Text: President Clinton's Address to India's Parliament

President Clinton made a strong appeal to India on March 22 to retreat
from its nuclear weapons program and reach out to rival Pakistan to
restart peace talks in his speech to the Parliament of India.


"In a nuclear standoff, there is nothing more dangerous than believing
there is no danger," said Clinton in a speech to both houses of
parliament.


"From South America to South Africa, nations are foreswearing these
weapons, realizing that a nuclear future is not a more secure future,"
said Clinton. "Most of the world is moving toward the elimination of
nuclear weapons. That goal is not advanced if in any country, in any
region, it moves in the other direction."


"India and the United States have reaffirmed our commitment to forego
nuclear testing," the President said, but he added, "we can do more."


"I believe both nations should join the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban
Treaty (CTBT); work to launch negotiations on a treaty to end the
production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons; strengthen export
controls."


He also said India could pursue defense policies "in keeping with its
commitment not to seek a nuclear or missile arms race, which the Prime
Minister has forcefully reaffirmed just in these last couple of days."


Both countries face the danger from the spread of weapons of mass
destruction "to those who might have no reservations about using
them," Clinton said. "I still believe this is the greatest potential
threat to the security we all face in the 21st Century."


Clinton said the United States and India face four challenges: the
first challenge was to set the economic relationship right. Secondly,
governments have to deal with the problems of poverty and find ways to
encourage global economic growth. In order for this to happen, he
said, "we know we must also stand with those struggling for human
rights and freedom around the world and in the region."


Thirdly, Clinton said, both countries need to deal with managing
economic growth to protect the environment and reverse climate change.


"Our fourth challenge is to protect the gains of democracy and
development from the forces which threaten to undermine them."


Addressing the question of Kashmir, Clinton stressed that he did not
come to South Asia to mediate the dispute over Kashmir. "Only India
and Pakistan can work out the problems," he said, adding that he "will
say the same thing to General Musharraf in Islamabad."


"In the meantime, I will continue to stress that this should be a time
for restraint, for respect for the Line of Control, for renewed lines
of communications," Clinton said.


Following is the White House text of Clinton's speech to the
Parliament of India:





THE WHITE HOUSE
OFFICE OF THE PRESS SECRETARY
(New Delhi, India)                                                             
For Immediate Release
March 22, 2000



REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT TO THE INDIAN JOINT SESSION OF PARLIAMENT
Parliament
New Delhi, India
11:10 A.M. (L)

	

THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Vice President, Mr. Prime Minister, Mr. Speaker,
members of the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, I am privileged to speak to
you and, through you, to the people of India. I am honored to be
joined today by members of my Cabinet and staff at the White House,
and a very large representation of members of our United States
Congress from both political parties. We're all honored to be here and
we thank you for your warm welcome. (Applause.)


I would also like to thank the people of India for their kindness to
my daughter and my mother-in-law and, on their previous trip, to my
wife and my daughter. (Applause.)


I have looked forward to this day with great anticipation. This whole
trip has meant a great deal to me, especially to this point, the
opportunity I had to visit the Gandhi memorial, to express on behalf
of all the people of the United States our gratitude for the life, the
work, the thought of Gandhi, without which the great civil rights
revolution in the United States would never had succeeded on a
peaceful plane. (Applause.)


As Prime Minister Vajpayee has said, India and America are natural
allies, two nations conceived in liberty, each finding strength in its
diversity, each seeing in the other a reflection of its own aspiration
for a more humane and just world.


A poet once said the world's inhabitants can be divided into "those
that have seen the Taj Mahal and those that have not." (Laughter.)
Well, in a few hours I will have a chance to cross over to the happier
side of that divide. But I hope, in a larger sense, that my visit will
help the American people to see the new India and to understand you
better. And I hope that the visit will help India to understand
America better. And that by listening to each other we can build a
true partnership of mutual respect and common endeavor.


From a distance, India often appears as a kaleidoscope of competing,
perhaps superficial, images. Is it atomic weapons, or ahimsa? A land
struggling against poverty and inequality, or the world's largest
middle-class society? Is it still simmering with communal tensions, or
history's most successful melting pot? Is it Bollywood or Satyajit
Ray? Swetta Chetty or Alla Rakha? Is it the handloom or the hyperlink?


The truth is, no single image can possibly do justice to your great
nation. But beyond the complexities and the apparent contradictions, I
believe India teaches us some very basic lessons.


