I don’t subscribe to that view. So far as we are concerned, we have made it quite clear that and it has been mentioned in the text of the agreement also. I would not like to go into this argument at this stage because this language has been initiated, debated, discussed and then agreed upon. It is just not that some draft has cropped up suddenly and somebody has initialled it. It is a negotiated draft and when it is approved, ratified by the U.S. Congress, thereafter, our procedures are also there. The cabinet will have to ratify it. Depending on the “observations” is not sufficient; it is their internal matter. We do not comment on their internal matter. When we discuss in Parliament, many members express their views. Nobody is expected to make any comment. When we take a decision in the Cabinet, what transpires in the Cabinet is exclusively our matter, not of somebody else. Therefore, in what way their internal decision-making process takes place and what transpires between one wing of the administration and another wing of the administration, is as per their Constitutional practice. It is their process.

I told you this is an enabling provision. After that when we buy the reactors, we will enter into the commercial agreement. These details will be worked out in framework of this agreement.

No. We are taking it as it is. Up to now there is the 123 Agreement language. In what form we will have the ratification, that will have to be seen.

With the EU our relationship is expanding very fast. We have a strategic partnership. They are on single largest trading partner. Single largest investments have come from the EU. We have many common perceptions, faith in democracy, multi-culturalism, pluralism. These are the essential features of our relationship. Every year we have a summit. The Prime Minister is going to attend the summit with the EU in Marseilles. We are also looking forward how the ratification of the amendment to the Constitution takes place and what is the outcome. In short our relationship with the EU is — economically and politically — excellent.

We have an excellent friendship with Russia, a friendship that is old and tested. What was a warm relationship with India and USSR, the Russian Federation as the successor state has maintained that relationship after the initial years of uncertainty. During the visit of President [Boris] Yeltsin, it was reaffirmed in the mid-90s. It was further strengthened during the tenure of President [Vladimir] Putin. We are expecting to receive the Russian President [Dmitry] Medvedev sometime before the end of this year. Prior to that I will have the privilege of receiving the Russian Foreign Minister [Sergei] Lavrov here. Other type of regional cooperation arrangements — RIC and BRIC — we are regularly having the meeting of Foreign Ministers. Our relationship with Russia is on upswing. Strategic partnership exists, in many areas like science and technology. The defence relationship exists very deeply. As far as SCO is concerned, India enjoys observer status. As observers, we do not participate in summit meetings. Since we joined SCO, we have been participating in every summit as an observer since 2005. Our Petroleum Minister Murli Deora represents India in this organisation. Keeping in view our status in SCO, we are for maintaining our relationship. Individual, and bilateral between India and countries of Central Asia are also expanding.

As far as Kosovo is concerned, I met the Serbian Foreign Minister today. We have not recognised Kosovo’s “independence.” We have a standard practice of recognising a country carved out of existing geographical entity. Keeping that standard we determine our position. We are watching the development with respect to Georgia and the other two small countries [South Ossetia and Abkhazia] which have been recognised by Russia. We have not yet taken any final view in respect of these two countries.

We should concentrate on the end result. How you proceed to arrive at a particular decision is not primarily a concern to us. If China had not wanted to be a party to consensus, it would not have been there. But as the consensus is there and China has gone in with the consensus along with other 44 countries, why should we object? What is our expectation, what type of behaviour we expect from countries, we can have our own view. But we should take into account the end result. China had all along committed to us that they will not be obstructive. In my interaction with their Foreign Minister and of the Prime Minister with their leadership, China maintained that position. And when I had discussion with the Chinese Foreign Minister when he was here, he explained their position and explained it to the media as well. Actions speak more clearly than words.

I don’t think there is any visible manifestation about lack of trust. We have problems and we are trying to resolve through dialogue, for instance the border dispute. Right now the Special Representatives are meeting.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating. It depends on what steps Pakistan takes to respond to our concerns, expressed during my visit to Pakistan and when Pakistan Foreign Minister visited India. When Prime Minister of Pakistan and Foreign Minister discussed with our Prime Minister on the margins of the Colombo SAARC summit, we discussed all these issues. Of course the Kabul bombing did not come up during my visit to Pakistan but we made it quite clear to them that we expect Pakistan to do more. Particularly, the ceasefire which was prevailing along the LoCis being violated. There should be ceasefire. Infiltration must be checked. Infrastructure and logistics support terrorists are getting from the other side of the border should be controlled. Let us see how it goes. We have received the list of commodities they have agreed for cross-LoC trade.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Time for hard decisions
Sharp decline
Devising a coherent anti-terror framework
Making sense of the Appiko movement
PoK eyes cross-LoC trade for economic progress on its side
Call for ‘wholesale’ investment in agriculture
Direct cash transfer
Advisory to States
Draconian laws
Tributes to PR
Evolution vs creation
Pensioners’ plight
It is a negotiated draft: Pranab

Copyright © 2008, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu