YTread Logo
YTread Logo

India Minister of External Affairs Subrahmanyam Jaishankar

India Minister of External Affairs Subrahmanyam Jaishankar
well welcome to our place okay good to have you

minister

I've called you many things over the years but

Minister

is my first public occasion to address you as such it's a bit like me you began as a career diplomat but you're much more successful than I was at that but then I went over to the dark side and went into politics and now you've done the same what's it like different I guess something you would know I'm still learning in a sense on the job but you know it's
india minister of external affairs subrahmanyam jaishankar
being in in our case being a

minister

is also being a member of parliament attending Parliament it's that has its own discipline its own culture in a way yeah you're obviously a much more public person in within every sense of the term and I I guess in an interesting way professionally you know even if you are I I was the sort of the senior most civil servant in the foreign ministry before but there was always that comfort of having the

minister

above you so when you actually honor the

minister

your own horizons widen your sense of you know the buck stopping with you also gross hmm so it's a it's a different feeling it's a qualitatively different world how you're getting on with the party whips and the

India

n upper house the the whips governed your life or death in Parliament sir well you know we do we have a relatively narrow working mature you know working sort of I won't say working majority because we actually don't have a majority in the upper
house so it's important that you are there for all the important you know for the critical legislation and you have to balance that with your diplomatic responsibilities and sometimes frankly you have to pass up some we have to prioritize I for example could not make it for the bricks foreign

minister

s meeting because we had some very important bills coming up at that time but I'm a conscientious member I'm always there for the world have you missed it have you missed any votes yet
no it's not not ten out of ten for them and well except for the ones when I was out but yeah you know that's good well whoops govern your life does your BJP Whip have a sense of humor let's put it this way we haven't tested all that yet these things lie ahead of you

Minister

that's all I can say but it must be operationally an interesting challenge if you are the foreign

minister

in particular and you've got a rolling series international challenges

India

's important
countries they got people rolling in the door to Delhi all the time and then you're in the upper house with this you know wafer-thin parliamentary situation so I would encourage your whip to adopt a generous human approach to the demands of the

minister

I'm sure you'll be urging him to do the same the here in New York it's a General Assembly week what's the core message this week for the

India

n government that you and Prime

Minister

Modi are seeking to deliver to the
international community well you know the I think the big issue before the world and before the United Nations right now is how we're all going to deliver or not on the sustainable development goals and this I mean in a sense I say this I mean this is this is a analytical observation I think whether the world would be successful in achieving SDG targets would be dependent on whether

India

would be successful because our numbers are so big and if you see what's happened in the last five
years actually a lot of the changes in

India

are led by national campaigns very often directly personally pushed by the Prime

Minister

campaigns about gender gender closing the gender gap education campaigns about digital connectivity about cleanliness about sanitation about urbanization about education about skills so you had actually a range of these initiatives now these these are not just locals you know if you look at the raw numbers for example you know there was a push to get people you
know weren't really sort of poor people to open bank accounts okay they open up 300 million bank accounts but more important in those five years actually sixty billion dollars went into those three hundred million bank accounts they push from microfinance microfinance particularly with a sort of bias towards women seventy-five percent of the users government they got two hundred sixty million microfinance accounts up and up if you look at rural housing last five years about close to 18
million rural homes gas connections because you know what in the

India

n women very heavily used firewood and why would is a killer literally it's a killer it's like smoking multiple packs of cigarettes a day they've got close to a hundred million ninety-six million new users of cooking gas who were enabled by the fact that he could appeal to people like me to give up cooking gas connections which we were getting at subsidized rates so I they're these are all you know sort of
what's what's shifting in

India

and they story on girls education and which interestingly is linked to building of toilets because girls didn't go to school because often there were no toilets in school so if you got about a hundred million toilets but you also had an impact on many millions of girls to school and that and the moment you do something like school going you actually raising awareness you are delaying marriage you know marriage dates I mean ages in a way you are
improving health you're also making people aware of the fact that they need to space out their kids that has consequences the demographic consequences it has health consequences so so all of that is happening and I think in I mean we you know in a sense when I look at governance at home you know I sit in cabinet meetings where you know typically foreign policy is a very small element of it the bulk of what I hear there is actually SDG at work and I think some of that those messages will
actually come through out there yeah I'm my sins I'm Jim man of sanitation water for all I'm available for that no no I so we're responsible globally as the civil society organization for Sustainable Development Goal number six the proof point of what you just said is will succeed in SDG six if you succeed in

