Question:
Mr. Jaishankar, and Secretary Blinken, I believe both sides had detailed discussions on the situation in Afghanistan. Could you tell us about the areas of convergence and divergence about Afghanistan and the way ahead?
 |
| China hosting Taliban: July 29 |
Dr. S. Jaishankar , External Affairs Minister:
You know, I would say rather than look at what is the convergence and what is the divergence if the secretary doesn't contradict me, I would say there was much more convergence, and there would be some issues on where we are coming from different places with different interests and backgrounds. I think on the whole it would be fair to say we agreed that, what I emphasised in my remarks that peace negotiations should be taken seriously, it is the only way to create a lasting solution and the diversity of Afghanistan must be taken into account in finding that lasting solution.
And as the United States, of course, has a very unique involvement in Afghanistan, but as a immediate neighbour with a historical connection we do feel that the way we are looking at it, the way we see the challenges ahead, what needs to be done, I would say our views were quite similar. I think that would be a fair description.
Hon’ble Antony J. Blinken, U.S. Secretary of State :
I will certainly not contradict my friend, for the most important reason that what he says is exactly right. I think we largely see Afghanistan the same way. We're both committed to the proposition that there is no military solution to the conflict that afflicts Afghanistan, there has to be a peaceful resolution, which requires the Taliban and the Afghan government to come to the table. And we both agree, I think strongly that any future government Afghanistan has to be inclusive and fully representative of the Afghan people.
But ultimately, this has to be an Afghan led and Afghan owned peace process that we will all support. I think it's also accurate to say that there is largely agreement among most countries, both neighbouring Afghanistan and in the region, on the need for that kind of future. And certainly a rejection of the proposition that military force is the way to define the future of the country and strong support for an Afghanistan that is inclusive and representative of its people.
So I would say that we are both not only in alignment, but working together and also working with other countries, both neighbouring Afghanistan and in the region to support that kind of future for Afghanistan. Let me just add one other point to emphasise even as we withdraw our forces from Afghanistan and NATO and others withdraw their forces, we remain very much engaged in Afghanistan.
We have not only a strong embassy there, but also important programmes that continue to support Afghanistan, economically through development assistance through security assistance, that remains, and we are very much engaged in the diplomacy, of working to bring the parties together at the table for a peaceful resolution of the conflict.
Shri Arindam Bagchi , Official Spokesperson: Thank you, Excellences. For the second question, Elizabeth from Mint.
Question: My question is to both Minister Jaishankar and Secretary Blinken. From your remarks, it seems there's been quite a bit of discussion on the Indo Pacific and the Quad. Now China doesn't lose any opportunity to criticise both these concepts. How would you answer Chinese criticism on the Indo Pacific and the Quad? Because they've described it as an Asian NATO clique of countries, etc. How would you answer this?
Hon’ble Antony J. Blinken, U.S. Secretary of State : I'm happy to start.
Dr. S. Jaishankar , External Affairs Minister: And I won't contradict you.
Hon’ble Antony J. Blinken, U.S. Secretary of State :
What the Quad is, is actually quite simple but as important as it is simple. Four like minded countries, India, United States, Japan, Australia, coming together to work collectively, on some of the most important issues of our time, that are going to have a real impact on the lives of our people. And to do it in a way that hopefully ensures a free and open Indo Pacific region, and peace, security and prosperity for the people of that region. So what we're doing together is coordinating, pooling our resources, pooling our thinking, and actively collaborating on a whole variety of issues that have an impact on the lives of our people on COVID-19.
And the vaccine initiative that we took with the first leaders meeting that took place just a few months ago, working on post pandemic economic recovery together, working on the climate crisis, as well as a whole series of issues. Everything from maritime security to infrastructure, that again, are going to have a meaningful impact on the lives of our people. What the Quad is not as a military alliance, it is not that. Its purpose is again, just to advance cooperation, on regional challenges, while reinforcing international rules and values that we believe together underpin peace, prosperity and stability in the region. And of course, we're doing that as well in cooperation with other countries with ASEAN, and other likeminded partners.
Shri Arindam Bagchi , Official Spokesperson: Thank you. I'll now hand over…
Dr. S. Jaishankar, External Affairs Minister:
Let me just add a few words before you hand over. Look to what Secretary Blinken said, I would, first of all emphasise, I'm giving you an Indian perspective here. In a globalised world today, India has interests of far beyond its immediate borders. Certainly we have interests in the Indian Ocean in the Pacific Ocean in the Indo Pacific, our major trade partners are there our major trade routes are there, our political partners are there, we have big community interest I mean, any parameter you use, it's very visible that India has interest in the Indo Pacific.
The second is that, in this more complicated world with a lot of new challenges, when we talk about rebalancing, what it really means is different countries whose capabilities have grown or have changed, and who are enlightened enough to work with each other, obviously, would like to do so. Now, for groups of countries to work together is not strange, this is the history of international relations, you know, groups of countries work together were in the same region, I mean, you have regional cooperation, or they sometimes work together, even if they can find intersections of interests, I mean, the BRICS is one such example.
So, I think people need to get over the idea that somehow, other countries doing things is directed against them. I think countries do things, what are in their interest for their good and for the good of the world and that is exactly what is the case with the Quad.
Shri Arindam Bagchi , Official Spokesperson: Thank you sir. Mr. Price floor is yours.
Mr. Ned Price: Thank you. Our first question will go to Conor Finnegan of ABC News.
Conor Finnegan: Thank you both. For Mr. Foreign Minister how concerned are you about regional security as the US withdraws its forces from Afghanistan? And do you believe the US government has done enough to pressure Pakistan over its support for the Taliban and for Mr. Secretary, General Mark Milley said last week that the Taliban have the momentum. Ambassador Ross Wilson has said there are credible reports of the group is committing atrocities. And the US recently had to conduct more airstrikes to slow their advances. Are things in Afghanistan headed in the wrong direction? Thank you.
