India Minister of External Affairs Subrahmanyam Jaishankar

Well, welcome to our place, it's good to have you

minister

. I have called you many things over the years, but Minister is my first public occasion to address you as such. It's a bit like it for me. You started out as a career diplomat, but you are much more. more successful than me at that, but then I went to the dark side and went into politics and now you've done the same thing, how is it different? I guess you know something. I'm still learning in a sense at work, but you know that, in our case, being a

minister

is also being a member of parliament, attending parliament, having your own discipline, your own culture, in a way, yes, obviously you are a much more public person in every sense of the term.

Guess in a professionally interesting way, you know, even if you are. I was the sort of senior official in the Foreign Office before, but there was always the comfort of having the minister above you, so when you really honor the minister, your own horizons broaden. your feeling that you know the buck stops with you is also disgusting hmm, so it's a different feeling, it's a qualitatively different world, how are you doing with the party whips and the upper house of India, the whips ruled your life or your death in Parliament. Sir, well, you know that yes, we have a relatively narrow working maturity, you know, a sort of working, I won't say working majority because we don't really have a majority in the upper house, so it's important that you be there to all the important things.

I know the critical legislation and you have to balance that with your diplomatic responsibilities and sometimes, frankly, you have to let some go, we have to prioritize. I, for example, could not attend the meeting of foreign ministers because we had some very important bills ahead of us. at that time, but I am a conscientious member, I will always be there for the world, have you missed it? Have you missed any votes yet? No, no, it's not ten out of ten for them and well, except for the ones where I was away, but yeah. you know that's good, wow, rule your life, does your BJP Whip have a sense of humor?

Let's put it this way, we haven't tried all that yet, these things are ahead of you Minister, that's all I can say, but it should be operationally interesting. challenge if you are the foreign minister in particular and you have an ongoing series of international challenges. Major countries in India have people coming through the Delhi gate all the time and then you're in the upper house with this, you know, wafer thin. parliamentary situation, so I would encourage your leader to adopt a generous humane approach to the minister's demands. I'm sure they will urge you to do the same.

Here in New York it is General Assembly week. What is the central message of this week? for the Indian government that you and Prime Minister Modi are trying to hand over to the international community, well, you know, I think the big issue before the world and before the United Nations right now is how are we going to meet the goals or not? . sustainable development goals and this I mean in a sense I say this I mean this is this is an analytical observation I think whether the world would succeed in achieving the SDG goals would depend on whether India would succeed because our number is very large and If You see what has happened in the last five years, in reality many of the changes in India are led by national campaigns, very often driven directly personally by the Prime Minister.

Campaigns on gender. Gender to close the gender gap. Educational campaigns on digital connectivity. urbanization over skills education, so there was actually a variety of these initiatives, now these are not just locals. If you look at the raw numbers, for example, you know that there was a push to attract people who you know weren't really poor. people to open bank accounts, okay, they open 300 million bank accounts, but the most important thing is that in those five years, in reality, sixty billion dollars went to those three hundred million bank accounts that they promote from microfinance, particularly with a kind of bias towards women, seventy-five percent of users have two hundred and sixty million microfinance accounts, and if we look at rural households in the last five years, about 18 million households rural areas have gas connections, because you know what, Indian women use firewood a lot and why it is deadly.

It's literally a killer, it's like smoking several packs of cigarettes a day. They have about one hundred million ninety-six million new cooking gas users, who were helped by the fact that he could appeal to people like me to get off cooking gas. connections that we got at subsidized rates, so that's all you know, kind of like what's changing in India and its history of girls' education and which, interestingly enough, is related to building toilets because girls don't they went to school because there were often no bathrooms in school, so if you got about a hundred million bathrooms but you also had an impact on many millions of girls who go to school and that, and the moment you do something like going to school, you're actually raising awareness that you're delaying marriage, you know? dates, I mean ages, in some ways you are improving health, you are also making people aware of the fact that they need to space their children, which has consequences, the demographic consequences, it has health consequences, so all of that is happening and I think in I mean, in a sense, when I look at governance at home, I sit in cabinet meetings where you know, usually foreign policy is a very small element, most of the What I hear actually has to do with the SDGs and I think some of those messages will really come through, yes, I am my sins, I am Jim, the man of sanitary water for all, I am available for that, no, no, so We are responsible globally as a civil society organization for sustainable development.

