|
April 27, 2000
Thomas R. Pickering, Under Secretary of State for Political
Affairs
Remarks to Foreign Policy Institute,
South Asia Program
Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies
The Johns Hopkins University Washington, DC
April 27, 2000
U.S. Policy in South Asia: The Road Ahead
Thank you, Shirin [Taher-Kheli]. I am delighted to have
this opportunity to address U.S. policy toward South Asia
but, before I begin, allow me to note one thing just about
everybody in this audience already knows: In your own work
here at SAIS, Shirin, as in your previous government service
and other professional pursuits, you truly personify the
highest level of energy, talent, integrity, and devotion --
both to your American home and to your South Asian heritage.
Indeed, if I may say so, one reason South Asia is now
assuming a higher place in American foreign policy is
because of the enormous contributions being made to our
country by those of South Asian descent. It is a region in
which I was privileged to serve as U.S. ambassador, and in
which I retain an abiding interest and affection. And, of
course, President Clinton's recent extensive visit to this
region has now placed it squarely on the map both in policy
and business circles. South Asia is literally on the
opposite side of the globe. For too long, that meant South
Asia also languished outside the mainstream of American
diplomacy. Until last month, no U.S. President had been
there since Jimmy Carter in 1978.
President Clinton started his second term with a deliberate
plan to end that neglect. As part of that plan, we were
preparing for him to visit the sub-continent in 1997. But
the vicissitudes of Indian politics and the extremely
unfortunate Indian and Pakistani nuclear tests, delayed the
trip for over 2 years, complicating our efforts to build new
bridges to countries in the region. Despite these setbacks,
we remain convinced of the need to build stronger
diplomatic, economic, and human ties with South Asia. There
are a number of factors that play into that conviction. I
want to outline a few for you today because I believe it is
critical that people in the United States understand the
importance of this region to them and our nation.
First, there is size and geography. It cannot escape
anyone's notice that this region is home to over one-fifth
of all human beings, and that proportion is growing. It is
an increasingly better educated, innovative, and competitive
population, which enhances its importance to us.
Second, South Asia sits at a crossroads in many senses. It
is a place where millions of people, from hundreds of
language groups and ethnicities have lived side by side for
millennia. All of the world's great religions are
represented in the region. In short, the region is a
learning laboratory for human diversity, democracy, and
development.
Third, South Asia sits in a strategically and commercially
important place geographically. Throughout history the
great trade routes between east and west have crossed the
region -- on both land and sea - - and that remains the case
today. All of this, however, points out only what is
historically true. To understand why we are working so hard
to reach out to South Asia now, one needs only to look at
the end of the Cold War and at globalization to understand
the flowering opportunities and the burgeoning challenges
that now confront us.
These events brought a realignment of relationships, more
open economies, and an increased flow of people, information
and ideas to all corners of the globe. South Asia has been
caught up in these changes, increasingly impacting important
American interests, but providing risks along with
opportunities.We believe it is imperative to engage with
South Asia to capitalize on the opportunities to strengthen
democracies, increase respect for human rights, and continue
to build sound and flourishing economies that benefit the
U.S. and the region. At the same time, we want to work
diligently with the people and countries of South Asia to
combat the new global threats from disease, environmental
degradation, transnational crime, and terrorism, and to
reduce the threats posed to all humanity by war and nuclear
proliferation.
The President completed his landmark visit to the three
largest countries in South Asia one month ago. This is,
therefore, a good moment to take stock of what was
accomplished on his trip, what remains to be done, and where
we want to go from here in our relations with this
increasingly important part of the world. Let me begin with
India.
Secretary Albright, in a speech to the Asia Society
that set the stage for the President's trip, observed that
"for decades, the enormous potential of Indo-U.S.
relations went largely untapped." The primary reason
for this was the Cold War, and, frankly, our very divergent
views about it. In the diplomatic arena, India chose the
path of nonalignment, in which we sometimes saw a pro-Soviet
bias. In the economic sphere, India's socialist, statist,
and protectionist policies did little, as we saw it, to
develop either its own great potential or its links with the
United States. Both sides were too slow, even after the Cold
War was over, to adjust to changing circumstances and find
ways to manage differences, including substantial
disagreement over nuclear issues. Today, however, as the
Secretary said, "both the U.S. and India are coming to
realize that there was always something unnatural and
regrettable about the estrangement of our two
democracies." The removal of many Cold War differences
has given greater prominence to the democratic values we
have always shared. India's decisions on economic policy
have begun to make it a better and a more important trade
and investment partner. India has long been a leader among
developing nations. Over the past decade, its gradually
globalizing economy has fostered a broader and more nuanced
perspective in politics as well. In its extemely important
role in the world, India has three great assets: a vigorous
and hardy democratic political system, a newly dynamic
economy, and a desire to expand its international horizons.