India

it's pretty simple and having been to

India

many times and most recently when you are doing a major public promotion for swatch park which is Prime

Minister

Modi's program for clean

India

including the principal question of ending open defecation and dealing with the widespread availability and use of toilets I mean the numbers are impressive even and I'm aware of the domestic debate about whether the numbers are all real or not but this is just so you take a 10 or 20 percent discount it's it's still a big achievement yeah look let me tell you what proves that the numbers were yes the fact that the numbers he became a politician
already then the numbers are real because and finally they gave you real numbers in the voting booth yeah you know if you asked a question why did the government led by mr. Modi not just get reelected got reelected by about I think eight almost eight to ten percent votes more than they had mmm those numbers led to these numbers so there's a direct connection between what we delivered on the ground in the last five years and what was the worker behavior because if you ask people so why did
you because you know you know the speculation there were people who said with great confidence that the numbers would drop yeah okay and the last time I was here in Asia Society we were having those conversations not in public but we were but the I think the reason why the numbers went up and and in any democratic exercise if in one term the numbers go up your your water base increases by about 10 percent it's a remarkable achievement and I think the reasons for that were twofold the primary
reason was that on the ground people saw change and typically at least in

India

where voters can be very impatient you are elected with a lot of hope then five years down the road there's impatience on the part of the water yeah but I think five years down the road clearly they believed that mr. Modi was still the best sort of harbinger of change and probably now implemented of change and the other of course was the national security side I think they just thought he was safe for pedophiles
so your overall argument about the outcome of the May elections was that five years ago he actually triggered a significant let's call it set of social revolutions against the list that you just referred to before which are also consistent with global development goals and and that actually has expanded the constituency for the BJP yes I think it's also that five years ago people looked at his record in Gujarat and hoped that you know this would the developmental progress you would kind
of achieve national scale I think that was the 2014 voting behavior I think the 2019 voting behavior was okay we have seen him for five years we've seen what his garment looks like we've seen you know how serious he is about delivering on all of this and we actually believe this you know so they're so nice here and therefore let's keep let's give him another term and see by where you know where he can take us good you mentioned the sustainable development goals one of them
deals with climate and of course you've got the UN climate summit this week as we prepare for five years into the Paris treaty what's

India

's formal policy what is your what are your Paris commitments are you meeting them and will you be expanding on those commitments between now and 2030 well the first point I'd make is that there's a big attitudinal shift okay on climate change and in in the in

India

and in till a few years ago or people looked at climate change as
something there was growing awareness but it was also looked at as an international negotiation yeah you know this was all about because Kyoto kind of captured the whole climate change issue and you know the story of Kyoto you know the promises made and the promises not kept so the difference between Kyoto and Paris was that and there was a transition and through Copenhagen in between the difference yes I wasn't but I I got some graphic accounts of things which happened there but I can
either fight with the

India

ns yeah but at Paris I think the difference was that we took the view that look if it is really exist tension you know then you know you you can't say on the one hand it's exist tential but it's subject to kind of nitty-gritty of of bargaining and I think we decided that we would we would actually take the lead in addressing the climate change challenge yes I saw actually you know how much the Prime

Minister

was involved in actually structuring the
compromises which led to Paris you know we were we used to be traveling and on the phone taking calls all the time I think a lot of our our views and positions influenced the g77 definitely but what we did actually outside the Paris conference was to my mind the more important outcome for us and for the world which was we took decided we take the lead on advocating and implementing the spread of solar energy and we unveiled what was actually the most ambitious solar program to date we started
something called the so international solar Alliance which has spectacularly taken off today we have a very ambitious the target was 175 gigawatts we are on our way to meeting that we've also much of our development assistance in Africa in Caribbean in Pacific Islands is geared around providing solar projects and in fact you know on my way here I saw very interesting analysis by the by the climate action tracker which which were very familiar with it and what the the analysis said was that
there were two countries who actually exceeded that nationally determined contributions one is Morocco I forget who was the other one there were five countries who have who have delivered on it with the 2-2 degree as lead as meeting the two degree benchmark and the five countries are Bhutan which is not a surprise Costa Rica Ethiopia Philippines and

India

so actually when it comes to delivering on on Paris commitments frankly it appears from what I read I haven't discussed it with my own
colleagues who deal with climate change but from what I can gather actually it seems to be doing better than much of Europe at a lot of other countries well it's a bit like everything else your success on climate and frankly China's success on climate very much will determine the future of the world so Prime

