New Horizons in
United States Relations with South Asia
United States Policy toward South Asia
The September 11 terrorist attacks on America
were a watershed in our relations with South Asia as well as a clarion call to action in
our foreign policy community. Even before his term began, President Bush saw a need to
transform our relationship with India. Then, as now, we were deeply concerned about the
dangers associated with nuclear weapons in the region, but we needed to move beyond the
constraints that proliferation sanctions legislation placed on our ability to effectively
pursue this and other important goals with India.
And then Afghanistan and Pakistan became the
front lines of the Global War on Terror, with repercussions for the entire region and our
relationships there.
Defending our vital national security
interests in the war on terror remains our principal global foreign policy priority. This
will be a long and difficult struggle. In cooperation with the countries of South Asia we
have already had notable successes in this war, and we are laying the groundwork for more.
For example, in Afghanistan, we worked with Afghans to rout the Taliban and establish a
central government. In Pakistan, the government captured notorious al Qaeda operational
commander Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and September 11 plotter Ramzi bin al Shibh. Through a
network of partnerships throughout the region we will achieve our goals of defeating
terrorism and preventing the additional spread of weapons of mass destruction. We will do
this through cooperation on security and law enforcement, but more importantly, we will
consolidate and preserve our gains by encouraging and supporting freedom and democracy,
development and human dignity. Meeting these goals in South Asia is not incidental to U.S.
foreign policy or to the interests of the South Asian states, it is essential for the free
and prosperous world we all seek.
Last month, I traveled with Secretary of
State Powell to South Asia. As part of the planning for such trips, and afterward, we
often make an effort to review where things stand in our relationships in the region.
I’ll try to give you an updated snapshot. I’ll start with India.
India – A New Strategic
Relationship
With India we see great promise for a
partnership offering enormous benefits to both our countries. The challenge before us is
to fulfill that potential.
The U.S. – India political relationship
is rapidly maturing and is probably better than it has ever been since 1947. The two
countries’ leaders meet often and speak with each other even more often. Our military
ties are growing as well, with army, air force and naval exercises steadily expanding in
frequency and scope. We consult regularly on cooperation against terrorism and a wide
range of other issues. Politicians in India and the United States have discovered what you
as academics have known instinctively for years: that the world’s two largest
democracies have always had more that ties us together than pulls us apart.
President Bush and Prime Minister Vajpayee,
at their first summit in November 2001, presented a vision for the rapid transformation of
the relationship between our two countries. Recently, the two leaders announced the next
steps in implementing their shared vision, which will involve increased cooperation in
civilian nuclear activities, civilian space programs and high technology trade. We have
also agreed to expand our dialogue on strategic stability, including missile defense.
Another area for improvement is in our
economic and commercial relations. India is projected to become the world's third largest
economy by 2015, and we want it to be a strong trading and economic partner. India’s
leadership sees that opening its economy and hastening reforms can make this projection a
reality, allowing continued growth rates of 7-8%. Such growth has the potential to
transform the lives of millions of Indians.
Yet we must also expand our commercial
relationship. We are India’s largest trading partners, but our bilateral trade
remains far below what it could be. Improving that situation is one of our primary
objectives with India. Our Ambassador to India, David Mulford, is a financier who knows
how to maximize business opportunities. He is working hard to overcome more quickly the
barriers that still stand in the way of a significantly bigger, freer and more productive
trade relationship between our two countries.
The progress in our relationship with India
in the past few years is the result of a deep commitment, and a lot of hard work by both
Indians and Americans—including people like you: you are part of a vast network of
reinforcing ties that will allow our two nations to work closely and easily together over
the entire spectrum of the relationships – between our governments, our businesses,
our academics, scientists, health providers, technicians, researchers, artists and between
our citizens. Such ties are the measure of truly strong international relationships and I
am confident that this is where the US and India will be soon.
Pakistan – Helping us remove the
threat of terrorism
The United States has had a long and, at
times, complicated relationship with Pakistan -- a country that faces many political and
economic challenges. Our goal is a Pakistan that is secure, prosperous and a moderate
democracy, contributing to growth and stability in the region. To achieve those goals, we
are committed for the long term to broaden and deepen our relationship with Pakistan.