Goal number six, the proof of what you just said is that you will succeed in SDG six if you succeed in India, it is quite simple and you have been to India many times and most recently when you are doing major public advocacy for Swatch Park, who is the Prime Minister. Modi's program for a clean India includes the major issue of ending open defecation and addressing the widespread availability and use of toilets. I mean, the figures are impressive and I'm aware of the internal debate about whether all the figures are real or not, but this is just for you to take a 10 or 20 percent discount, it's still a great achievement, yeah, look, let me tell you what proves that the numbers were yes, the fact that the numbers already became political, then the numbers are real because they finally gave You are real numbers in the voting booth.

Yes, you know, if you were to ask a question, why was the government led by Mr. Modi not only re-elected, it was re-elected by about eight, almost eight or ten percent more votes than it had um, those numbers carried to these numbers, so there is a direct connection between what we achieved on the ground in the last five years and what the behavior of the workers was because if you ask people, why did you do it? Because you know you know the speculation, there were people who said with great confidence that the numbers would go down, yeah, okay, and the last time I was here at Asia Society we were having those conversations not in public, but we were just the I think the reason why the numbers increased and in any democratic exercise, if in a period the numbers increase, your water base increases by approximately 10 percent, it is a remarkable achievement and I think the reasons for it were twofold, the main reason was that on the ground people saw changes and generally, at least in India where voters can be very impatient, you get elected with a lot of hope and then five years later there is impatience on the water side, yes, but I think that Five years later they clearly believed that mr.

Modi was still the best harbinger of change and probably now implemented it and the other of course was the national security side. I think they just thought it was safe for pedophiles, so their general argument about the May election result was that five years ago it triggered a significant set, let's call it that, of social revolutions against the list that you just mentioned. referred to above, which are also consistent with global development goals and have actually expanded the BJP's electorate. Yes, I think it's those five years too. Five years ago, people looked at their record in Gujarat and expected them to know that this would be the developmental progress they would make on a national scale.

I think that was the voting behavior of 2014. I think the voting behavior of 2019 was fine. We've seen it for five years. We've seen what their garment looks like, we've seen, you know how serious they are about adhering to all of this and we really believe that, you know, they're very nice here and so let's go ahead and give it another term and we'll see until where. Do you know where it can take us? You mentioned the sustainable development goals, one of them has to do with climate and of course you have the UN climate summit this week as we prepare for the five years of the Paris treaty, what is the formal policy of the India?

What are your Paris commitments? Are you going to fulfill them? Will you expand these commitments between now and 2030? Well, the first point I would like to make is that there is a big change in attitude regarding climate change and in India and until recently. A few years ago, people saw climate change as something, there was growing awareness, but it was also seen as an international negotiation. Yeah, you know, this was all about because Kyoto captured the whole issue of climate change and you know the history of Kyoto. I 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 the middle of the difference yes, I wasn't, but I got some graphic accounts of the things that happened there , but I can do it. fight with the Indians, yes, but in Paris I think the difference was that we took the view that, look, if there really is tension, you know, then you can't say, on the one hand, that there is potential, but it is subject to a kind of The Nitty-gritty of the Deal and I think we decided that we would really take the initiative to address the challenge of climate change.

Yes, I saw that you actually know how much the Prime Minister was involved in structuring the compromises that led to Paris. We used to travel and talk on the phone taking calls all the time. I think a lot of our views and positions definitely influenced the G77, but what we actually did outside of the Paris conference was, in my opinion, the most important outcome for us and for the world that we decided to take the lead. in promoting and implementing the spread of solar energy and revealed what was actually the most ambitious solar program to date.