Minister

Modi's leadership domestically as well as globally on this will be crucial in the period ahead you here in the United States I watched how D Modi and thought you went a
few million others but I thought it was kind of fun there's sort of a Cointreau of remind me of Dunn's helping wearing a Stetson back in the late 70s but the struck me is interesting in terms of the evolving Modi Trump relationship now personally I could think of no two more dissimilar personalities than right Narendra Modi and Donald Trump these are like chalk and cheese these are just completely different people but my friend it seems to be working so what's the actual substance of
india minister of external affairs subrahmanyam jaishankar
this relationship what are its principal opportunities and tensions right now can you navigate it through to obviously the end of next year and if there's a trump reelect beyond that look when it where the houston event was concerned I mean I regard it in many ways really as a tribute to the

India

n American community that you had you know their ability today to organize themselves to motivate themselves to do an event of the scale I mean they had 50,000 people in the stadium and I don't
know how many people outside and and this is not the first time I mean he started in Madison Square Garden five years ago remember yeah then we did something a little bigger at San Jose the next year so this is a thought that and they've grown in scale now the fact that they can do this speaks in many ways of some of the strengths of our relationship with the United States and those are structural strengths I mean it shows today that the u.s. is still in many ways a land of equal opportunity
for certainly that's how many

India

n Americans would view and that they have really and it was a very bipartisan event I mean while President Trump obviously got a lot of the attention but he was preceded on the stage by the Majority Leader Steny Hoyer so again that speaks of the the political you know bandwidth of the

India

n American community so we do see the community today as one of the key pillars of the relationship and one of the many factors which have created a new paradigm between

India

and the United States which has evolved over the last 20 years there are other factors as well business factors geopolitical factors but in regard to the president and the Prime

Minister

well look I saw them the first time when I met in Washington and 2017 and you know sometimes even if people are not the same they hit it off but it was very it's very visible that they you know when they meet that they bound well and when you know when you ask saying okay where is this going I think
one difference for us in

India

one

India

ns themselves are very adjustable people by nature sometime it's it's part of our DNA secondly Prime

Minister

Modi is a very outgoing person so if you know so if it's you and me and we are very different he kind of shifts gears and responds to you in a way in which it works with you and with me in a way in which it works with me so you've had two very different presidents Obama and Trump back to back but he's actually happy
understatement of the morning had very very you know a long cordial but it's also you know there's a larger issue here which is remember we are not you know we don't have the history with the United States and with American leaders which many other countries do so because we don't have that history when there is change we don't have those anxieties you know a large part of what you see in East Asia what you see in Europe are actually leaders fretting because today's
reality is a is a departure from the norm okay with

India

there was no no we were still a relationship very much in progress so for us okay there's one more adjustment to be made hmm so the trade dispute which has been long-standing now between the Trump administration and your government can you get an agreement and are you now singing from the same song sheet on the chord and China on the trade arguments not disputes because I think you know there is a lot of backing and forthing on those
issues look the u.s. today has taken a certain approach towards its trade relations with the entire world so what's happening in the case of

India

is not unusual in fact I would say compared to some of the more public arguments they have with other countries and some of those are disputes how's this to my mind much more manageable in in many ways so they're not I mean clearly fooled by nature are not also easy to resolve that's my trade negotiators make a living so but I wondered
what I did mmm-hmm they're making a living yeah so so the my expectation is and in fact my trading my trade

minister

ial colleague is also in town today that well we'll work our way through it I mean we will agree on some things we probably may not agree on everything that be issues we don't it's not there's no sort of finite sort of deadline on which all of these things work these are ongoing conversations because trade is ongoing and new things you know a few years ago for
example data issues we're not even there on on the radar today you you know we may have differing perspectives on a matter like that or some years ago steel was was really not a subject of dispute or even argument so so trade will keep changing but here's the good news I am encouraged when more attention goes to that zone because it actually means there's more activity happening to the larger the trade the more the arguments at agreeing but I went that you slide off court so what
where's the is there a common

India

n and American strategic view of China is there a common view of the quad you're going to bring the Australians in from the cold on Malabar what are going to do on you know my my senses big countries perhaps more than big countries maybe all countries today won't have Commons cautions I I think everybody would have their own lyrics and their own tunes but there would be notes that they would strike together occasionally it would be cacophonic and
sometimes seem like an orchestra but your composure tell me how you would write this go no I look I think we are we are moving to a world of convergences but a lot of it would be situational a lot of it would be issue-based a lot of it would be regional mmm I mean we may agree in in indo-pacific but we may not agree and the gaff so so I I do think we are looking at much more complicated differentiated relationships today rather than clean-cut you know you're with me you're not your ally
you are not we are alive we have a common unified position I don't think we are we are anymore into the unified positions world I think we've just moved away from that so there would be you know better by the court is concerned right now till now the courts been largely at the official level we are exploring how to raise it beyond that now the quads largely be discussing maritime security connectivity terrorism these are issues on which these four countries