The first is about democracy. There are still those who deny that
democracy is a universal aspiration; who say it works only for people
of a certain culture, or a certain degree of economic development.
India has been proving them wrong for 52 years now. Here is a country
where more than 2 million people hold elected office in local
government; a country that shows at every election that those who
possess the least cherish their vote the most. Far from washing away
the uniqueness of your culture, your democracy has brought out the
richness of its tapestry, and given you the knot that holds it
together.


A second lesson India teaches is about diversity. You have already
heard remarks about that this morning. But around the world there is a
chorus of voices who say ethnic and religious diversity is a threat;
who argue that the only way to keep different people from killing one
another is to keep them as far apart as possible. But India has shown
us a better way. For all the troubles you have seen, surely the
subcontinent has seen more innocence hurt in the efforts to divide
people by ethnicity and faith than by the efforts to bring them
together in peace and harmony.


Under trying circumstances, you have shown the world how to live with
difference. You have shown that tolerance and mutual respect are in
many ways the keys to our common survival. That is something the whole
world needs to learn.


A third lesson India teaches is about globalization and what may be
the central debate of our time. Many people believe the forces of
globalization are inherently divisive; that they can only widen the
gap between rich and poor. That is a valid fear, but I believe wrong.


As the distance between producers large and small, and customers near
and far becomes less relevant, developing countries will have
opportunities not only to succeed, but to lead in lifting more people
out of poverty more quickly than at any time in human history. In the
old economy, location was everything. In the new economy, information,
education and motivation are everything -- and India is proving it.


You liberated your markets and now you have one of the 10 fastest
growing economies in the world. At the rate of growth within your
grasp, India's standard of living could rise by 500 percent in just 20
years. You embraced information technology and now, when Americans and
other big software companies call for consumer and customer support,
they're just as likely to find themselves talking to an expert in
Bangalore as one in Seattle. (Applause.)


You decentralized authority, giving more individuals and communities
the freedom to succeed. In that way, you affirmed what every
successful country is finding in its own way: globalization does not
favor nations with a licensing raj, it does favor nations with a
panchayat raj. And the world has been beating a path to your door.


In the new millennium, every great country must answer one overarching
question: how shall we define our greatness? Every country -- America
included -- is tempted to cling to yesterday's definition of economic
and military might. But true leadership for the United States and
India derives more from the power of our example and the potential of
our people.


I believe that the greatest of India's many gifts to the world is the
example its people have set "from Midnight to Millennium." Think of
it: virtually every challenge humanity knows can be found here in
India. And every solution to every challenge can be found here as
well: confidence in democracy; tolerance for diversity; a willingness
to embrace social change. That is why Americans admire India; why we
welcome India's leadership in the region and the world; and why we
want to take our partnership to a new level, to advance our common
values and interests, and to resolve the differences that still
remain.


There were long periods when that would not have been possible. Though
our democratic ideals gave us a starting point in common, and our
dreams of peace and prosperity gave us a common destination, there was
for too long too little common ground between East and West, North and
South. Now, thankfully, the old barriers between nations and people,
economies and cultures, are being replaced by vast networks of
cooperation and commerce. With our open, entrepreneurial societies,
India and America are at the center of those networks. We must expand
them, and defeat the forces that threaten them.


To succeed, I believe there are four large challenges India and the
United States must meet together -- challenges that should define our
partnership in the years ahead.


The first of these challenges is to get our own economic relationship
right. Americans have applauded your efforts to open your economy,
your commitment to a new wave of economic reform; your determination
to bring the fruits of growth to all your people. We are proud to
support India's growth as your largest partner in trade and
investment. And we want to see more Indians and more Americans benefit
from our economic ties, especially in the cutting edge fields of
information technology, biotechnology and clean energy.


The private sector will drive this progress, but our job as
governments is to create the conditions that will allow them to
succeed in doing so, and to reduce the remaining impediments to trade
and investment between us.


Our second challenge is to sustain global economic growth in a way
that lifts the lives of rich and poor alike, both across and within
national borders. Part of the world today lives at the cutting edge of
change, while a big part still exists at the bare edge of survival.
Part of the world lives in the information age. Part of the world does
not even reach the clean water age. And often the two live side by
side. It is unacceptable, it is intolerable; thankfully, it is
unnecessary and it is far more than a regional crisis. Whether around
the corner or around the world, abject poverty in this new economy is
an affront to our common humanity and a threat to our common
prosperity.