All of these elements are acknowledged in the joint
statement on "Indo-U.S. Relations: A Vision for the
21st Century" signed by President Clinton and Prime
Minster Vajpayee in New Delhi during the trip. The two
leaders resolved "to create a closer and qualitatively
new relationship between the U.S. and India," based on
shared democratic values and increasingly convergent
pragmatic interests, in the political, economic,
environmental, and other domains.
The statement also commits
both countries to build upon the productive strategic
dialogue led by Deputy Secretary Strobe Talbott and Minister
for External Affairs Jaswant Singh to prevent the
proliferation of nuclear weapons and their means of
delivery. In appropriately visionary yet very concrete
language, both governments promised "to remove
impediments to bilateral trade and investment,"
particularly "in the emerging knowledge-based
industries and high-technology areas." The fact is
that, for the past several years, India's software exports
have been growing at the astronomical annual rate of 50%,
with no end in sight. Ten years ago, they were less than
$200 million per year. Last year they were $5.2 billion.
Increasingly, Indian technical and computer expertise is
eagerly sought around the world. In a broader sense we have
both also committed to preserve stability and growth in the
global economy through support of an open, equitable and
transparent rule-based multilateral trading system. India
continues to work at opening its markets and we hope that
progress will continue in such important areas as increasing
protection for intellectual property rights, decreasing
protectionist tarrifs, and broadening competition in the
financial services and insurance sectors.
In the
environmental arena, our joint statement pledges a common
effort to meet global challenges, "including climate
change and the impacts of air and water pollution on human
health." Given India's size and substantial economic
growth rate, this new undertaking on its part must be
counted as a significant advance in cooperative approaches
to these worldwide problems. It is a good first step toward
addressing the severe environmental problems in the region,
including the need to provide clean water, cleaner air and
environmentally safer energy to the people of India.
In the
related area of health, the President's trip also
highlighted U.S.-Indian cooperation. India suffers under a
heavy burden of infectious disease and it has only just
begun to deal with the enormous threat that HIV/AIDS poses
to its people. While the President was in India, we issued a
Joint Leadership Statement on AIDS and reaffirmed our
support for AIDS prevention, as well as polio and
tuberculosis eradication. The complete eradication of polio
in India is in sight. USAID has made health its top
priority in India.
The United States and India are also
natural allies in the cause of democracy. We are both
members of the convening group for the Community of
Democracies, and Bangladesh is also participating. During
the President's trip we established together the Asian
Center for Democratic Governance.
In addition to the vision
statement, President Clinton and Prime Minister Vajpayee
also laid out a new "architecture" for the ongoing
high-level exchanges needed to propel that vision forward.
With the framework in place, the builders are now busy
fitting the new pieces into the structure. As you know,
President Clinton has invited Prime Minister Vajpayee to
visit Washington later this year. A new bilateral Science
and Technology Forum is being set up right now to promote
even closer collaboration in this and related areas, where
there has been a long-standing U.S.-Indian common interest.
The United States and India also agreed on the importance of
continuing our dialogue on security and nonproliferation.
Treasury Secretary Larry Summers and Finance Minister
Yashwant Sinha last week signed a Memorandum of
Understanding formally establishing the India-U.S. Financial
and Economic Forum, which will greatly facilitate our
consultation and cooperation in this field. With very
productive counter-terrorism talks here and FBI Director
Freeh's visit to New Delhi resulting in agreement to open
the first FBI office in India, we have reinforced our strong
cooperation in the common battle against terrorism and
international crime.
Let me now turn for a moment to the subject of
nonproliferation. No issue is more important to American
security than our efforts to counter the proliferation of
weapons of mass destruction, especially nuclear weapons, and
their means of delivery. This issue will continue to play a
central role in our relations in the sub-continent. Even as
we seek to build a new and qualitatively closer relationship
with India, that relationship cannot realize its full
potential without further progress on nonproliferation. We
also cannot and will not be able to cooperate on military
issues until there is substantial progress on
non-proliferation. We face similar problems in our
relations with Pakistan. This issue was discussed at length
by the President in both countries.