India

Japan Australia us
happened to you know they're democratic countries with very strong similarity of approaches on these issues that's not to say we agree I mean let's say an issue like climate change opposition with each one of the quad countries we would have the I won't say disagreements but clearly very different positions so it would very much dependent on on the issue and the partner consent that brings us to the elephant in the room China country next door to you you've spent a bit of
time there let me start by opening it up on what the government of

India

has done most recently on Kashmir this is a significant decision from Delhi perhaps you could explain to our gathering here what is the

India

n government seeking to achieve how do you think both Pakistan and China are responding and where to from here the one sentence answer to that is read today's financial times it has an op-ed by me and don't look at the picture okay so that's my one sentence answer but
I'll give you the longer answer I always choose photographs to make the subject feel uncomfortable apparently that those are well developed skills yes right so that's why is get used to it so the you know year to to sort of walk back a bit on Kashmir look the first point which people should appreciate is that the provision in the Constitution which gave Kashmir the different status was a temporary provision now first of funny thing you rarely read that in the international press and when
I say it's a temporary provision don't take my word for it Google the Constitution of

India

it's a written out there the word temporary is out there on the heading of this segment as well as the article in question now I think we all I know you're Australian but we agree on what the word temporary means it means something comes to an end after 70 years it came to an end and 70 years is a decent definition of the word temporary so what will not okay so so let me come to why it
changed okay now what happened was at the time when Kashmir the joint

India

as did about 560 other princely states treasury was unique one it was about a state - it was under attack as it was negotiating its accession from Pakistan so the sense in the Constitution Constituent Assembly was that we need to you know cut them some slack give them somewhat different times and you know in Constituent Assembly if not in 47 48 yes right in which by the way the Kashmiri representatives joined it so the
sense was that okay these guys are coming under different circumstances so let's give them in a sense or different terms for alignment give them more time and space to do that now over so over a period of time what happened was the accession the integration of the state of Jammu and Kashmir with the rest of

India

proceeded much more gradually then did all the other princely states but and it came through a series of presidential orders which were provided for by this temporary provision so
they were they are in the last seventy years about fifty four of these presidential orders now in the nineteen ninety around late 80s as the Afghan the first of God war came to an end the we saw a spiking of terrorism in cross borders people coming from across the line of control now they created a sort of intermediate riaf echt on the polity and so the allah and the entire alignment process actually slowed down so if you actually track those presidential proclamations you get much more in the
50s 60s 70s 80s then you do that out now what did it mean on the ground what it meant on the ground was that because you had a provision which said that be essentially local ownership of property there were no investments from outside a lot of the change the economic changes you see in the rest of

India

the businesses that long history about the past - okay now so what was meant to actually help cash which ended up in a way as you know the the bridge became a barrier now what it had political
consequences and eventually national security consequences because when you didn't have enough activity and therefore not enough jobs and then people blame Delhi for not having enough jobs you were we were spending ten times from the from Delhi's perspective ten times on average Kashmiri which we're spending on an average

India

n citizen but yet the feeling was well you know we haven't seen what's what's due to us so the the lack of development lack of opportunity actually
created a sense of alienation alienation - separatism separatism use for terrorism and the story of Kashmir because people you know somehow there's suggestion that things have become worse and you know something changed for the worse on August 5th when this legislation was passed look at the 30 years before that they were about more than 40,000 people have died and commuted okay and it isn't just those numbers I mean you look you had on the streets of Srinagar you know senior police
officials lynched in broad daylight you know eminent journalists killed you had military personnel going home and leaf pulled out of the homes and tortured and killed I mean that in a sense gave us you know a feel for the state of

affairs

before now when we they were also interesting socio-economic consequences because a national loss did not automatically apply to the state of German - pretty much the progressive legislation which has been enacted in

India

over the last 20 years has passed that
state so it's still a state where you know women's property rights are less than men's a state where say domestic violence laws don't apply juvenile protection laws don't apply right to work right to education right to information doesn't apply the affirmative action programs that you had in the rest of

