Political India: Engaging America

Labels: India-US relations, Robert Blake, United States-India Strategic Dialogue

From The Hindu

The reform of the United Nations Security Council and India's bid to gain a permanent seat will be a “long and complicated process”, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia Robert Blake has said.

During a briefing on President Barack Obama's Asia trip, Mr. Blake, however, added that the United States was committed to continued engagement on UNSC reform and to a “modest expansion” of permanent and non-permanent seats.

Underscoring that there were numerous other potential candidates for a permanent UNSC seat besides India, Mr. Blake said the question of veto power had also not been resolved.

“I would caution against expecting any kind of breakthrough any time soon,” he said, adding, “We need to have a very detailed and serious conversation with all of our friends who are competing for these seats.”


Iran and Myanmar

On how the U.S. viewed India's approach — said to be divergent from its own strategy — to the questions of Iran and Myanmar, Mr. Blake said: “I think India does understand the importance of taking greater responsibility for some of these very important global issues.”

To a question from The Hindu on what the U.S.' failure to get the military interoperability agreements signed by India meant for the partnership between the two countries, the Assistant Secretary said “India will see it as in its own interest to sign these agreements” as the two countries' military engagement deepened. He added that the U.S. was “not pressuring India” on this matter.

Labels: India, Obama trip, Robert Blake, U.S., UNSC seat

From The Hindu

Reacting to an announcement by Turkmenistan of a pipeline project between itself, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India, Robert Blake, United States Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia, said that while he thought it was a good idea in principle, “it will be up to the governments themselves to make some decisions on these very important matters, and also to attract commercial financing”.

In an interview with Kommersant in Moscow, Mr. Blake said the U.S. had heard about the proposed pipeline but did not have any details so far about “exactly what they want to do”. He added that in his view, the project was still very much in a preliminary stage.

Kommersant quoted Mr. Blake as saying, “Many many details need to be worked out, not the least of which will be the exact route for such a pipeline, the security arrangements, and also whether they will be able to attract commercial financing for this project.”

Labels: Robert Blake, Turkmenistan pipeline project

From The Hindu

Green t-shirts flooded the State Department yesterday, during an event that celebrated the graduation of teenage “Peace Ambassadors” from India, Pakistan and Afghanistan, out of a programme aimed at promoting cross-border understanding in the leaders of the future.

Indian graduates of the ‘Seeds of Peace’ programme who spoke to The Hindu said that the three weeks they had spent at a camp in Otisfield, Maine, provided some critical foundations for the empowerment of young people through deeply personal interactions with their counterparts from “the other side”.

Karan Mantri (14) said that in “dialogue groups” of around 20 people, delegates from all three countries would discuss issues such as the border dispute in Kashmir, water disputes between India and Pakistan and “after sometime, we started looking at the solutions to these problems”.

Kashmir was the most intensely discussed issue between Indian and Pakistani delegates, Mr. Mantri noted, while the Durand line and Pakistan’s post-Cold War role in Afghanistan was the hot topic between Pakistani and Afghan delegates.

And the discussions resulted in a genuine paradigm shift in the minds of delegates on both sides, Mr. Mantri added, saying, “We think that Pakistan attacked Kashmir and we helped them; but according to Pakistani students we sent our troops in and annexed Kashmir.”

Home Stay scheme

Another experience in the ‘Seeds of Peace’ programme that truly transformed attitudes across borders is the Home Stay scheme, according to Rayan Modi (17). Under this scheme, Mr. Modi spent time in the Lahore home of one of his Pakistani friends from the programme, and then his friend visited him in Mumbai and stayed in Mr. Modi’s home there.

Mr. Modi said to The Hindu, “The whole idea is for each member of the organisation to go across to the other side, live with the families of fellow [delegates], to be in their lives, to experience their culture for a week. And this helps in understanding similarities and differences between our cultures.” He added that sometimes “we even forget that they exist, that they are leading their own lives [across the border].. but it is only when you live there that you understand that their point of view is so important”.

The ‘Seeds of Peace’ programme is clearly orientated towards impressing upon future leaders the importance of peace and tolerance born of greater empathy. Ronita Bhattacharya (17), said there was a clear focus on effective leadership, for example on “listening, and on how to express things in a way that is acceptable to others. When you say something you can either say it bluntly and make it a controversy or state it in a way that people may find they agree with more easily”.