President Clinton
publicly posed a set of questions that set out clearly
fundamental concerns relating to nuclear weapons and
security. Were people really more secure today than before
testing nuclear weapons? Will these weapons make war less
likely, or simply more deadly? Will a costly arms race help
to achieve any economic development? Will ties with friends
around the world be strengthened?
The United States,
as Secretary Albright reminded the Nonproliferation Treaty
(NPT) Review Conference on Monday, is dramatically cutting
its own nuclear arsenal. Other nations around the world are
renouncing these weapons. We and the rest of the world, as
expressed in UN Security Council Resolution 1172, firmly
believe it is in India's and Pakistan's own interests -- as
well as the interest of the global community -- for them to
move toward the international mainstream on this vital
issue. They are two of the only four countries in the world
that have not accepted the NPT. On these issues, Deputy
Secretary Talbott and Foreign Minister Singh have held many
rounds of dialogue. Many observers consider it one of the
most intensive and substantive dialogues in the history of
the U.S.-Indian relationship. The discussions will continue
to follow up on the momentum created by the President's
trip.
Our objectives in the near term are simple: we would
like to see early signature of the Comprehensive Test Ban
Treaty by both India and Pakistan; strengthened export
controls; cooperation in negotiating a Fissile Materials
Cut-off Treaty and, pending its conclusion, a multilateral
moratorium on production of such material; restraint in the
development of missiles, including not deploying
nuclear-capable missiles; and prudence in shaping defense
postures.
Just as India judges that its security interests
cannot be defined by reference to one neighbor, both India
and Pakistan will appreciate that the decisions they take
will affect the interests, thinking and decisions of other
countries in the region and beyond. Above all, we want to
see serious steps on both sides to reduce the chances of
conflict, particularly nuclear conflict. With India we have
just registered progress on a critical, though often
overlooked, nonproliferation item: export controls. Indian
officials informed us of a series of steps just taken to
enhance India's controls on the export of sensitive
technologies. Continuing convergence on this and other
nonproliferation issues will remain high on our agenda with
India, as we seek to find greater common ground in all areas
and to narrow our differences in this one.
Let me now turn
specifically to Pakistan. Ever since Pakistan achieved
independence in 1947, our two countries, as President
Clinton told the people of Pakistan during his recent visit,
"have been partners." Pakistan, the President
recalled, "helped the U.S. open a dialogue with China.
We stood together when the Soviet Union invaded
Afghanistan. Our partnership helped to end the Cold War.
In many years since, we have cooperated in the fight against
terrorism. Our soldiers have stood together in missions of
peace in every part of the world."
But over the past
decade, U.S. relations with Pakistan have been troubled by a
number of factors. First was the incontrovertible evidence
of Pakistan's progress on a nuclear weapons program, which
required us by law to impose sanctions that restricted our
ties in certain areas. Those ties were further limited by
Pakistan's pursuit of generally poor and protectionist
economic policies, aggravated by widespread corruption,
which sharply reduced the scope for bilateral cooperation in
trade or investment, as it has also elsewhere in the region.
Most recently, we have been greatly concerned by Pakistan's
support both for the Taliban in Afghanistan, in whose
territory the now notorious Usama bin Laden finds shelter,
and for militant groups that are escalating violence in
Kashmir. Finally, of course, there is the serious departure
from democracy caused by the October 12, 1999 military
takeover. All these concerns, I must emphasize, do not argue
for walking away from our longstanding ties with Pakistan.
Quite the opposite: they make continued high-level
engagement all the more urgent.
It is in this context of
historical friendship, current concerns, and desire to keep
open lines of communication now and in the future that the
President decided to include Pakistan on his visit last
month and that we continue our contacts and work with
Pakistan.
Let me touch on five issues where a very brief
look ahead at our agenda with Pakistan is in order:
nonproliferation, narcotics, democracy, economic reform, and
terrorism. On non proliferation, I have already outlined
both our main objectives, and our main means for pursuing
them. I would just add that several leading Pakistanis have
publicly pointed out that signing the Comprehensive Test Ban
Treaty would promote Pakistan's own security interests --
and, as the President said in Islamabad, "the whole
world will rally around" Pakistan if it does exactly
that. In Pakistan's long competition with India, this would
be a striking first step. It could turn the competition
from a downward spiral of malevolence to an upward one of
benevolence. The President and Musharraf agreed, in this
context, to reinvigorate our security and nonproliferation
dialogue. In that regard, we look forward to Strobe
Talbott and Foreign Minister Sattar meeting very soon.