India

don't apply so so you know you actually have socially basked in a bypass that state you've economically disadvantaged that state you've created a
national security problem for yourself you created an integration challenge so when we came back to power I think there was a long hard look at what are our options and the options were either we do more of the same knowing it doesn't work or we do something different so I think the choice was ok we will do something different now when we did that something different and something different by the way has no implications for the

external

boundaries of

India

I mean we are not we are sort of
india minister of external affairs subrahmanyam jaishankar
reformatting this within our existing boundaries it obviously drew a reaction from Pakistan you drew a reaction from China there are two very different reactions I think for Pakistan it was a country which has really created an entire industry of terrorism to deal with the Kashmir issue I mean in my view it's actually bigger than cash wait I think they've created it for

India

but let that pass for the moment who now see that that investment of 70 years undercut if this policy succeeds
okay so there's is I think today a reaction of anger of you know frustration in many ways because he will built an entire industry over a long period of time you think they will do I've said a lot what will I do yeah but let me let me close out the China bit I think the China bit the Chinese I think misread what was happening there which was they reacted to the fact that the state today constitutes two union territories now I don't know why they believe that it impacted on them I I
went a few days after the legislation to China and explained to them that you know as far as they were concerned nothing had changed

India

's boundaries had not changed the line of actual control had not changed so that was a conversation we had with them but obviously you know the Pakistani sort of challenges of a very different order in respect of what will they do your question look they have to they have to accept and this is not a Kashmir issue it's a bigger issue than that they have
to accept that the model which they have built for themselves no longer works that you cannot in this day and age conduct policy using terrorism as a legitimate instrument of statecraft I think that's at the heart of Asia so I mean we we have no problem talking to Pakistan but we have a problem talking to terrorists on and they have to be one and not be the other moving to the broader relationship with China the iWatch with keen interest Prime

Minister

Modi's discussions with Xi Jinping
I think from memory and walk on in that two or three day meeting from memory a couple of years ago and what sort of framework did that lay out for the future of the

India

China relationship and what do you now see as its prospects in

India

still for example is not party to one belt one Road you have geopolitical reservations against aspects of it but on the broader economic front the broader national security front and of course the long-standing question of the border what's your approach
to the future of that relationship you know the Wuhan meeting to my mind was a very good thing it was very good because the two countries today have very strong leaders with both with you know strategic visions in a sense of the world and a sense of their country's destiny in the world and to my mind the real benefit of Wuhan was the fact that the two of them President Xi and prankster Modi could actually spent on just I mean they just for the two of them he would look at the pictures the
two of them and the interpreters okay so now you know a lot of the way by which business is done in China is it's very choreographed very choreographed yeah yeah so you know we meet on these long tables and you know we give our principals their talking points and they give this and they kind of exchange those in a way now these were real conversations there were real free billing conversations with no agreed agenda I think to my mind that's an extremely important very significant
development because look what we do know I mean we can debate the pace and the complexity of the process but it's a given today that you know China will be among the key global powers of our era and you know

India

in its own way will be - perhaps at a different pace in a different timeline so if these two powers in the next 20-30 years are going to have such an important role then we need to start preparing for that and we need to start preparing for that by encouraging an equilibrium
between these two powers because their relationship with the world is shifting but the relationship with each other will also be very dynamic with a neither of them is really static static at home or static in relationship the rest of the world so - and then to do that you need to have those open conversations conversations about the world conversations about your country conversations about politics so don't hold back so I think that's what we saw it will haunt our hope is that we will
see a repeat of that in the not-too-distant future and personally I you know i someone who's grappled with this challenge on the field I'm very pleased that we have reached this stage mmm and and now having said that look these are not negotiating sessions so when some of the observations you made that you know you have a boundary problem and you know you have we have our viewpoint on Delta Road yes of course we do but we have there's a time and place to talk that and to negotiate
that this is not an it is not a negotiation between the two leaders this is really the two of them sort of discussing exchanging looking at the world in the sort of biggest big picture sense of the term if you think of China's future and you mentioned before China's trajectory in terms of becoming a global great power the economic trajectory has been there for some time and

