U.S. Relations With the People's Republic of China (2006)

U.S. Department of State

Press Conference With India's Foreign Secretary Shiv Shanker Menon

R. Nicholas Burns, Under Secretary for Political Affairs; Shiv Shanker Menon, Foreign Secretary

New Delhi, India
December 8, 2006
Released by U.S. Embassy New Delhi

[ ...Intervening Text... ]

QUESTION: Can you tell us something about the Iran provisions in the bill? [inaudible]

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: Thank you. Since I have not and no one else in the administration has seen the final bill, I simply cannot comment. I think that it would be a great mistake to try to imagine what the Congress is going to say on this issue because it is up to the Congress to say that. But I will say this. We greatly respect the fact that India and the United States and all other countries around the world have to react to the challenges posed by Iran in the case of the nuclear program. I would say that India and the United States have been in the mainstream of international opinion. When the IAEA Board of Governors met on February 4th of this year and voted to repudiate the Iranian nuclear program, Brazil, Egypt, Sri Lanka, Ecuador, Japan, Australia, all the European countries, Russia and China, all of us sent the same message. And so I think India and the United States have been part of this global effort to say to the Iranians, "we want to work with you."

We in the United States believe that Iran has the right to civil nuclear power. In fact, President Bush said as early as a year ago that he would support President Putin's initiative to supply civil nuclear power to Iran. But Iran turned that down. I think all of us are just saying that we don't want to see a nuclear weapons power to emerge in Iran. And so India, from my perspective, is in the mainstream of that global opinion that unites Russia, China, Egypt, India, United States, lots of different countries. I think India had a very responsible policy towards Iran. So I don't expect any major surprises from the legislation that is going to emerge.

[ ...Intervening Text... ]

QUESTION: For Mr. Menon, how will India de-link any provisions on Iran in the bill from its foreign policy so that the bill does not restrict Indian foreign policy actions? For Mr. Burns, if India had not voted against Iran in the IAEA on the last two occasions, would the U.S. consider India an irresponsible state?

[ ...Intervening Text... ]

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: I am going to avoid a hypothetical question. But I will say this. Everyone understands that India is a great country and a sovereign country and nobody in our system, whether it is in the Executive part of our government, the Legislative, would ever want to infringe upon India's right to make its own sovereign decisions. That is a fundamental tenet of international politics, and particularly of this relationship of trust and respect that we have developed over the last several years. In every respect you are going to see an American Administration, and an American Congress I believe, very respectful of India's sovereignty and India's independence.

I would also say this. It just bears repeating a point I made earlier. It is important that Iran is being sent one message on its nuclear weapons program from China and Russia and the other countries of the permanent five members of the Security Council, including my own and countries like India. I think that degree of unanimity on that particular question is important to Iran. We seek a peaceful, diplomatic solution to the problem of Iran's nuclear weapons. I wouldn't read too much into what the Administration is saying and what others may say because I think we should accentuate the positive in that all of us have stood together with a message of peace and a message of diplomacy. That is a positive message which we hope the Iranians will react to.

[ ...Intervening Text... ]

QUESTION: What kind of reactions are you getting from the NSG countries on the deal?

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: You are right to suggest that at the end of this process the Nuclear Suppliers Group is going to have to agree by consensus, meaning everyone, to make the same type of changes in NSG practice that the United States Congress is just about to make today or tomorrow in United States law. We have spent the better part of the last year talking to our partners, including the Chinese Government and others, about this arrangement. And we are, of course, enthusiastic supporters of the Nuclear Suppliers Group taking a positive initiative to support India.

I think the great majority of countries in the NSG have already come out to support India. There are some who have not and there are some who have asked questions and who have been mildly critical. But I am confident that at the end of the day when this is presented to the Nuclear Suppliers Group it will pass by consensus. We will see the international community, in essence if you will, follow the lead of the United States that our President has taken in suggesting that it is time that India be given its rights. It is time that India be allowed to participate with all of our companies to develop its civil nuclear power sector. This is the right thing for the world as well as for our two countries.

QUESTION: Will the concerns on nuclear apartheid [inaudible] be addressed? For Mr. Menon, what about the BJP comments today that the PM's behavior on this deal has been demeaning?

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: Well, let me just say that I am kind of surprised that anybody would use the term "nuclear apartheid." India, it is true, has been kept out of the system for 35 years. India has not been given its rights. What President Bush and Prime Minister Singh have done is essentially work for the liberation of India, and to allow India's scientific and technological community to be able to work on an equal basis with their brethren in the United States and in Europe and in Russia and China. So we look at this as the "Liberation Act" of 2006 and 2007 for India's civil nuclear power efforts.

The argument we have made around the world is: how do you keep the country that will soon be the largest country in the world by population, India, out when that country has been responsible? When it has not traded its nuclear technology on the world markets, black markets? When there are environmental and energy benefits to this that will accrue to the Indian people as well as to the whole world?

We saw this as an issue of great strategic importance, of strategic liberation. As I said before, sometimes people when they react to change do so in a conventional way. This is undoubtedly the right step to take for the whole world, and I think you are going to see a very large majority in support in our own country but also around the world.

[ ...Intervening Text... ]