Labels: Robert Blake, Seeds of Peace

From The Hindu

Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia Robert Blake underscored shared interests and dimensions of cooperation between the United States and India in Pakistan and Afghanistan, including action against terror networks in the former and development projects in the latter.

Addressing media at the Foreign Press Center here Mr. Blake said that counter-terrorism was the U.S.’ “highest priority” and the one area in which the U.S. had “made the greatest progress in terms of our cooperation with India — in terms of not only law enforcement cooperation but also intelligence cooperation”. He added that the U.S. would never be soft on terrorism.

Terror syndicates threat to India, Pak

Mr. Blake further noted, “We take extremely seriously the threats against both of our countries because we believe increasingly that there is a syndicate that is operating in countries like Pakistan that threatens both of our countries.” This syndicate of terror networks also threatens Pakistan itself, he added.

Mr. Blake emphasised that the U.S. had been at “the forefront of countries urging Pakistan to not only continue the progress it has been making in Swat and South Waziristan, but also to address the problem in the Punjab, namely the Punjab-based groups such as the Lashkar-e-Taiba, that are operating against India, that have also targeted the U.S., in the Mumbai bombings and elsewhere.”

Speaking at a televised discussion with Teresita Schaffer of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Mr. Blake further noted that the U.S. was aware of India’s concern regarding the possibility of U.S. aid to Pakistan being diverted to use against India. He said, “I think [India understands] that we are trying to build up Pakistan’s counter-insurgency capabilities and we are seeking end use assurances to insure that… the weapons that are provided will not be used against India.”

During the discussion with Ms. Shaffer, Mr. Blake also announced that the U.S. and India would engage in joint projects in Afghanistan. On India’s work in Afghanistan he said, “We have welcomed the very important role India has played so far. It is really up to India to decide where it wants to take its cooperation but we commend the steps it has taken so far and we had a discussion on ways that we might be able to cooperate together.” He added that such joint projects may be a promising new area of cooperation between the two countries.

Mr. Blake’s comments came shortly after External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna firmly underscored India’s intention to continue its work in Afghanistan despite its mission there coming under attack from insurgents. India’s approach to Afghanistan has been the subject of recent discussion in policy circles, with some analysts such as Raja Karthikeya of the non-partisan India Research Group think tank arguing that “India enjoys tremendous soft power in Afghanistan but the challenge lies in converting that soft power into influence”.

Labels: Lashkar-e-Taiba, Pak terror networks, Robert Blake

From The Hindu

After many months of pressing its case with the Obama administration, the Government of India may finally hope to get some good news regarding export control restrictions imposed by the United States on sensitive, dual-use items of high-tech trade and on legitimate government institutions such as the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO).

Addressing media here closely on the heels of the United States-India Strategic Dialogue, Robert Blake, Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia, said, “I expect that there will be some positive announcements to be made before the President’s visit — hopefully well before [that].”

His comments also follow statements made by Nirupama Rao, India’s Foreign Secretary, at the close of the Strategic Dialogue, that an important element with regard to the ongoing U.S.-India partnerships in defence modernisation would be “progress on the easing of U.S. export control restrictions as they apply to India”. Ms. Rao had noted that this would not only be a logical outcome of the civil nuclear initiative, but would also be a catalyst for promoting trading and cooperation in high-technology, defence and the space sectors.

Two processes

By way of explaining the U.S. approach to this issue, Mr. Blake said there were two processes involved, firstly a wider review, on the part of the administration, of the overall export control regime; and secondly, an “India-specific review that also is under way… [which] will probably split off from the wider review”.

He also admitted that the U.S. export control regime was “in many cases outdated”, and in the case of India, the U.S. was taking “a particularly close look at the Entities List”. Mr. Blake noted that many entities had already come off the Entities List — a list of organisations with which U.S. companies cannot trade, or can only trade under restrictions — over the last few years, and “now there is a focus on entities like ISRO and the Defence Research and Development Organisation”.

India-specific export controls

Arguing that significant progress had been made with India-specific export controls, Mr. Blake said, “We have made a great deal of progress over the last six years or so in reducing the export controls that apply to India. Now less than one half of one per cent of all exports requires any sort of license at all — and most of those are presumed to be approved.”