India

has its own trajectory if you look at some of the current challenges facing China's own political economy
model as it seeks to sustain growth and it's very difficult relationship between party and market between state-owned enterprises and private firms and you see the ebb and flow of this policy debate within China it's so flowing through two slower growth rates for the Chinese economy in the last few years does Delhi see this as a potential opportunity for itself to accelerate its own domestic market economic reforms by which I mean now you've got a whole lot of capital in this country
from this country United States which is disinvesting from China because of not just the uncertainties of the trade war between the two not an argument or dispute but a war and an uncertainty about whether this leads in a broader direction of economic decoupling so I'm not into the binary business as a matter of policy preference but I wondered whether our friends in Delhi had seen some shift in global perceptions of the as it were eternal riches of the China market relative to what

India

could now provide well I look I would make a set of points and you can connect the dots number one what is happening in China is not economically it's not unexpected I mean everybody knew that the economy would mature and as it does growth rates would not be what they were earlier so that's my first point secondly where

India

is concerned you know we are in it certainly on the economic side for ourselves a bit if I you know I I would make myself a more attractive destination for foreign
investment and even for domestic investment not because it's a foreign policy issue because because it's an economic its economic common sense so today if I let's say if I cut my corporate tax which is what we did last week with the intention of sort of spurring investments that's a

India

n decision for

India

n on you know you don't take that saying what's you know it's it's it's not part of a lot of modern policy strategic design when we we have opened today to
Chinese investment in many sectors in fact in the last five years we've seen an increase in Chinese foreign investment FDI we are obviously very open to it from the United States if for whatever reason I mean us supply chains are shifting relocating and may not be only from China I mean they could be from other countries as well I would be happy to host them that's that's very much so there is a there is a sort of merit in doing it for its own sake not necessarily as part of a
calculation on China hmm I've got a few questions from the audience and so I will select these in a degree of difficulty if ends okay because I know you can happily accommodate to whichever of these what does Pakistan need to do as a precondition for Kashmir talks okay you wanted me to go a question by question yeah look I I think we're getting this wrong you know first of all Pakistan has to do something for its own good and if it does that it would enable a normal neighborly
relationship with

India

the issue between

India

and Pakistan I mean it's not like we agree on everything else and we have wonderful relationship and there's a Kashmir issue I would you know we had an attack on Mumbai City the last time I checked Mumbai city was not part of cash hmm so so you know Pakistani to risk and attack states and regions which are far removed from Kashmir we go to recognize there's a bigger problem out there so what's the problem the problem is really a
mindset I mean look what we have today every time there's a change of government in Pakistan somebody says first of all it's new and nothing to do with the earlier guys it's all their fault second position by the way it's nothing to do with us as a country it's all the Americans you know the Americans taught us the bad habits by doing the Afghan jihad we were good people till you came along by the way you I know you're not invent it so it's true but so the the point
is there is a fundamental issue there which they need to understand and we need to encourage them to do and that is to move away from terrorism it's not you know it's not at one level beyond you know it's a huge issue at one level it's very obvious issue I mean these are not activities which are subterranean these are activities and broad daylight so they know where the caps are I mean anybody knows where it counts up just google them we'll find them via which leads to
another question from the audience which is now what's the first question we at the Asian society should ask him run con when he comes here to speak on Friday you don't need that answer to that I just thought I'd try yeah the and his interesting one someone in the audience has a genuine sense of humor Donald Trump has offered to mediate and help on Kashmir will you be taking up his offer I'll move on to any other questions from the audience the one point I was going to raise
there was a question here I'll take this one from this gentleman Mike's coming to yourself yes my name is Farooq Siddiqui and I am from Kashmir the foreign

minister

spoke about the Instrument of Accession that the Maharaja then acceded to

India

it was but on the basis of three conditions one was the foreign policy the other was the defense and the third was the communication that time it was there was no Constitution of

India

so the Constitution of

India

came into being in 1950 right 49
26 now yeah 40 let's mine it was finalized so article 37 370 and article 35 a which is two separate things 370 article was provided in the Constitution of

India

to honor the Instrument of Accession which

India

n government took to the United Nations as a proof that

India

has that Kashmiri has acceded to

India

on the basis of those Instrument of Accession you need to make sure your questions yes my question is that how is it possible that

India

can remove this particular condition of 370 and
35 a because it reflects the I guess let me complete the question no I think we got the question sir and I think well maybe answer is that once article 30 75 370 is removed that means