The problem is truly immense, as you know far better than I. But
perhaps for the first time in all history, few would dispute that we
know the solutions. We know we need to invest in education and
literacy, so that children can have soaring dreams and the tools to
realize them. We know we need to make a special commitment in
developing nations to the education of young girls, as well as young
boys. Everything we have learned about development tells us that when
women have access to knowledge, to health, to economic opportunity and
to civil rights, children thrive, families succeed and countries
prosper.


Here again, we see how a problem and its answers can be found side by
side in India. For every economist who preaches the virtues of women's
empowerment points at first to the achievements of India's state of
Kerala -- I knew there would be somebody here from Kerala -- (laughter
and applause.) Thank you.


To promote development, we know we must conquer the diseases that kill
people and progress. Last December, India immunized 140 million
children against polio, the biggest public health effort in human
history. I congratulate you on that. (Applause.)


I have launched an initiative in the United States to speed the
development of vaccines for malaria, tuberculosis and AIDS -- the
biggest infectious killers of our time. This July, when our partners
in the G-8 meet in Japan, I will urge them to join us.


But that is not enough, for at best, effective vaccines are years
away. Especially for AIDS, we need a commitment today to prevention,
and that means straight talk and an end to stigmatizing. As Prime
Minister Vajpayee said, no one should ever speak of AIDS as someone
else's problem. This has long been a big problem for the United
States. It is now a big problem for you. I promise you America's
partnership in the continued struggle. (Applause.)


To promote development, we know we must also stand with those
struggling for human rights and freedom around the world and in the
region. For as the economist Amartya Sen has said, no system of
government has done a better job in easing human want, in averting
human catastrophes, than democracy. I am proud America and India will
stand together on the right side of history when we launch the
Community of Democracies in Warsaw this summer.


All of these steps are essential to lifting people's lives. But there
is yet another. With greater trade and the growth it brings, we can
multiply the gains of education, better health and democratic
empowerment. That is why I hope we will work together to launch a new
global trade round that will promote economic development for all.


One of the benefits of the World Trade Organization is that it has
given developing countries a bigger voice in global trade policy.
Developing countries have used that voice to urge richer nations to
open their markets further so that all can have a chance to grow. That
is something the opponents of the WTO don't fully appreciate yet.


We need to remind them that when Indians and Brazilians and
Indonesians speak up for open trade, they are not speaking for some
narrow corporate interest, but for a huge part of humanity that has no
interest in being saved from development. Of course, trade should not
be a race to the bottom in environmental and labor standards, but
neither should fears about trade keep part of our global community
forever at the bottom.


Yet we must also remember that those who are concerned about the
impact of globalization in terms of inequality, in environmental
degradation do speak for a large part of humanity. Those who believe
that trade should contribute not just to the wealth, but also to the
fairness of societies; those who share Nehru's dream of a structure
for living that fulfills our material needs, and at the same time
sustains our mind and spirit.


We can advance these values without engaging in rich-country
protectionism. Indeed, to sustain a consensus for open trade, we must
find a way to advance these values as well. That is my motivation, and
my only motivation, in seeking a dialogue about the connections
between labor, the environment, and trade and development.


I would remind you -- and I want to emphasize this -- the United
States has the most open markets of any wealthy country in the world.
We have the largest trade deficit. We also have had a strong economy,
because we have welcomed the products and the services from the labor
of people throughout the world. I am for an open global trading
system. But we must do it in a way that advances the cause of social
justice around the world. (Applause.)


The third challenge we face is to see that the prosperity and growth
of the information age require us to abandon some of the outdated
truths of the Industrial Age. As the economy grows faster today, for
example, when children are kept in school, not put to work. Think
about the industries that are driving our growth today in India and in
America. Just as oil enriched the nations who had it in the 20th
century, clearly knowledge is doing the same for the nations who have
it in the 21st century. The difference is, knowledge can be tapped by
all people everywhere, and it will never run out.


We must also find ways to achieve robust growth while protecting the
environment and reversing climate change. I'm convinced we can do that
as well. We will see in the next few years, for example, automobiles
that are three, four, perhaps five times as efficient as those being
driven today. Soon scientists will make alternative sources of energy
more widely available and more affordable. Just for example, before
long chemists almost certainly will unlock the block that will allow
us to produce eight or nine gallons of fuel from bio-fuels, farm
fuels, using only one gallon of gasoline.