In
the counternarcotics field, we applaud Pakistan's progress
toward eliminating poppy cultivation and look forward to
enhanced cooperation. With the impact Afghan opium and
heroin have on Pakistan itself, certainly this is an area
where we urge Pakistan to encourage the Taliban to take
action.
So too, we urge our friends in Pakistan to continue
to do all they can to deal with the scourge of terrorism in
their own country, in and from Afghanistan under the
Taliban, and wherever else they can help.
On the issue of
Pakistan's return to democracy, we welcome General
Musharraf's announcement that local elections will be held
by next year. We also believe that his pledge this week to
protect human rights for all Pakistanis, and in that context
to prevent or prosecute so-called "honor killings"
of women, is another initial step in the right direction
that we hope others in the region will emulate. We very much
hope also to see more. Pakistan needs restoration of
freedom of association and assembly and an impartial
judiciary. In particular, we urge General Musharraf to
move quickly toward a clear road map for a real rebirth of
democracy, including fully functioning political parties and
a free and fair national election at the earliest possible
date.
In the economic sphere, we are encouraged by
Pakistan's apparent intention, at long last, to reform its
policies and institutions, work to root out corruption, and
resolve international commercial disputes. Here again, as we
look toward the future; actions as always will speak much
louder than words. I believe that Pakistan has a last
chance to save itself from economic stagnation, or worse.
If it makes the right moves in this area, we and the
international economic community will be prepared to lend
appropriate support in offering its people prospects for a
better life.
President Clinton's televised address to the
people of Pakistan during his visit addressed many troubling
concerns in our relations, including the view of some that
U.S. policy in South Asia and elsewhere is anti- Muslim. On
the contrary, the President affirmed the major examples of
solidarity with Muslim populations in key regions of the
world. He personally "stood with the people of Bosnia
and Kosovo, who were brutalized because of their Muslim
faith." He has "been privileged to speak with
Palestinians at their National Council in Gaza." He
has "mourned with Jordanians and Moroccans the loss of
their brave leaders." At a White House ceremony marking
the end of Ramadan this year, the President recalled, a
Muslim imam cited the Koranic message that God created
different nations so that we might learn from each other,
not despise each other. And to the people of Pakistan,
President Clinton declared that he was "proud to speak
with you because I value our long friendship," which he
said "can still be a force for tolerance and
understanding throughout the world."
A second, quite different concern that has bedeviled
Pakistan-American relations lately is the idea circulating
in Pakistan that if events spiral further downward in
Kashmir toward all out military conflict, it would somehow
compel the U.S. to mediate that conflict and on more
favorable terms. This notion, too, the President addressed.
"International sympathy, support and intervention," he
proclaimed, "cannot be won by
provoking a bigger, bloodier conflict. On the contrary,
sympathy and support will be lost." At the same time,
the President expressed understanding for Pakistan's
concerns about Kashmir, and a shared conviction that the
human rights of all its people must be respected.
The
President made clear in his remarks to Pakistan's leaders
and people the level of tension in and around and over
Kashmir needs to be reduced. Publicly and privately, the
President urged mutual restraint by the parties, respect for
the Line of Control, rejection of violence, and renewal of
dialogue. The tragic cycle of violence continues to claim
precious lives in Kashmir. Following the massacre of Sikhs
last month by unknown assailants, allegations of encounter
killings of Kashmiri civilians by Indian security forces led
to violent demonstrations and further deaths as police
opened fire. Later, during a militant attack in Srinagar,
Kashmiri school children were killed in a crossfire. More
recently, a suicide bomber injured a dozen civilians in a
failed attack on a security post. Exchanges of artillery
fire along the Line of Control regularly claim innocent
victims on both sides. Accusations of blame for each
incident will not stop the shooting and the suffering.
History continues to show that a military solution to the
Kashmir conflict is not possible. The only way to end the
tragic violence is for both sides to commit to a political
dialogue that takes broadly into account the wishes and
interests of the people of Kashmir themselves.
Other issues also might be resolved apart from the broad
question of Kashmir. For example, India and Pakistan were
once very close to an agreement on the Siachen Glacier.