We started something called the International Solar Alliance that has taken off spectacularly today. We have a very ambitious goal: 175 gigawatts, we are on track to meet it and also a lot of our development assistance in Africa, in the Caribbean, in the Pacific Islands, is aimed at providing solar projects and, in fact, you know , on my way I saw very interesting analysis done by climate action tracker which I was very familiar with and what the analysis said was that there were two countries that actually exceeded nationally determined contributions. One is Morocco. I don't remember who the other one was.

There were five countries. those who have met it with grade 2-2 as an advantage to meet the two grade benchmark and the five countries are Bhutan, which is not a surprise: Costa Rica, Ethiopia, Philippines and India, so, actually, when it comes to meeting the Paris commitments, frankly From what I read it seems like I haven't discussed it with my own colleagues who deal with climate change, but from what I can gather, it actually seems to be doing better than in much of Europe in many other countries, well, it's a bit like everything. Otherwise, their success on climate and, frankly, China's success on climate will largely determine the future of the world, so Prime Minister Modi's leadership domestically and globally on this issue will be crucial in the future. upcoming period.

Here in the United States, I watched D Modi and I thought you came away with a few million more, but I thought it was funny, there's some kind of Cointreau that reminds me of Dunn helping to wear a Stetson in the late 70s, but I that caught my attention is interesting in terms of the current evolution of the relationship between Modi and Trump. Personally, I can't think of two more different personalities than Narendra Modi and Donald Trump. These are like chalk and cheese. They are just completely different people, but my friend, they seem to beworking. What is the real substance of this relationship?

What are your main opportunities? and the tensions right now, can they navigate until obviously until the end of next year and if there is a re-elected win beyond that look as far as the Houston event is concerned? I mean, I think of it in many ways really as a tribute to the American Indian community. that you had, you know their ability today to organize and 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 this is not the first time, I mean.

It started at Madison Square Garden five years ago, remember, yeah, then we did something a little bigger in San Jose the next year, so this is an idea and now they've grown in scale, the fact that they can do this speaks volumes. many ways of some of the strengths of our relationship with the United States and those are structural strengths. I mean, this shows today that the US is still, in many ways, a land of equal opportunity because, without a doubt, that's how many American Indians would see it and that they really have done it and it was a very bipartisan event, I mean, while President Trump obviously got a lot of attention, but he was preceded on stage by Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, so again that speaks to the political bandwidth of American Indians. community, so today we see community as one of the key pillars of the relationship and one of the many factors that have created a new paradigm between India and the United States that has evolved over the last 20 years.

There are other business factors as well. factors geopolitical factors, but with respect to the president and the prime minister, well, look, I saw them the first time when I met in Washington and in 2017 and you know, sometimes, even if people are not the same, they get along, but it was very, it is very visible. that when they meet, you know they bond well and when you ask, you say, okay, where is this going? I think one difference for us in India is that Indians are very adaptable people by nature, sometimes it's part of our DNA secondly.

Minister Modi is a very outgoing person, so if you know, it's you and me and we are very different, he changes the subject and responds to you in a way that works with you and me in a way that works. with me, so you've had two very different presidents, Obama and Trump, one after the other, but he's actually happy. The morning euphemism had a very, you know, long cordial, but you also know that there's a bigger problem here, which is remembering that we're not you. We know that we don't have the history with the United States and with American leaders that many other countries have because we don't have that history, when there are changes we don't have those anxieties, you know a lot of what you see.

In East Asia, what you see in Europe are actually leaders concerned that the current reality is a deviation from the norm. Okay, with India, there was no, no, we were still in a very progressing relationship, so for us, okay, there's one more adjustment to make. Hmm, so the trade dispute that has been going on for a long time between the Trump administration and his government can come to an agreement and now they are singing from the same sheet of music in the chord and China in the trade arguments, not in the disputes, because I think they know.