Since September 2001 Pakistan has been a key
ally in the Global War on Terrorism. The Pakistani government recognizes that terrorists
are as much a threat to the Pakistani people as to anyone -- many innocent Pakistanis have
been killed in terrorist attacks in the last few years. Pakistan has captured more than
550 al-Qaida operatives and Taliban remnants. Its security forces are continuing
operations, and taking casualties, against the Taliban and al Qaida along its border with
Afghanistan, sometimes in the face of opposition from local residents.
Pakistan’s cooperation in the Global War
on Terror has had costs for the government of Pakistan and for the country’s social
fabric. This year, President Bush will be asking Congress to fund the first $600 million
of a five-year $3 billion assistance initiative for Pakistan. These funds, and others
already in train, will help Pakistan better prepare its forces for the fight against
terrorism, against narcotics smugglers and against criminals, with equipment such as
vehicles, helicopters, communications and surveillance equipment and fingerprinting
systems. But we also want to help the Pakistani people. Consequently, we are financing 800
kilometers of roads, including in the historically off-limits tribal areas, refurbishing
schools, building wells, and looking at ways to bring fresh water to those who need it. We
will, if Congress agrees to fund the assistance plan, train 40,000 female federal,
provincial and local councilors to legislate effectively. We will provide scholarships for
mid-level civil servants and employees of NGOs to obtain advanced degrees in the US. We
will launch teacher training programs and youth and adult literacy programs, and promote
development of an independent media. We are exploring establishing burn units in local
clinics, which will treat victims of so-called honor crimes, and will work to improve
governmental transparency.
Further, last month, in Islamabad, Secretary
Powell announced our intention to designate Pakistan a Major Non-NATO Ally – an
indication of the special status and long-term nature of our relationship.
We are also working with Pakistan to prevent
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. President Musharraf has acted quickly and
decisively to end the operations of A/Q/ Khan’s nuclear proliferation network. Dr.
Khan and his associates are now being questioned, and we, Pakistan and other allies are
using the information obtained to completely eradicate the network he created. We are
working closely together to improve Pakistan’s export control system so that such
damaging leaks of technology from Pakistan can never occur again.
All of these efforts demonstrate our
commitment to a rich, long-term and multi-layered relationship with the Government and
people of Pakistan as they work to build a secure, peaceful, prosperous and moderate
democracy.
Pakistan and India – Seeking an
End to Conflict
The threat to regional stability resulting
from differences between Pakistan and India has long been a focus of American diplomacy in
South Asia. As recently as the summer of 2002, war between India and Pakistan seemed
possible. The international community worked hard to help our friends move back from the
brink of a conflict that could have devastated and destabilized the region for years. The
United States has been single minded in working to turn our parallel improvement of
relations with India and Pakistan into what Secretary Powell has called a "triangle
of conflict resolution." "We do not impose ourselves as a mediator," he
said. Instead, we "try to use the trust we have established with both sides to urge
them towards conciliation by peaceful means."
The United States strongly supports these
historic steps by India and Pakistan. The leaders of both countries deserve enormous
credit for the statesmanship they are demonstrating and for their determination to turn
their historic confrontation into opportunities for both of their people. Although the
road ahead is certain to be challenging, we are optimistic that both sides want to keep up
the momentum generated by these recent hopeful events.
Nepal – Political Crisis and
Terrorist Insurgency Threaten Future Development
Nepal, one of the poorest countries in the
world, faces serious political problems and an eight-year old terrorist insurgency that
has killed over 2,000 people last twelve months. Our objective is to see a restoration of
multi-party democracy and bring an end to the violence so that we can help Nepalis deal
with the underlying economic, social and political problems that hold it back from
achieving its potential. During our close 50-year relationship with Nepal, the country
evolved from a closed, monarchy-dominated society into an emerging democracy with growing
economic opportunity. During that time, we contributed more than $1 billion to improve the
lives of the Nepalese people. Unfortunately, the Maoist insurgency has left more than 9000
people dead since 1996 and threatens to destroy much of this progress.