Other border issues also could be cleared up, including Sirr
Creek and Wullar Barrage. Perhaps economic cooperation
between the two countries can be revived, leading to further
efforts on political disputes. But even if these issues, or
others like them, are not yet ready for definitive
solutions, the two countries must find their own way to at
least coexist in peace, and even better to begin their
dialogue over all of these questions. We thus hope that
steps can be taken to improve the chances for dialogue
between the two countries.
And, in this regard, I believe
the Indian government has recently taken a step in the right
direction by releasing several leaders of the Kashmiri
All-Party Hurriyat Conference (APHC) and indicating a
willingness to talk with them. Reportedly, other Hurriyat
leaders may be released soon. Apart from the APHC and those
parties represented in the State assembly, there may be
other segments of opinion in Jammu and Kashmir that will
emerge as normal political activity becomes a less risky
undertaking.
Today, the question is how best to move toward
that objective of calming the conflict -- and the answer in
our view -- is through peaceful dialogue between India and
Pakistan, in the spirit of the Lahore meeting between their
two leaders in February 1999. The Kargil incident not only
did enormous damage to the prospects of dialogue symbolized
by Lahore, it imposed new demands on the process by
devaluing statements of intent and increasing the premium on
actions. Kargil cannot be forgotten, but it can and should
be transcended.
In the past few weeks, General Musharraf
has repeatedly offered to meet with India, and we are asking
New Delhi to consider very seriously the possibilities for
resuming this dialogue. But Pakistan now should do its part
to help create the peaceful conditions needed to make such a
dialogue meaningful. This need not be a matter of public
fanfare, proclamations or even comments; what matters most
is to be able to see the reality on the ground.
Let me now
turn to another country visited by the President:
Bangladesh. In less than 30 years of independence, this
nation of more than 120 million people has managed to
transform itself, against great odds, into a model both of a
moderate Muslim democracy and a grass- roots based economic
development. Bangladesh set an example for the entire region
on nonproliferation by ratifying the Comprehensive Test Ban
Treaty in March. The President's visit, the first ever to
Bangladesh, celebrated these achievements and, more
importantly, set the stage for more. Follow-up efforts are
already underway in several important areas.
As with India,
we look forward to working with Bangladesh in launching an
international Community of Democracies effort in Warsaw,
Poland, in June. Bangladesh's participation in this
important initiative -- as well as its own free and fair
exercise of the right to vote in national elections next
year -- offers yet another opportunity to support
Bangladesh's democracy. While in Bangladesh, the President
met with both Prime Minister Hasina and Opposition Leader
Zia and urged them to avoid the politics of confrontation
and to strengthen the spirit of compromise and cooperation
necessary in any democracy.
We also want to work with
Bangladesh to develop its economic potential, and a big part
of that means bolstering our increasing trade and investment
relationship. Those ties have grown dramatically in the
past several years. American investment, mostly in the
energy sector, will soon approach $1 billion, with
Bangladeshi garment exports to the United States nearing $2
billion a year. These sectors are economically significant,
and in the case of energy, there is the added potential for
the development of regional cooperation. But it is clear
that we can expand beyond these sectors to areas such as
telecommunications, financial services, and infrastructure.
The key will be renewed commitment to economic reform, and
cooperation between investors and the government in keeping
the investment pipeline running smoothly and efficiently.
We
want to see Bangladesh's economy thrive, but we also want to
work with Bangladesh as it addresses its many environmental
and social challenges. We have launched a creative
"debt for nature" pilot project designed to
preserve the unique tropical forests of the Bangladeshi
coast. We are supporting World Bank efforts to deal with
the serious problem of arsenic contamination of groundwater.
Similarly, we will be working together to extend to
additional sectors Bangladesh's successful efforts to end
child labor in its garment export industry, and to lift
people out of poverty with small-scale private enterprise
development through micro-lending, especially to women.
Reviewing the U.S. relationship with these three largest
countries of the region just visited by President Clinton,
one can extrapolate several broad themes of our engagement
for the future: economic reform, social development, and
integration into the international mainstream on
nonproliferation and peaceful conflict resolution, among
others.
But there is also one overarching issue --
democracy. Scholars and diplomats alike are increasingly
convinced that democracy is the best promoter for the
greatest measure of progress in all of these other areas as
well. That is why, in preparing the President's trip and in
looking ahead today, we attach so much importance to the
strength of democracy in both India and Bangladesh, and to
the restoration of civilian, democratic rule in Pakistan.