He added that there was a reciprocal process under way which also sought to obtain “the necessary assurances from the Indians about the strength of their own export control regime that would enable us to relax our restrictions”. Mr. Blake added that he anticipated there was going to be “further good progress” on this matter and the U.S. and Indian sides had a “good exchange during the Strategic Dialogue”.

Touching upon the potential for cooperation in high-technology trade, he also noted, “We think there are enormous opportunities for American companies to do more and work more with their colleagues in the space area and also in the defence area. These are steps that would serve both of our countries.”

Labels: high tech trade, ISRO, Nirupama Rao, Robert Blake, U.S. export restrictions, U.S. India Strategic Dialogue

From The Hindu

There is no escaping a strong sense of déjà vu surrounding the upcoming United States-India Strategic Dialogue to be held here this week. Both countries are poised, yet again, to do what they have done ever since President Obama took office, namely, skip through policy minefields while professing unwavering cooperation on a range of less exigent issues.

Much like the previous meetings, this one will not be about Pakistan’s inability or unwillingness to deliver justice through the prosecution of the masterminds of the 2008 Mumbai attacks.

Speaking before the talks Robert Blake, Assistant Secretary for South and Central Asian Affairs, said that regarding Punjab-based terror groups, such as Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed, “Pakistan has [acted against them] in the past between 2004 and 2007, and that laid the basis for a very significant expansion in relations between India and Pakistan.” Then why exactly did the Mumbai attacks occur? This “softly, softly” approach towards Pakistan may be wearing dangerously thin.

Neither will this meeting recognise a fundamental dissonance within President Obama’s nuclear security and non-proliferation agenda — that powers such as the U.S. and Russia continue to maintain significant and less-than-secure arsenals even as they turn up the heat on de facto nuclear powers like India.

Questions to be raised

Would India dare remind the U.S. that it was on American soil that six nuclear warheads fixed to cruise missiles were mistakenly carried on a B-52 bomber in 2007, violating numerous Cold-War-era treaties? Would India even contemplate asking the U.S. to bring Israel’s nuclear programme into the spotlight as it has done Iran’s?

Much like the previous dialogue, this one will certainly not be about understanding India’s views on third parties like Iran, regardless of India’s strategic closeness to that country.

Given its absence at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), India will have no say in the decision by the P5+1 group to mete out rough justice to Iran through UNSC sanctions, which completely undermine Iran’s promise to move low-enriched uranium off its soil under the fuel-swap deal brokered by Turkey and Brazil.

Global, bilateral issues on agenda

Instead, global and bilateral issues have been placed on the agenda which, though worthy of holding the relationship to a positive pitch, make a proverbial 200-pound gorilla of the other burning questions.

The most telling sign that the U.S.-India engagement is set to simmer but will never get fully cooked was a statement by Mr. Blake to a question on what the deliverables of the Strategic Dialogue would be. He said, “I do not want to talk about the deliverables now. But we are really not focused that much on deliverables.”

Labels: India-U.S. ties, Lashkar-e-Taiba, non-proliferation agenda, nuclear security, Robert Blake, Strategic Dialogue, UNSC

From The Hindu

The United States will not limit any effort by India to offer direct training to the Afghan Army, according to Robert Blake, Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs.

Responding to an observation that many in Pakistan, including General Ashfaq Kayani, had objected to India playing such a role, Mr. Blake said, the U.S. had “welcomed very much the assistance that India has provided and all of our cabinet-level officials have welcomed that and will continue to do so.”

He also stated that India had played a very important role with the $1.3 billion in assistance that they provided to date, mostly in infrastructure and other kinds of reconstruction projects, but certainly also in capacity building and training.

Mr. Blake added that India’s role was “a very important part of the international effort to help stabilise Afghanistan.”

Labels: Afghan Army training, Robert Blake, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State

From The Hindu

On the eve of the United States-India strategic dialogue, it has become clear that the U.S. is poised to push India towards a nuclear liability legislation “that will be consistent with the Convention on Supplementary Compensation”; and if such a legislation were passed, “it would provide a very important legal protection and open the way for billions of dollars in American reactor exports and thousands of jobs”, according to Robert Blake, Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs.