There is a lot of support and progress on these issues. Look at the United States. Today it has adopted a certain approach in its trade relations with the entire world, so what is happening in the case of India is not unusual; in fact, I would say compared to some of the more public discussions that they have with other countries and some of them are disputes. In my opinion, this is much more manageable in many ways, so they are not, I mean, clearly fooled by nature, they are not easy to solve either, this is how my business negotiators make a living, but I was wondering what I did . mmm-hmm, they're making a living, yeah, so, my expectation is, and in fact, my trade ministerial colleague is also in town today, so we'll work through it, I mean, we'll agree on some things, probably Let's not agree on everything that is problems.

We don't, there's no kind of finite deadline by which all of these things work. These are ongoing conversations because trading is ongoing and there are new things that were known a few years ago, for example, data issues that we are not even present on. radar today, you know we can have different perspectives on an issue like that or a few years ago, steel wasn't really a topic of dispute or even discussion, so trade will continue to change, but here's the good news . I feel encouraged when more attention is paid. to that area because it actually means that there is more activity the greater the trade, the more arguments there are to reach an agreement, but I said you go out of your way, so where is it?

Is there a common strategic vision of India and the United States on China? Is there a common vision? of the quad you are going to get the Australians out of the cold in Malabar, what are they going to do? You know, my senses, big countries, maybe more than big countries, maybe all countries today don't have Commons precautions. I think everyone would have them. their own lyrics and their own melodies, but there would be notes that would play together occasionally, it would be cacophonous and sometimes sound like an orchestra, but your composure tell me how you would write this.

See, no, I look, I think we are, we are moving towards a world of convergences, but a lot of them would be situational, a lot of them would be issue-based, a lot of them would be regional, um. I mean, we may agree on the Indo-Pacific, but we may not agree and the mistake is like that. I think today we are seeing differentiated relationships that are much more complicated rather than clear. You know you are with me, you are not your ally, you are not, we are alive, we have a unified common position, I don't think we are.

We are no longer in the world of unified positions. I think we've just moved away from that, so you should know better: the court is concerned right now. Until now, the courts have largely been at the official level. We're exploring how to elevate it beyond that. Now the quads will largely discuss maritime security, connectivity, terrorism, these are issues in which these four countries, India, Japan, Australia, happened to us, you know, they are democratic countries with a great similarity of approaches on these issues. , that doesn't mean we agree, I mean, let's say. On an issue such as the opposition on climate change with each of the Quad countries we would have, I will not say disagreements, but clearly very different positions, so it would depend largely on the issue and the consent of the partners, which would give us leads to the elephant in the room China, next country, you've spent a bit of time there, let me start by talking about what the Indian government has done most recently in Kashmir.

This is an important decision of Delhi, perhaps you could explain it to our meeting here. What is the Indian government seeking to achieve? How do you think both Pakistan and China are responding and where to from here? The one-sentence answer is read in today's Financial Times. It has an opinion article from me and don't look at the image. Well, 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 those are well-developed skills. Yes, of course, that's why you get used to it, so you know from one year to the next.

It's like going back a little bit on Kashmir. Look, the first point that people should appreciate is that the provision of the Constitution that gave Kashmir a different status was a temporary provision. First thing, a funny thing, it is rarely read in the international press and when I say it is a temporary provision, don't take my word for it, Google the Constitution of India, it is written there, the word temporary is in the title of this segment, as well as in the article in question. I think we all know them. We'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 won't be okay , let me explain why. changed well, now what happened was at the time Kashmir, joint India, like 560 other princely states, the treasury was unique, it was a state: it was under attack while negotiating its accession from Pakistan, so that the meaning in the Constitutional Constituent Assembly was that we need, you know, to give them a little slack, to give them a little different times and you know, in the Constituent Assembly, if not in 47 48, yes, of course, in which, for true, the Kashmiri representatives came together, so the feeling was that okay, these guys are coming. under different circumstances, so let's give them a different meaning or terms for alignment, let's give them more time and space to do it now, 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 than all the other princely states, but it came through a series of presidential orders provided for by this temporary provision, so that in the last seventy years about fifty-four of these presidential orders are now in force. . 1990, around the end of the 80s, when the Afghan war, God's first, came to an end, we saw an increase in terrorism in cross-border people who came from the other side of the line of control, now they created a kind of riaf echt intermediate in the political system and therefore Allah and the whole alignment process actually slowed down so if you really track those presidential proclamations you get a lot more in the '50s, '60s, '70s and '80s, so you do it now .

