22 January 1999
TEXT: INDERFURTH REMARKS ON US POLICY IN SOUTH ASIA, JAN. 21
(Cites progress in dialogues with India and Pakistan) (2710) Washington -- Karl F. Inderfurth, Assistant Secretary of State for South Asian Affairs, says the challenges the United States faces in South Asia are difficult, but it is important that the U.S. "tackle and surmount" these challenges. "In many respects, our major challenges in South Asia are not so much about prevention, but management of thresholds that have already been crossed. The most recent, and indeed most dramatic example was, of course, the reciprocal nuclear tests conducted by India and Pakistan eight months ago," Inderfurth said January 21 in remarks to the Foreign Policy Association. Inderfurth noted that in one week he would be traveling with Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott and General Joe Ralston, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to New Delhi and Islamabad to begin the eighth round of intensive dialogues with both governments since their nuclear tests in May 1998. "We are making progress in these talks," he said. The Assistant Secretary also discussed the interests the United States has at stake in South Asia, in particular with India, and the vision the President and his Administration have for relations with the region. The United States, Inderfurth said, is "working on transforming the U.S.-Indian relationship into a true partnership" and continues "to remain engaged and optimistic that we will, over time, be able to reach an understanding on non-proliferation issues." "I could easily identify dozens of examples of cooperative activities and actions between India and the United States, all of which we hope will define our new partnership for the 21st century," he said. "Moreover, it is also illustrative of the approach we envision for South Asia as a region, with our longstanding friend Pakistan, with an emerging Bangladesh, with Sri Lanka, Nepal and Maldives." Following is the text of Inderfurth's remarks: (Begin text) The United States and South Asia Assistant Secretary for South Asian Affairs Karl F. Inderfurth The Foreign Policy Association January 21, 1999 Thank you very much for the opportunity to address the Foreign Policy Association. Our topic -- the impact of last May's nuclear tests by India and Pakistan on South Asian stability -- could not be more timely. Just this past week there was a major conference at Stanford University, co- sponsored by the Carnegie Commission on Preventing Deadly Conflict and the Stanford-Harvard Preventive Defense Project. A principal focus of that conference was South Asia Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott spoke on behalf of the Clinton Administration. Tonight's speech is also timely because one week from today Secretary Talbott and I will depart Washington with General Joe Ralston, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to travel to New Delhi and Islamabad to begin the eighth round of our intensive dialogue with both governments since their nuclear tests. We are making progress in these talks. As India's new Minister for External Affairs, Jaswant Singh, has put it, we are working very hard to "harmonize" our respective security perspectives. At the same time we recognize that the issues we are discussing are very difficult, of fundamental importance to all concerned and relate to the history of a region that has had more than its share of security concerns. Breaking Taboos South Asia is a region where a number of taboos have been broken in the security realm, where conflict between the two major players has erupted three times -- and has come quite close to erupting on several other occasions. In many respects, our major challenges in South Asia are not so much about prevention, but management of thresholds that have already been crossed. The most recent, and indeed most dramatic example was, of course, the reciprocal nuclear tests conducted by India and Pakistan eight months ago. The temptation in a speech such as this is to focus upon the causes of -- and U.S. response to -- this monumental development and what it means for global security and the international non-proliferation regime. We have devoted considerable time and effort to these matters since May. I want, however, to resist temptation a bit, and focus on a broader topic that often gets lost, or at least overshadowed, in the rather heated exchanges we have seen in many of the recent discussions and seminars on security in South Asia. If you will permit me, I believe it will be both useful and timely to take this opportunity to discuss the many interests that the United States has at stake in South Asia, and to outline the vision that the President and his Administration have for relations with the region. Such a discussion, I am sure you will agree, not only will better enable us to articulate to the American public why events in South Asia -- historically, in recent months, and into the next millennium -- are of such consequence. It will also enable us to build a constituency for devoting the time, attention and resources to a region that traditionally has been, as Under Secretary of State Tom Pickering has said, "on the back side of the U.S. diplomatic globe." And finally, the discussion will help us to underscore, primarily to the two major players in the region, that the United States does indeed look at South Asia in comprehensive terms. Even if we have occasional disagreements -- including those that are strongly