Expressing confidence that the Indian Government may well commit itself to CSC-compliant laws for payouts in the event of a nuclear accident, Mr. Blake said, “The Prime Minister addressed this very forthrightly himself [when] he said that… the passage of this legislation is a priority for the Indian Government.”

"Win-win nature"

Emphasising the “win-win” nature of the deal, Mr. Blake argued it would both deliver nuclear technology that would meet the energy needs of India’s fast-growing economy and also help the U.S. “to substantially increase our exports [and] provide much needed new jobs".

In his remarks to the media here, Mr. Blake however conveyed the U.S.' sense of confidence that Dr. Singh would deliver the goods despite delays in the Indian parliament due to concerns over the overall cap on compensation to Rs. 500 crore and the allocation of much of the burden of nuclear liability to the Indian taxpayer.

He said, “I do not think it has taken that long. India is a democracy and, like our own democracy, they have to work a bill through – first through their own cabinet system and then they have to get a consensus within their own parliamentary system on this very, very important bill.”

When the Prime Minister tabled the bill in Parliament earlier this month the Left and the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) members said the cap “violates the rights of a citizen guaranteed under the Constitution".

Mr. Blake added the nuclear liability bill had political resonance in India because of the Bhopal disaster. As a result, people were looking at the bill very closely as they ought to, he said.

Labels: Assistant Secretary of State, Convention on Supplementary Compensation, Nuclear Liability Bill, Robert Blake

From The Hindu (shorter print edition excerpt)

Robert Blake is the United States Assistant Secretary for South and Central Asian Affairs a position he has held since May 2009. A career Foreign Service Officer, Mr. Blake has served at the American Embassies in Tunisia, Algeria, Nigeria and Egypt and in senior roles at the State Department in Washington. Mr. Blake was also Deputy Chief of Mission in New Delhi between 2003-2006, and Ambassador to Sri Lanka and the Maldives from 2006 to mid-2009. He has a B.A. from Harvard College and an M.A. in international relations from Johns Hopkins. In a recent interview with The Hindu, Mr. Blake touched upon a number of current foreign policy issues.


Two questions on economics and trade, firstly, several Indian ministers, including Sachin Pilot and more recently Mallikarjun Kharge, have made references to the fact that Indians and Indian companies pay a lot of money towards social security here in the U.S. and yet do not see any benefits coming out of such contributions as they do not remain in this country long enough. From these statements it is obvious that this is becoming a growing concern in India. Can you explain what, if anything, the U.S. is planning to do to address this concern?

Well this has been a long-standing issue on our agenda and it is called “totalisation.” The problem is that our social security systems are not synchronised. We certainly have heard the Indian concerns on this and sought to be responsive. But our social security administration has really grappled with this but thus far not found a way to be responsive. But we will continue to look at this and see what we can do.

With Indian state institutions such as ISRO still on the Entities List of the BIS, there is a real concern in India that this will come in the way of high-tech trade and cooperation promised under the Obama-Singh umbrella of initiatives (especially for dual-use items). While the administration has said that its policies in this area will be reviewed, the concern on the Indian side has been magnified by the fact that the administration is altering tax laws against off-shoring of U.S. business and the rhetoric seems to point towards a deliberate intent towards greater protectionism. What could you say that would reassure India in this regard?

I can tell you that we are not moving towards a more protectionist position vis-à-vis India or any other country. The President has repeatedly stated his commitment to free trade and has stated his commitment to the existing trade agreements that we have with countries that are pending, like Colombia, but more broadly to the Doha Round. Obviously the role and cooperation of countries like India is going to be critical in achieving a successful outcome. You have seen our trade representative Ron Kirk make statements with Minister Sharma on this.

On the question of export controls, there is a broader administration-wide export-control review that is taking place. You saw, recently, statements by Secretary Gates, that referred to the fact that the laws on the books are now quite dated and do not reflect the tremendous advances that have taken place in technology; and the fact that many of the technologies that are now controlled are available in RadioShack and there is usually not need for any controls on many of these things [laughs]. So there is a need to rationalise that list and there is also a need to make one agency responsible and not the whole bunch of agencies right now that have responsibilities for export control. The administration is really committed to trying to look at this in a really positive way. One of the most important benefits to the United States is that it will enable us to export more to countries like India.