Dr. S. Jaishankar , External Affairs Minister:
Well, look. It is natural, I would say inevitable that if the United States which for the last 20 years had a robust military presence in Afghanistan withdraws that presence that there will be consequences. Now, the issue is not whether that's good or bad, what is done is done. It is a policy taken. And I think in diplomacy, you deal with what you have. And a lot of our conversations today and conversations I've had with many of Afghanistan's neighbours address exactly that situation. And now, in terms of what we think about the situation, I think with the previous question, both secretary and I made it very clear, we don't think outcome should be decided by force on the battlefield.
We think the peace negotiations should be a negotiation and should lead to peace, it should see cessation of violence, there should be a political settlement. So that is where we are looking at. And I think there is a broad consensus, deep consensus, most of the neighbours of Afghanistan agree with that. Now, I grant you, not everybody who agrees does what they say they would do. I noted the exception, which you have pointed out too, but I think that is a reality, which is not new. That is the reality over the last 20 years.
Hon’ble Antony J. Blinken, U.S. Secretary of State :
And Conor your question, let me say a few things. Yes, certainly what we're seeing on the ground in the last week, is the Taliban making advances on district centres challenging some provincial capitals. We've also seen these reports of atrocities committed by the Taliban and areas that it's taken over that are deeply troubling, and certainly do not speak well to the Taliban's intentions for the country as a whole. Having said that, a few things first, as I noted, we remain very much engaged in Afghanistan in support of the government through the very supportive assistance we're providing, including to the security forces, as well as the diplomacy that we're engaged in to try to bring the parties together in a meaningful way to resolve the conflict peacefully. And, ultimately, an Afghanistan that does not respect the rights of its people, an Afghanistan that commits atrocities against its own people would become a pariah state.
The Taliban says that it seeks international recognition, that it wants international support for Afghanistan; presumably it wants its leaders to be able to travel freely in the world, sanctions lifted, etc. Well, taking over the country by force, and abusing the rights of his people is not the path to achieve those objectives. There's only one path, and that's at the negotiating table to resolve the conflict peacefully and to have an Afghanistan emerge that is governed in a genuinely inclusive way. And it's representative of all its people.
Mr. Ned Price: Final question, we'll go to Courtney McBride of The Wall Street Journal.
Courtney McBride: Thank you. Question for each gentleman. Mr. Secretary, you've discussed the US India's shared democratic ideals and the challenges of upholding those. And as you look to partner on issues such as climate and COVID, and to offer a democratic alternative to China, how do you address the Indian government's backslide on such issues? And to Dr. Jaishankar what progress did you make in these discussions of a path out of the pandemic? I mean, are you confident in the ability to accelerate vaccine production and distribution? And are you satisfied that the Biden administration is committed to expanding access to the US beyond the students that you mentioned?
Hon’ble Antony J. Blinken, U.S. Secretary of State :
I'm happy to start. So let me start by saying that our shared values, our shared democratic traditions, the high ideals that we both set for ourselves, we're very much a part of our conversation today as they usually are. And let me just tell you why you've heard me say this already today, I've said it a few times in the past, but the relationship between our two countries is so important, and so strong, because it's a relationship between our democracies, and at its core, a relationship between our peoples. And I think one of the elements that Americans admire most about India is the steadfast commitment of his people to democracy, to pluralism, to human rights to fundamental freedoms. That's in our minds one of the ways that we define India and we see ourselves reflected in that. And it's in part why our shared values, strengthen the relationship.
Like our own, India's democracy is powered by its free thinking citizens. We applaud that. And we view Indian democracy as a force for good in defence of a free and open Indo Pacific, indeed, a free and open world. We also recognise that every democracy, starting with our own is a work in progress.
And when we discuss these issues, I certainly do it from a starting point of humility, we've seen the challenges that our own democracy has faced in the past and faces today. But this is, in a sense, common to all democracies. I mentioned this earlier, we talk about in our founding document, the search for a more perfect union, that by definition, means that we're not perfect. And that our entire quest is to get closer and closer to the ideals that we set for ourselves. And that's how societies make progress. And sometimes, we were at moments when the challenge is painful. It can even be ugly, but as democracies we deal with it openly. And ultimately, I think we have in our democracies self-writing mechanisms that are made up of free citizens of different backgrounds, different faiths, free media, independent courts, powered by a system of free and fair elections, the most remarkable democratic elections in the world, in many ways are here in India just by sheer numbers. It's the largest expression of free political will by citizens anywhere on Earth. So I say all this because as friends, because we talk to each other about these issues, we talk about the challenges that we're both facing in renewing and strengthening our democracies.
And I think, humbly we can learn from each other. Because no democracy, regardless of how large or how old has it all figured out. And we celebrate that the world's oldest and the world's largest democracies are dedicated at heart to a shared set of values that, I believe will ensure not only the ultimate success of democracy, but the success of the relationship between India and the United States.
Dr. S. Jaishankar, External Affairs Minister:
Well, before I answer the question, you directed at me, let me just add a few words to what the Secretary said, we had a good conversation on number of issues. And on this broad issue, I think I would sum it up from my perspective, I made three important points. One, that the quest for a more perfect union applies as much to the Indian democracy as it does to the American one, indeed, to all democracies. Number two, it is the moral obligation of all polities to really right wrongs, when they have been done, including historically and many of the decisions and policies you've seen in last few years, fall in that category.
And third, that, freedoms are important, we all value them, but never equate freedom with non-governance or lack of governance or poor governance. They are two completely different things. So, we had a good conversation, I'm sure we will continue that conversation.
No comments:
Post a Comment