India

's relationship with Kashmir is over and what is there is 800 thousand army I think we've got three questions and I think I'm going to take the microphone from you okay I'll actually chair in the meeting not you thank you so so let me let me give a short clear answer to the questions that I I
think that took two misconceptions number one a misconception that the Instrument of Accession which was signed by the ruler of the state of Jammu and Kashmir was different from those of the others in fact you can you can again this is public information I have it on my phone if you look at the dot the Instrument of Accession and remember the British bureaucracy at that time was very strong and had impacted all of us everybody all the princely states got exactly the same document to sign this
document was typed up it had a blank for the name of the ruler a blank for the name of the state a blank for the date and a blank because Lord Mountbatten of Burma wanted to sign his full name in a fountain pen by you know himself otherwise 520 times yeah otherwise every one of these instruments of accession we're exactly the same all of them began by saying that we are now exceeding and handling over pass related to foreign offense defense and communications to the Union of

India

now the
Constitution making process which happened thereafter from from 1947 to 49 involved them all the princely states now aligning with the Constitution in the making now as I explained in the case of Jammu and Kashmir the sentiment in the Constituent Assembly with Kashmir II participation was that they needed more time to do that alignment which is why you had as I said a provision with the word temporary written on it on the title of it and on the text of the article now the gentleman raised the
issue that you know 370 when it was a temporary article that's your relationship with the state of Kashmir actually it's not there is an article in the Constitution Article one which actually lists out all the constituent parts of

India

so the relationship is not based on article it cannot be based on a temporary article it obviously has to be based on a permanent article so I think there are two factual inaccuracies or misunderstandings of the Constitution of

India

take my word for it
I've read it many times I'm student of political science as well so I would respectfully urge you to go back and look at the Constitution of

India

let me just beyond Kashmir to Afghanistan what do you see as being the optimal landing place for the negotiations between the Taliban and the Americans but more broadly for the long-term stabilization of the country and where does

India

n policy fit look I think this is today one of the big vexing questions in our part of the world and I must
tell you on this trip it is a issue which are good be talking to a number of people yesterday I met ambassador college SOT I also had a meeting with the Iranian Foreign

Minister

Javad Zarif and I will be I'm going from here on to Washington so I expect to discuss it with secretary Pompeo as well and with many others who are here this I met many of the Central Asians yesterday Tajikistan Uzbekistan and everybody really has a common set of concerns anxieties interests on this issue you know at
one level we understand the compulsions on the United States 18 years is a long time to be fighting a war you know and and actually frankly I take my hat's off to the United States that it had the the durability and the persistence and the commitment and the fortitude to do that for so long so it's apparent that this is going to change okay the question which we need to answer is how much changes in what way what is the what are the consequences of those changes now that's some of
that is what is has been negotiated between the American negotiators and the Taliban and you know whatever is happening with the comment in the Afghan government the elected Afghan government in Kabul we know different countries have also been involved in some of them in this process our point of view is this recognizing the the compulsions of this church we do think that many of the achievements of the last 18 years it and for which you know so many countries have fought you know shed blood
spent money they those achievements should not be lost in the process so whatever the outcomes whatever the the likely direction in which Afghanistan is going it must be such that these these are not jeopardized by my you-know-what what could be agreed upon we ourselves you know we had a very strong history of development assistance day in terms of delivery of projects we've been really among the better deliverers you know whether you look at bringing electricity to Kabul city or building a
dam in Herat province so doing health clinics radio stations schools building a road through western Afghanistan we've done a lot lot of that but obviously now now we'll have to see with the larger direction which is quite but our preference obviously our interests are that the gains of the last 18 years should not be jeopardized the country which Prime

Minister

Maria's place particular attention on and one which you have obvious connections with an interest in I presume Japanese is
one of your seven languages is of course Tokyo and are based on and and Marie's son have what appears to the rest of us to be a strong working relationship if you were to try it for this audience to explain where you see the strategic significance your relationship with

India

with her and Japan heading over the next five years give us some sense of the texture of that well first of all I must tell you that reports of my linguistic skills are vastly exaggerated as much as rumors of my tact
and diplomatic abilities so having got that disclaimer out of the way do you speak Australian as well as English I'm working on that I'm taking lessons i watch cricket to do understand us just good winning the ashes but I won't dwell on that reserve did you notice I'm not contradicting you and that's right we have our own shade Kalani will pass in a strange way about you know about coming to Japan look I I do think that it's really a very at the moment or very under under
analysed or shall I say a relationship that hasn't got the prominence that it should maybe it's all for the good and because it's still a stage where this relationship is growing and we see you know Asia has changed the world is changing Asia is changing and probably these changes would be better if we saw in many ways of greater Japanese participation in international

affairs

because if you are if are declared objective is a multiple of world to my mind it's prerequisite is a
multipolar Asia mmm and if you're talking of a multiple of Asia obviously one of the natural poles one of them is Japan now the how much the Japanese do and what they do and how they do these are for them to decide but we have seen much greater interest on their part in participating and security-related conversations political conversations they are we work with them in the quad we actually have a trilateral with Japan and America which completely coincidentally is called J we have we work
with them on the reform of the UN Security Council we have a G fo will be meeting this week at the foreign masters level so but the Japanese also have been much more active in investing in