As part of that export control review we will then be able to look at what we might be able to do on the Entities List, for example, with India – I know ISRO and there are several others. We have already been looking at ways that the U.S. and India could take reciprocal measures that would allow us to continue to enhance trade in high technology goods of all kinds. As you know we have already had the high-technology corporation group which has been in existence for many years and has made really very significant progress in reducing the number of goods that require a license for export to India. Now it is well over 96-97 per cent of the things that we trade are not subject to any license at all. It is really a very small proportion of the overall goods.

But again we feel that there are very significant opportunities to work in space. We were already part of the Chandrayaan launch. We are already doing a lot of cooperation through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration on things like meteorological forecasting and things like that. We would very much like to do this and space will be another important area of cooperation going forward.

On David Coleman Headley, it has been over one month since he struck a plea agreement with the Department of Justice. When you spoke to us at the Foreign Press Centre you said that no decision had been made on giving India direct access to Mr. Headley. So there are a few questions here: Could you please explain why Indian authorities should not feel frustrated that this process is taking so long and how much longer will they have to wait? Secondly what is the exact nature of the procedures that are stalling the process – is it simply a question of formal filings required by either side or is it something more fundamental such as Mr. Headley reconsidering his offer to cooperate or the U.S. still trying to put in place modalities to manage Mr. Headley’s interaction with India tightly?

It is not so much a question of the U.S. putting [modalities in place]. It is more a question of getting agreement from Mr. Headley and his lawyers about this – what are going to be the parameters of that access, should it occur. I do not think anyone should read too much into this. People at a very high level with very good intentions are working on this and we are in very close touch with Indian authorities on this. I think it is just important to be patient, but I can tell you that we are well aware of India’s interest but also India’s equities as well. Obviously Mr. Headley was involved in reconnoitring sites for not only the Mumbai bombings but perhaps other ones. They have a very clear interest in knowing what further information he may have and we understand that.

So what is it that is the specific problem, because the plea agreement clearly says that the death penalty was waived based on his cooperation.

I really do not want to say more than what I have already said. It is not really our department that is working on this but the Department of Justice.

On your recent trip to the region, you mentioned that you had urged authorities in Pakistan to take action against Punjab-based groups, such as LeT, “not only because that is important to India but it is important to the U.S..” Apart from the earlier indirect actions by Pakistan in the Swat and South Waziristan offensives, in what ways are they following your advice? How about more immediate goals such as banning them and their associates from holding public meetings (as they have been doing) or seeing through the trial of the Mumbai attacks suspects to its completion?

First of all with respect to the case, my impression is that is moving forward and that there is not any effort on the part of the Pakistani government to slow that down in any way. It is just that the judicial process is moving ahead.

On the question of LeT, I will just say what I have said before, which is that we really see that LeT is an organisation of growing scope and ambition, as the Headley case itself illustrates; and also a threat to the U.S. but also a threat to India and other countries, and potentially a threat to Pakistan too. So it is important for all countries to do what they can to circumscribe and control the activities of LeT. We will be continuing to urge our friends in Pakistan to deal with this. As I said earlier, they have made a lot of progress in Swat and then in South Waziristan, in arresting senior members of the Taliban. There is good momentum that has been taking place. At the same time it is important for all of us that these other groups – many of which have attacked Pakistan itself, like Jaish-e-Mohammed and groups like that – that they also be a target of Pakistani actions. We will continue to urge for progress on that.

It has wider benefit for not only counterterrorism priority, but also Indian and Pakistani relations. One of the things that I said to our Indian and Pakistani friends when I was there, particularly to the business community, is that there are tremendous under-exploited opportunities for trade between the two countries and that if progress can continue to be made on terrorism and on the judicial actions that we talked about earlier, that would really open up a way for the business communities of both sides to expand trade relations and business investment relations.

From my conversations both in India and Pakistan, they are both ready to do that. But they are both waiting for political signals from their governments before they take actions. These small but important steps on things like LeT can have a wider and positive effect on bilateral relations.

Yes but in that same vein do you not think that some of these related organisations could have public meetings and also the slightly unrelated point on attacks in Afghanistan on Indian personnel. Do these things not dissuade this sort of process from kicking off?