And that is also a crucial ingredient of our overall
approach to this entire region -- including development in
some of its smaller but still significant states, in which
the future of democracy is among the important interests we
pursue. To take one example, we strongly support the
democratically elected government of Sri Lanka's arduous
campaign to resist separatist violence, and its bold offer
to negotiate new arrangements for the Tamil minority on the
island through peaceful political means. While we are
disappointed at the continuing violence in the North of the
country, we are encouraged that both the government of
President Kumaratunga and the leading opposition party are
coming closer together on a joint approach on autonomy for
the northern and eastern parts of the country, home to most
Sri Lankan Tamils. We offer our support for this approach,
while calling upon Sri Lankan government forces to adopt the
strongest measures to prevent civilian casualties and human
rights abuses. We hope that the military reverses suffered
by the Sri Lankan government in the Jaffna peninsula earlier
this week will not derail its efforts to settle this dispute
on honorable terms.
Another case in point is Nepal. This
country, which this year proudly celebrates its first decade
of full democracy, confronts a violent Maoist insurgency and
severe poverty. We support the government's admirable
efforts to stay on the path of democracy and development. I
would also note that Nepal's sense of civic engagement
extends well beyond the country's borders, as demonstrated
by Nepal's frequent participation in peacekeeping operations
and in providing humanitarian assistance to thousands of
refugees.
At the other end of this spectrum, unfortunately,
is Afghanistan. There have been some small and scattered
improvements lately in the Taliban's egregious treatment of
women and girls, and we remain open to dialogue with Taliban
representatives on this and all other urgent matters. On the
whole, however, this is a regime which, by its behavior at
home and abroad, has isolated itself from virtually the
entire world, and increasingly from its own people. In the
long run, only a representative government that includes all
parts of the Afghan community can bring peace to this
tragically tortured land. This will require the
participation not only of the Taliban and the Northern
Alliance, but also of other Afghans inside and outside the
country.
The United States is encouraged by the efforts of
Afghans around the world to contribute to the search for
peace. We believe Pakistan can exert considerable influence
on the Taliban and support its initiative to find common
ground with Iran to work together on a peaceful solution of
Afghanistan's civil war. Unfortunately, we see little
movement on either front at this stage and the international
community is, once again, beginning to look at what steps it
can take to address our multitude of concerns in Afghanistan
- - terrorism, narcotics, human rights, and ending the
two-decade long conflict.
The UN Security Council, in
Resolution 1267 last year, unanimously imposed targeted
sanctions because of the continuing presence in Afghanistan
of Usama bin Laden and terrorist training facilities --
sanctions that affect only the Taliban and principally its
leader, while providing unimpeded humanitarian access for
all the people of Afghanistan. Just a few weeks ago, the
Security Council prefigured further action if bin Laden is
not brought to account. And last week, the UN Commission on
Human Rights, by consensus, not only condemned Taliban
policies but also called upon all nations to stop supporting
them. The isolation of Afghanistan will only increase unless
steps are taken now to address the international community's
deep concerns.
To return for a final moment to a broader
view of the region, all across South Asia we see some of the
most important challenges of this new century in play. They
range from the universal striving for democracy through the
gamut of global security, technological innovation and
economic growth, to environmental and other issues that will
define our interdependence in the coming years. In some of
the largest countries of the region - which are also among
the largest in the world -- the promise of this new era is
correspondingly great. In others, while we currently have
great cause for concern, we are determined to maintain the
kind of engagement that offers the best hope of advancing
our interests, and those of a more peaceful and prosperous
planet.
The goal is certainly worth the effort: I hope to
see a South Asia with no more conflict, no more fissile
material for use in weapons, and no perceived need to test
nuclear weapons; with Kashmiris engaged creatively in a
future of peace and prosperity, working in ways that bring
Pakistan and India closer together. My vision includes
prosperity, with a common market and open borders, with
local and Central Asian energy resources available to all
and where the militaries work together to solve regional
problems and contribute to world peace rather than to arm
and plan for war against each other.
Late next month, I hope
to travel to the region to pursue these and other issues
further. South Asia is destined to play a growing part on
the world stage. American engagement in the region is sure
to increase in intensity in the years ahead. The active
involvement of all of you here today will be an essential
element in ensuring that we conduct this engagement
successfully. We expect, and very much desire, a great
future for the region, its people, and its relationship with
the United States. I deeply appreciate your being here today
and your kind attention and I look forward to your comments
and questions on these important issues.
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
Return to the Washington File
|