felt and involve matters of grave principle -- we will not allow our relationships to be defined by a single-issue agenda. Charting a New Direction Though many Americans can easily identify India on the map and more precisely know that the Subcontinent exists as a geographic entity, they have trouble grasping or remembering that it truly is its own region, separate and distinct from East, Central, or Southwest Asia, much less why it matters. To his great credit, President Clinton recognized early in his first term, amidst India's and Pakistan's dramatic conversion to market economics and emerging transitions to democratic systems in Nepal and Bangladesh, that the United States could no longer afford to neglect South Asia, and indeed had substantial present and future interests to advance and protect. Under the President's watch, the State Department saw the confirmation of the first-ever Assistant Secretary of State for South Asian Affairs, and the Administration undertook a comprehensive review of the Subcontinent and all of the U.S. equities there. The result in mid-1997 was a considered decision to move away from our traditionally narrow focus on problem areas, and towards more cooperative, broad-based relations with the countries of the region, to be pursued and solidified through an active policy of engagement. We reflected upon and put into place a series of high-level visits, including by Secretary of State Albright, which were designed to highlight discrete areas where our interests with India and the other South Asian states converged, and which were to culminate in the first Presidential trip to the region since Jimmy Carter's in 1978. A key feature of that trip was to have been a celebration of 50 years of independence for both India and Pakistan, with an emphasis on our shared democratic experiences. Democratic Ties To be sure, democracy has long played a strong role in the South Asian context, particularly in the modem period since India's independence. We, of course, have been warmly disposed toward India's democratic tradition, yet somehow that never seemed quite enough to get us beyond correct but rather chilly exchanges with various Indian governments. On the other hand, Pakistan, whose democratic path has been less steady, was counted upon as a partner of the United States in various Cold War alliances and played a major part in reversing the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. This illustrates a trap that one can fall into in the employment of democracy as the yardstick in our relationship with India, Pakistan and the other South Asian states. On one end of the spectrum, we could hold up democracy as the principal basis for our relationship with a country like India and make the case that we thereby are natural partners on the global scene. Under such a scenario, we would elevate and perpetuate the use of the phrase that we and India are "the world's largest and oldest democracies," as if the size and duration of our democratic systems were all that mattered. From there, it would be easy to gloss over any perceived transgressions, or for pursuing policies that might conflict with other U.S. interests, since, after all, India would only be acting in accordance with the will of its people. On the other end of the spectrum, we could take India's democratic course for granted, and try to force India into positions for which there is no national consensus, or that violate its concepts of sovereignty or self-interest. In other words, there is a risk that our appreciation of democracy in India would amount essentially to lip service, and that we might overlook how much blood, sweat, tears and determination it took for India to make democracy work successfully in such a vast and diverse land. Our task then is to strike a balance, to give our common democratic heritage its proper emphasis without giving short shrift to other important equities. We need to remind ourselves that India's government is every bit as popularly elected and self-respecting as ours, even as we try to influence its behavior or shape its perspective on events and matters of policy. As our relationship matures, our interaction with India will be less prone, to misunderstandings and assume a proper equilibrium. We can look forward to a more cooperative and true partnership, which will serve as a healthy example for others to emulate. About Governance Let me add here a word about democracy, namely that it is about more than elections and the franchise. It is equally about governance, about securing the prosperity and fundamental rights of the citizenry. Breakdowns have been known to occur in our country, and we have seen it in South Asia as well. When extremists, or factions, or sectarian-based parties are able to exert undue influence on a government or shape a national or even local debate, the result can be disastrous. That is why many observers are closely watching the emergence of caste- and religious-based parties in India, why they are concerned about the impact of "Islamicizing" the constitutional and legal system in Pakistan, and wonder whether or not some of the recent events we have witnessed -- including attacks on Christians in Gujarat and deadly sectarian violence in Karachi and the Punjab -- are somehow connected. While it is not for us to dictate the interaction between religion and politics in any other system than our own, we trust that today's and tomorrow's leaders in South Asia share our belief that democracy means as much about