Well they do, yes, so again that underlines the importance of Pakistan fulfilling what it has always said it would do, which is to not allow its territory to be used as a platform against other countries.

Well I guess what many Indians would wonder is, what role could the U.S. play in pushing that forward on the ground. Certainly they have made the right statements but there is a sense that action is not following.

Yes, Pakistan has a sovereign government and they are a friend of the U.S. and we will continue to work with them on this but all I can say is we have identified this as a priority.

President Obama said at his Nuclear Security Summit press conference that the U.S. wanted to reduce nuclear tension in South Asia. Does the U.S. see Chinese nuclear weapons and the Chinese proliferation link with Pakistan as factors which have contributed to this tension historically and at the present time?

We all know the historical ties between Pakistan and China. But I do not think I would want to make any statements about the current [situation]. I do not think that there are any significant proliferation issues right now with regard to China and Pakistan.

There are no concerns?

I do not think that that is at the forefront of things that we are working on. Our dialogue with China now is first of all urging them to work with the international community to help stabilise Pakistan and then help provide the assistance that it needs. But then also on the counter-terrorism front there are groups operating in Pakistan that are antithetical to Chinese interests – [for example] the East Turkistan [Islamic] Movement. It is certainly in their interest and in our interest to see that action is taken against those groups to prevent the destabilisation of China. Then we are of course very closely working with China in Afghanistan as well, and we appreciate the role they are playing there in terms of new investments and a lot of the projects they have undertaken there.

On Sri Lanka, what would you say is your single biggest worry about how the post-election scenario could play out in terms of continuing the process of rehabilitations of IDPs and a longer-term political solution for lasting peace between the major ethnic groups? Does the President’s appointment of his brothers to powerful portfolios and his attitude towards Sarath Fonseka, who is still in custody, worry you at all in this regard?

I would rather not talk about worries; I would rather talk about opportunities. Again I think the President has scored a very significant victory in both the Presidential elections and in the Parliamentary elections. It shows that the President has a great deal of personal support around the country and particularly in the south, where he won an overwhelming victory. Now, he has a really historic opportunity to unify the country, to bring the country together as one country as never before – or at least not in the last 30 years. So we look very much forward to working with the new government to help that process of unifying the country. I hope to have the opportunity to meet with President Rajapaksa during the SAARC summit which is going to be taking place in Bhutan next week to hear about his plans in that regard.

So what about the question of Mr. Fonseka?

That is a in the Sri Lankan judicial system now and I do not have any independent information about the charges that are against him. We will have to wait and see on that. Our interest, like the interests of the Sri Lankan people, is to make sure that he is tried in accordance with Sri Lankan law.

Do you see any obstacles at all in terms of this President reaching out to Tamil groups and IDPs and fostering a long-term solution? That is the harder bit and that is something that this country wrestled with for decades and that is what people are going to be watching for now.

The election results were only announced yesterday so we have to give the President a chance to articulate his plans. I do not want to make statements that are going to in any way circumscribe what he is going to say. I would rather give the President a chance to make his comments and then we will comment after that [laughs].

Finally as the Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian affairs, what is your view of India, Pakistan and Iran joining the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation? The SCO is expected to announce membership criteria at its Tashkent summit next month and all three countries are known to be interested. How does the U.S. see the SCO in general, and specifically, in relation to U.S. involvement in Afghanistan. Could the SCO play a role in stabilising the situation there?

We see that the SCO can play a very important role in bringing in the countries of Central Asia and the wider region together. That could be a very important vehicle for dialogue and also for economic development and economic integration. As long as the SCO sees those things as its goal, we certainly welcome that. The expansion to other countries, such as India and Pakistan, would be welcome. I know India particularly has a great deal of interest in trying to expand relations into Central Asia, and many Central Asians tell me that they have interest in doing more business with India, and also Pakistan eventually. But the security situation in Pakistan sometimes constrains them right now. But many Central Asian business people that I have spoken to see quite significant trade and investment opportunities both from South Asian countries coming up to invest in Central Asia but also in terms of export opportunities into South Asia for Central Asian companies. The SCO can play quite an important role in that respect and it is good for friends like Pakistan and India to be involved in that.