Indian scientists are at the forefront of this kind of research --
pioneering the use of solar energy to power rural communities;
developing electric cars for use in crowded cities; converting
agricultural waste into electricity. If we can deepen our cooperation
for clean energy, we will strengthen our economies, improve our
people's health and fight global warming. This should be a vital
element of our new partnership.


A fourth challenge we face is to protect the gains of democracy and
development from the forces, which threaten to undermine them. There
is the danger of organized crime and drugs. There is the evil of
trafficking in human beings, a modern form of slavery. And of course,
there is the threat of terrorism. Both our nations know it all too
well.


Americans understood the pain and agony you went through during the
Indian Airlines hijacking. And I saw that pain firsthand when I met
with the parents and the widow of the young man who was killed on that
airplane. (Applause.) We grieve with you for the Sikhs who were killed
in Kashmir -- (applause) -- and our heart goes out to their families.
We will work with you to build a system of justice, to strengthen our
cooperation against terror. (Applause.) We must never relax our
vigilance or allow the perpetrators to intimidate us into retreating
from our democratic ideals.


Another danger we face is the spread of weapons of mass destruction to
those who might have no reservations about using them. I still believe
this is the greatest potential threat to the security we all face in
the 21st century. It is why we must be vigilant in fighting the spread
of chemical and biological weapons. And it is why we must both keep
working closely to resolve our remaining differences on nuclear
proliferation.


I am aware that I speak to you on behalf of a nation that has
possessed nuclear weapons for 55 years and more. But since 1988, the
United States has dismantled more than 13,000 nuclear weapons. We have
helped Russia to dismantle their nuclear weapons and to safeguard the
material that remains. We have agreed to an outline of a treaty with
Russia that will reduce our remaining nuclear arsenal by more than
half. We are producing no more fissile material, developing no new
land- or submarine-based missiles, engaging in no new nuclear testing.


From South America to South Africa, nations are foreswearing these
weapons, realizing that a nuclear future is not a more secure future.
Most of the world is moving toward the elimination of nuclear weapons.
That goal is not advanced if any country, in any region, it moves in
the other direction.


I say this with great respect. Only India can determine its own
interests. Only India -- (applause) -- only India can know if it truly
is safer today than before the tests. Only India can determine if it
will benefit from expanding its nuclear and missile capabilities, if
its neighbors respond by doing the same thing. Only India knows if it
can afford a sustained investment in both conventional and nuclear
forces while meeting its goals for human development. These are
questions others may ask, but only you can answer.


I can only speak to you as a friend about America's own experience
during the Cold War. We were geographically distant from the Soviet
Union. We were not engaged in direct armed combat. Through years of
direct dialogue with our adversary, we each had a very good idea of
the other's capabilities, doctrines, and intentions. We each spent
billions of dollars on elaborate command and control systems, for
nuclear weapons are not cheap.


And yet, in spite of all of this -- and as I sometimes say jokingly,
in spite of the fact that both sides had very good spies, and that was
a good thing -- (laughter) -- in spite of all of this, we came far too
close to nuclear war. We learned that deterrence alone cannot be
relied on to prevent accident or miscalculation. And in a nuclear
standoff, there is nothing more dangerous than believing there is no
danger.


I can also repeat what I said at the outset. India is a leader, a
great nation, which by virtue of its size, its achievements, and its
example, has the ability to shape the character of our time. For any
of us, to claim that mantle and assert that status is to accept first
and foremost that our actions have consequences for others beyond our
borders. Great nations with broad horizons must consider whether
actions advance or hinder what Nehru called the larger cause of
humanity.


So India's nuclear policies, inevitably, have consequences beyond your
borders: eroding the barriers against the spread of nuclear weapons,
discouraging nations that have chosen to foreswear these weapons,
encouraging others to keep their options open. But if India's nuclear
test shook the world, India's leadership for nonproliferation can
certainly move the world.


India and the United States have reaffirmed our commitment to forego
nuclear testing. And for that I thank the Prime Minister, the
government and the people of India. But in our own self-interest --
and I say this again -- in our own self-interest we can do more. I
believe both nations should join the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban
Treaty; work to launch negotiations on a treaty to end the production
of fissile materials for nuclear weapons; strengthen export controls.
And India can pursue defense policies in keeping with its commitment
not to seek a nuclear or missile arms race, which the Prime Minister
has forcefully reaffirmed just in these last couple of days.