protecting the rights of even the smallest of minorities as serving the will of the majority. Other U.S. Interests There are other widespread benefits, even more immediate and tangible than the rather lofty notions of democracy and governance I have mentioned thus far, and these help to illustrate the broader interests that the Clinton Administration has tried to pursue in its South Asia policy for the past year and a half. Market economies, as we have come to realize, tend to flourish in democratic settings. South Asia, with the glaring exception of Afghanistan - where democracy has not seen much daylight in recent memory -- is beginning to realize its promising potential as a market for U.S. business and investment and is making important strides towards integrating into a regional trading bloc. The United States, which already enjoys pride of place as a trading partner and investor in the region, stands to benefit considerably through an expansion of economic interaction with the South Asian states. And those benefits will not be one-sided; India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal are all in need of foreign investment, particularly in the infrastructure sector, and will see a corresponding expansion in their own economies as employment and wages rise, as productivity and efficiency increase, and as investment dollars pursue opportunities. From there, new horizons begin to emerge and a whole host of opportunities for growth, development and cooperation will present themselves. An India that sees sustained economic growth at a level of 8-9% per annum -- not outside the realm of possibility -- can turn to problems of poverty, and move from its current admirable posture of self-sufficiency in food and agriculture towards the eradication of hunger. An economically-secure Bangladesh can begin considering the possibilities for exporting its potentially enormous gas reserves, giving a tremendous push to regional cooperation and paving the way for a dramatic leap in Bangladesh's development prospects. In other words, the pieces of the puzzle and how they fit are already apparent -- potential energy surpluses in Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, and Central Asia, alongside enormous energy deficits in India; a paltry $100 million in documented trade between India and Pakistan (and an estimated figure at least three times greater on the black market). Economic growth, and the confidence, creativity, and entrepreneurship that it breeds, can help to move those pieces closer together. Indian Opportunities While our Presidentially-mandated broad-based approach applies to all of the countries of South Asia, it is no accident that much of our time, attention and focus is on India. The United States recognizes that India is the largest, strongest and indeed the dominant player in the Subcontinent, and as such it commands a corresponding level of thought and care. I do not mean to suggest that we deal with India to the exclusion or at the expense of the other countries in the region, but rather that we simply recognize reality. Our interests in India are a bit better appreciated and understood by the American public, and of course India's size and influence on the global scene -- in international fora, as a leader and spokesman for the developing world, and as an emerging market -- are well documented. That is why we were working on transforming the U.S.-Indian relationship into a true partnership, and why we continue to remain engaged and optimistic that we will, over time, be able to reach an understanding on non-proliferation issues. The horizons are boundless. We can realistically target increases in trade and investment over the next 10 - 20 years to reach levels that we enjoy with China. We can build upon the extraordinary, but little known record of cooperative science between our two nations. We should pursue a full agenda of collaborative research, especially in life-threatening diseases such as HIV/AIDS, plant biotechnology, civilian space applications, and advanced information technology. We can undertake to develop an agenda for cooperation on environmental protection and remediation, with a major investment of time and resources in the production and deployment of clean technologies in India. In short, I could easily identify dozens of examples of cooperative activities and actions between India and the United States, all of which we hope will define our new partnership for the 21st century. Moreover, it is also illustrative of the approach we envision for South Asia as a region, with our longstanding friend Pakistan, with an emerging Bangladesh, with Sri Lanka, Nepal and Maldives. Closing Let me conclude with this thought. No doubt you will think this Administration's vision of the South Asia region ambitious, given the gap between where we are and where we hope to go. Still, I have taken advantage of your indulgence to explain our views not to downplay the difficulty of the current challenges we face, but to emphasize the importance of tackling and surmounting these challenges and the value to be gained for the United States in doing so. And it is in that spirit that, along with Deputy Secretary Talbott and General Ralston, I will be off to New Delhi and Islamabad next week. Your support would be greatly appreciated. The stakes for U.S. policy and long-term American interests are considerable. Thank you, and I look forward to your questions. (End text)
NEWSLETTER
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|