Again in that context you earlier mentioned that you were concerned about both India and Pakistan tying up with Iran, in the context of pipelines, talking of business in the region. What is your thinking on that either in the context of the SCO or even otherwise, with such projects going forward? Do you think that both at forums such as the SCO and on independent commercial projects the coming together of countries like India and Iran is a cause for concern for the U.S., vis-à-vis stability in the region or what you are trying to achieve with Iran in a global context?

You are well aware of what we are trying to accomplish with Iran right now. We are at a very sensitive stage in our diplomacy with them. The President has pursued the dual-track policy of holding out a hand of friendship, but if the Iranians are not willing to accept that, to build international consensus to bring the Iranians to the table and stop their efforts to acquire nuclear weapons. At the moment we are trying to discourage all countries from pursuing projects that would put significant resources into the hands of, particularly groups like the Iranian Revolutionary Guard corps, that have pursued terrorist actions and that have given money and weapons to terrorist groups in the Middle East and have sought actively to destabilise and attack Israel and pursue terrorist policies in the wider part of the world.

So we have a very strong interest in stopping that. All the countries of the world have a very strong interest in stopping that. It is in that context that we discourage friends like India and Pakistan from pursuing, for example, energy projects and so forth.

But the coming together of these countries on the platform of the SCO per se does not worry you?

I do not know, I cannot comment on the Iranian part of the SCO. I have not really followed it that closely – what Iran’s intentions are with regard to SCO.

Labels: David Coleman Headley, India-U.S. ties, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Robert Blake

From The Hindu

No decision has been made on the question of whether India will have direct access to David Coleman Headley, the Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia, Robert Blake, said today.

Discussing some of the highlights of his recent trip to the region with journalists Mr. Blake said, “We understand that there is a lot of information that Mr. Headley has, which is of great interest to India, particularly because he was scouting out some possible sites.” In turn the United States had great interest in sharing as much information as it could on that, Mr. Blake added.

Yet he cautioned that although the U.S. Department of Justice was working with the Government of India to discuss the modalities for cooperation on the Headley case, “no decision has been made on that.”

Broader LeT threat

On the other hand in Pakistan Mr. Blake said that among the most important messages that he had conveyed was his view that India was seeking two things: first the “continued prosecution of suspects in custody for the Mumbai bombings”; and second, “progress to curtail cross-border infiltration that is taking place from Pakistan into India.”

Mr. Blake also said that he had urged Pakistan to take action against the Punjab-based groups, such as Lashkar-i-Taiba (LeT), “not only because that is important to India but it is important to the U.S.”

He explained that the LeT now had growing ambition and scope in its activity as shown by the David Headley case. “So we think it is very much in the interest of Pakistan as well to take action against the LeT,” he added, implying that the global nature of the LeT threat may endanger Pakistan’s interests.

The Assistant Secretary further argued that the it was important for Pakistan not to allow any terrorist groups to use Pakistan as a base from which to attack India or any other country. “I made that point not only publicly but also privately with my friends in Pakistan,” he said.

Mr. Blake praised Pakistan for its military action along the Afghan border. “I think an enormous amount has happened in Pakistan, first in Swat, then in South Waziristan, and then the more recent arrests of several senior Taliban leaders.” A lot of important progress has been made, he added, however qualifying that with the statement that there has not been any recent progress with the trials of the Mumbai attacks accused in Pakistan.

Liability and the civil nuclear deal

Reacting to suggestions that India may not pass legislation for absolute liability in line with Committee on Supplementary Compensation Mr. Blake said, “I do not see it as a sticking point. In all of our conversations with the Government of India, they have consistently said they remain committed to fulfilling this commitment under the civilian nuclear deal, to pass the civil liability legislation.”

He admitted that the opposition in India has recently expressed its objections to aspects of that legislation but said that it would be up to the Government of India to figure out how to move forward on this.

India-Iran pipeline project

Regarding the proposed Iran-Pakistan-India oil pipeline proposal Mr. Blake sought to dissuade India and Pakistan from engaging with Iran in this area. “This is a very sensitive time with negotiations with Iran and we would prefer that all countries not conduct such transactions with Iran at this time,” he said.

He said that the reason for this would be that the U.S. view of Iran was that it appeared to be unwilling to uphold its international responsibilities in terms of its alleged nuclear development programme.