India

in in collaborating with us on connectivity initiatives in looking at a range of global issues so you know I was in Japan 20 years ago okay they were much more reticent about their own potential and their big change in the area and I think those changes are good you know it's not for me to say
whether they're good for Japan I think they are but you know that's for them to decide but there's certainly good for

India

hmm let me sort of trying to begin to draw this conversation to a close because I know you've got to go off and see the Donald and and and that'll be a fun meeting the but

India

and the future of global trade right they're wrongly

India

has been criticized in the past for being excessively protectionist for not being a shall we say full and open
participant in global trade negotiations the particular role which

India

played in in the destiny of the Doha round but let's not revisit history looking to the future and the opening of of markets within the wider indo-pacific region give me your sense of where our set goes give me a sense of where broader

India

n policy on trade goes and that me challenge you on the question of of

India

n accession to APEC and where you would like to see your country go on that one mm-hmm but look my
understanding of the r7 ago she ations The

minister

s met earlier this month in Bangkok I think it's very advanced the the key point that we make is that I'm a 1 which I make as a foreign

minister

is that our ship is a trade agreement and its merits and demerits must be weighed on the scale of trade it it has political strategic implications and connotations but they cannot be the principal criteria of evaluating a trade agreement a trade agreement must stand on its own feet there must be
good trade offers out there to justify that agreement now what are the big concerns I'm in a big concern of course is we have free trade agreements with many of the current or sub but spent countries so the new ones are are the important ones because we don't have agreements with them at all one is China one is Australia when its newest in it they they each you know have their own particular complications and wrinkles so we have a big trade deficit with China which everybody knows which
is a source of concern for

India

n business so how well are these challenges addressed how well our challenges of you know you and there are creative solutions i I don't think this is beyond the realm of imagination i I think trade negotiators can find fixes in terms of coverage and time and there are answers there there are another set of issues my understanding again is these relate to services which is really they've got to be good services offers on the table because it's
something which is important for

India

so so I I think the call would be look if if those gaps are closed in the near future then the chances are hot that we would have enough ship now in terms of what you said about the APEC you know

India

has been steadily pulled eastwards okay it began in 1992 with what was called the look east but the look east we really looked at Southeast Asia in many ways as a sort of a model as a lesson and as a justification for changes which we were trying to do an
inspiration for those changes now in the 25 years that have passed lucas became at least because the connectivity has got built up the conversations expanded the the relationships expanded so today we have security relations with all these countries we didn't have before MIDI RCM tape we have many more flights we have a lot of investment a lot of

India

n companies operating up there now the next stage was to go beyond to Indo Pacific an Indo Pacific because beyond the ASEAN we actually found
that today our principal trade partners are actually China Japan Korea and - now to a large extent Australia so we actually if you looked for us the center of gravity in terms of our economic interests and consequently of our strategic interest has steadily shifted missed words so and given the other developments which have happened the repositioning of America and the rise of China a lot of the artificial silos between the

India

n Ocean and the Pacific Ocean have also become irrelevant so you
have the Indo Pacific so for me if you actually do the our ship agreement and you have and that becomes your economic trade framework and the you have the indo-pacific as your strategic approach in a way then obviously that brings you that much closer towards epic I mean epic has its own process challenges but to mean the case for APEC would grow yeah I mean my argument about APEC is simply not just that it was an Australian idea 25 years ago but it's actually worked for all the Member
States in its own crazy way not least because all of these disconnected economies in various stages of economic opening at the official class level were forced to work with each other for the first time so suddenly they found colleagues and friends in the relevant ministries with a civil aviation or domestic energy of God knows whatever from whether it's Laos the Philippines South Korea and wherever and they're all in this thing together it was quite interesting and in fact it was
largely domestically driven which is why I've always seen it has been a great thing for

India

in itself but also for the wider region to have

India

as a party to this I think useful pan regional institution when we still don't have a pan regional security body which i think is still a missing element in our architecture we've been privileged today to have the foreign

minister

of

india

with us to spend some time I'd like to you to express your appreciation in the conventional
fashion