The Maoist insurgents, in their attempt to
overthrow the government and replace it with an autocratic communist state, have destroyed
schools and infrastructure, tortured and killed civilians, looted food from humanitarian
aid projects, forcibly conscripted children, and assassinated government officials. In
August 2003 the Maoists unilaterally withdrew from a seven-month ceasefire and immediately
engaged once more in terrorist actions against the people and government of Nepal. In
October, the U.S. designated the Maoists as terrorists under an executive order,
subjecting them to financial sanctions.
But there can be no military solution to this
conflict. The preservation of Nepal’s system of constitutional monarchy and
multi-party democracy is key to defeating the Maoist challenge. The palace and the parties
must unify – urgently -- under an all-party government as the first step to restoring
democracy and presenting a unified front against the terrorist insurgents. At the same
time, the government and the military must maintain a better human rights record. Fighting
a ruthless enemy does not mean that their tactics can or should be adopted. Along with
India, the UK, and others in the international community, we stand with the Government of
Nepal in its continuing struggle against the brutal Maoist insurgency.
(The author is US Assistant Secretary
of State for South Asia Affairs)
Failure of ANNAN plan:
Shock to the Turkish Cypriots
We regret that the UN Secretary
General’s proposal for a comprehensive settlement submitted to referenda on the two
sides of the Island today, 24 April,2004, has been rejected by the Greek Cypriot side. The
rejection by the Greek Cypriot side of the most comprehensive and serious settlement plan
to date regarding the Cyprus issue which was brought about by the efforts of the UN Secty.
General and the initiatives taken by Turkey recently, has led to the loss of an important
opportunity. This development has also clearly revealed the real source of opposition to a
solution in Cyprus.
The Turkish side has always been in favor of
a just and lasting solution in Cyprus. However, the results of the referenda demonstrated
that the Greek Cypriot side was not ready for a new partnership and coexistence and
reconciliation with the Turkish Cypriots. At the same time, the Greek Cypriot policy of
blaming the Turkish side and Turkey with intransigence through distortion of facts has
also gone bankrupt.
The UN Secretary general’s proposal for
a comprehensive settlement was aimed at reaching a balanced compromise in Cyprus before
1st. May 2004 and the full membership of the Island to the EU under a new partnership
structure and as a whole on this date. The said proposal on the notion that the future of
the Island would be so determined by the Turkish and Greek Cypriots, has foreseen the
establishment of a new bi-zonal partnership formed by the two equal constituent states.
The UN Secty. General’s proposal stipulated that in case one of the sides voted no
the plan would be null and void. Unfortunately this is what we face today.
These referenda, which were held for the
first time in the Island following the UN negotiation process of almost thirty years have
created a new situation in Cyprus. The international community has to analyse and assess
the situation accurately. We believe that the two peoples on the Island should draw
necessary conclusions from this new situation and live side by side in peace and security.
The results of the referenda have also
created a highly paradoxical situation for the EU. On one hand, the EU is admitting to
membership the party, which has voted against the solution and the unification of the
Island, while on the other leaving out in the open the party wishing to find a solution
and unite the Island.
Under the circumstances we expect the Greek
Cypriot political leadership and international community to remove the unjust and
illegitimate embargoes and restrictions imposed on the Turkish Cypriot people. Though this
referendum, the Turkish people have demonstrated they desire to integrate with the world.
No one has the right to further isolate the Turkish Cypriot people in the international
arena.
We expect the international community to
respond favorably to this call of the Turkish Cypriots. It is now high time for the
international community to assume its obligations towards the Turkish Cypriot people, who
live in a pluralistic democratic structure respecting human rights.
As a country enhancing to security and
stability in her region and the world, Turkey has set up for itself, as a strategic
objective, full membership to the EU. In the same vein, Turkey will continue to spebd
efforts to further develop its relations with Greece. We hope the Greeks will duly assess
this new situation that emerges in the Island and adop a consistent and constructive
attitude.
(Remarks made by the Turkish Foreign
Minister Mr. Abdullah Gul, Courtesy: Turkish consulate, Nepal) |