Labels: 26/11 Mumbai attacks, David Headley, India, Obama, Robert Blake, US

From The Hindu

Labels: Afghanistan, Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia, India, Pakistan, Robert Blake

From The Hindu

Pakistan would not be acting in its own interests if it endangered the United States by failing to rein in Lashkar-e-Taiba, Robert Blake, Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs, on Friday suggested.

In an interview Mr. Blake said, “Lashkar-e-Taiba is a terrorist group based in Pakistan that has increasingly global ambitions and global scope… and so it’s in the interest of Pakistan to rein in the activities of LeT.”

Signalling growing concerns in the U.S. over the LeT’s capacity to target locations outside South Asia, Mr. Blake’s comments came a day after a hearing on Capitol Hill at which Congressmen noted that “The LeT has put the world on notice that they intend to escalate the carnage and spread it worldwide.”

Touching upon the first Indo-Pakistan talks since the 2008 Mumbai attacks, Mr. Blake said, “We do believe that one of the most important things to work on is this issue of terrorism, because, I think, it’s something that threatens not only both of these countries but also the United States.”

Mr. Blake explained that in addition to a significant increase in U.S. civilian assistance, the U.S. has also been “helping the Pakistani military to reorient itself from its historical focus on India and the threat that might have been posed by India, towards improving its counter-insurgency and counter-terrorist capabilities, so that it can really grapple and deal with the challenges in its border areas.”

He said that there could never be success in stabilising Afghanistan without the full participation of Pakistan.

Obama “committed” to India nuclear agreement

On the question of the civilian nuclear agreement between the U.S. and India, Mr. Blake affirmed that “The United States, under President Obama, remains very much committed to the nuclear agreement that was signed under President Bush, and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.”

Pointing out that “very important talks on reprocessing” were under way, he said that he expected the discussions to be completed “well before” the deadline of August 2010.

He also emphasised that the U.S. was very much hoping that the Indian government will proceed with a very important legislation on nuclear liability, and was gratified to learn that the President of India has announced India’s intention to introduce this bill in the current session of Parliament.

“We’ll be following the progress of that legislation very closely,” Mr. Blake said, adding that the U.S.’s ultimate goal was to allow the export of nuclear reactors to India.

Labels: Barack Obama, insurgency, LeT, Manmohan Singh, Mumbai attacks, Robert Blake

From The Hindu

CHENNAI: The “threats and harassment” that members of the press continue to experience in Sri Lanka remain a “significant concern” to the United States, according to Robert Blake, Assistant Secretary, South and Central Asian Affairs. “That continues to be an important part of our dialogue,” he said, adding that the human rights situation and media freedom are an important part of the reconciliation process.

Speaking at a media roundtable here, Mr. Blake said he was “very impressed with the progress made in terms of resettling Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) from the camps in Manik Farms and elsewhere.” With 1,15,000 IDPs in Manik Farms no longer under detention and the rest resettled, the U.S. would welcome the completion of the resettlement process by the end of January, as per the date set by Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa.

Touching on the need for political reconciliation and devolution of power, Mr. Blake said, “I know that President Rajapaksa has said that following the national elections next year, he intends to take additional steps on political reconciliation. But he has not yet enumerated what those steps will be.”

Mr. Blake said it was important to have measures to devolve power to the provinces so that elections could be held in the Northern Province and IDPs who lived under the rule of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam could “finally have the opportunity to exercise their democratic rights to vote and choose their own leaders.”

Responding to questions on intelligence sharing with India, Mr. Blake said, “Home Minister Chidambaram made a very successful visit to the United States in September, during which he had very productive meetings with a full range of counterparts in the U.S. — the Director of the FBI, the head of the CIA and the Attorney-General.” Mr. Chidambaram also discussed mega-city policing with the authorities in New York.

Mr. Blake highlighted other areas such as healthcare and education, where cooperation has crystallised since Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit. He said U.S. universities welcomed opportunities to invest in and partner with Indian counterparts as more foreign investment is allowed in the Indian education sector.

Labels: IDPs, Mahinda Rajapaksa, Manik Farms, Manmohan Singh, mega-city policing, P. Chidambaram, Robert Blake, Sri Lanka, U.S.