Again, I do not presume to speak for you or to tell you what to
decide. It is not my place. You are a great nation and you must
decide. But I ask you to continue our dialogue on these issues. And
let us turn our dialogue into a genuine partnership against
proliferation. If we make progress in narrowing our differences, we
will be both more secure, and our relationship can reach its full
potential.


I hope progress can also be made in overcoming a source of tension in
this region, including the tensions between India and Pakistan. I
share many of your government's concerns about the course Pakistan is
taking; your disappointment that past overtures have not always met
with success; your outrage over recent violence. I know it is
difficult to be a democracy bordered by nations whose governments
reject democracy.


But I also believe -- I also believe India has a special opportunity,
as a democracy, to show its neighbors that democracy is about
dialogue. It does not have to be about friendship, but it is about
building working relationships among people who differ.


One of the wisest things anyone ever said to me is that you don't make
peace with your friends. That is what the late Israeli Prime Minister
Yitzhak Rabin told me before he signed the Oslo Accords with the
Palestinians, with whom he had been fighting for decades. It is well
to remember -- I remind myself of it all the time, even when I have
arguments with members of the other party in my Congress -- (laughter)
-- you don't make peace with your friends.


Engagement with adversaries is not the same thing as endorsement. It
does not require setting aside legitimate grievances. Indeed, I
strongly believe that what has happened since your Prime Minister made
his courageous journey to Lahore only reinforces the need for
dialogue. (Applause.)


I can think of no enduring solution to this problem that can be
achieved in any other way. In the end, for the sake of the innocents
who always suffer the most, someone must end the contest of inflicting
and absorbing pain.


Let me also make clear, as I have repeatedly, I have certainly not
come to South Asia to mediate the dispute over Kashmir. Only India and
Pakistan can work out the problems between them. And I will say the
same thing to General Musharraf in Islamabad. But if outsiders cannot
resolve this problem, I hope you will create the opportunity to do it
yourselves, calling on the support of others who can help where
possible, as American diplomacy did in urging the Pakistanis to go
back behind the line of control in the Kargil crisis. (Applause.)


In the meantime, I will continue to stress that this should be a time
for restraint, for respect for the line of control, for renewed lines
of communication.


Addressing this challenge and all the others I mentioned will require
us to be closer partners and better friends, and to remember that good
friends, out of respect, are honest with one another. And even when
they do not agree, they always try to find common ground.


I have read that one of the unique qualities of Indian classical music
is its elasticity. The composer lays down a foundation, a structure of
melodic and rhythmic arrangements, but the player has to improvise
within that structure to bring the raga+ to life.


Our relationship is like that. The composers of our past have given us
a foundation of shared democratic ideals. It is up to us to give life
to those ideals in this time. The melodies do not have to be the same
to be beautiful to both of us. But if we listen to each other, and we
strive to realize our vision together, we will write a symphony far
greater than the sum of our individual notes.


The key is to genuinely and respectfully listen to each other. If we
do, Americans will better understand the scope of India's
achievements, and the dangers India still faces in this troubled part
of the world. We will understand that India will not choose a
particular course simply because others wish it to do so. It will
choose only what it believes its interests clearly demand and what its
people democratically embrace.


If we listen to each other, I also believe Indians will understand
better that America very much wants you to succeed. Time and again --
(applause) -- time and again in my time as President, America has
found that it is the weakness of great nations, not their strength,
that threatens our vision for tomorrow.


So we want India to be strong; to be secure; to be united; to be a
force for a safer, more prosperous, more democratic world. Whatever we
ask of you, we ask in that spirit alone. After too long a period of
estrangement, India and the United States have learned that being
natural allies is a wonderful thing, but it is not enough. Our task is
to turn a common vision into common achievements so that partners in
spirit can be partners in fact.


We have already come a long way to this day of new beginnings, but we
still have promises to keep, challenges to meet and hopes to redeem.


So let us seize this moment with humility in the fragile and fleeting
nature of this life, but absolute confidence in the power of the human
spirit. Let us seize it for India, for America, for all those with
whom we share this small planet, and for all the children that
together we can give such bright tomorrows.


Thank you very much.  



(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: usinfo.state.gov)