What did it mean on the ground? What it meant on the ground was that because you had a provision that said ownership was essentially local, there was no outside investment, much of the change, the economic changes that you see in the rest of India, businesses with a long history about the past; well now what was actually supposed to be cash aid that ended up somehow, as you know, the bridge became a barrier, which had political consequences and ultimately national security consequences because when there was not enough activity and therefore there were not enough jobs, so people blame Delhi for not having enough jobs, we were spending ten times from Delhi's perspective, ten times on average in Kashmir, what we are spending on an average Indian citizen, but still the feeling was good, you know, we haven't seen our share, so the the lack of development the lack of opportunities actually created a feeling of alienation alienation - separatism use of separatism for terrorism and the history of Kashmir because people you know somehow suggest that things have gotten worse and you know that something changed for the worse on August 5th when this legislation was passed.

It was passed, look, 30 years ago, there were about 40,000 people who died and were commuted, okay, and it's not just those numbers, I mean, look, there were on the streets of Srinagar, you know, senior police officials lynched to full daylight. eminent journalists killed, military personnel returning home and leaves taken from houses and tortured and killed. I mean in a sense it gave us an idea of ​​the previous situation, when there were also interesting socio-economic consequences. because a national loss does not automatically apply to the state of Germany; Virtually all of the progressive legislation that has been enacted in India over the last 20 years has been passed in that state, so it remains a state where women's property rights are known to be lower than men's. state where they say that domestic violence laws do not apply youth protection laws do not apply right to work right to education right to information the affirmative action programs that were in the rest of India do not apply , so you know you've actually socially reveled in a bypass of that state, you've put that state at an economic disadvantage, you've created a national security problem for yourself, you've created an integration challenge, so when we came back to power, I think that there was a long and deep look at what our options are and the options were: either we do more of the same knowing that it doesn't work or we do something different, so I think the choice was good, we will do something different now that we did that, something different and, by the way, something different. there are no implications for India's

external

borders, I mean we are not, we are reformatting this within our existing borders, obviously it provoked a reaction from Pakistan, you provoked a reaction from China, there are two very different reactions, I think for Pakistan was a country. which has actually created an entire industry of terrorism to address the Kashmir issue.

I mean, from my point of view, it's actually bigger than cash. Wait, I think they created it for India,But let's let that pass for the moment. Who now sees that 70-year investment undermined if this policy is successful, so I think today there is a reaction of anger, you know, frustration in many ways because he will build an entire industry over a long period of time, you think they will . I have said a lot what he will do. Yes, but let me close the China part. I think China bit the Chinese. I think they misunderstood what was happening there and what their reaction was to the fact that the state today constitutes two union territories.

Now I don't know why. I think it affected them. I went a few days after the legislation to China and explained that, as far as they were concerned, nothing had changed. India's borders 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 challenges of a very different order as to what they will do. Your question, look, they have to accept and this is not a Kashmir problem, it is a bigger problem than what they have. accept that the model that they themselves have built no longer works that today a policy that uses terrorism as a legitimate instrument of government cannot be carried out.

I think that's in the heart of Asia, so I want to say that we have no problem talking to us. Pakistan, but we have a problem talking to terrorists and it has to be one and not the other. Move toward a broader relationship with China. The iWatch with great interest. PM Modi's talks with Xi Jinping. I think from memory and continue on those two. or a three-day memory meeting a couple of years ago and what kind of framework was set for the future of the India-China relationship and what are its prospects now in India, for example, which is not yet part of the Strip and the Route. you have geopolitical reservations about some aspects of it, but on the broader economic front, the broader national security front, and of course the long-standing issue of the border, what is your approach to the future of that relationship? ?, you know that, in my opinion, the Wuhan meeting was a very good meeting because the two countries today have very strong leaders with both, you know, strategic visions in a sense of the world and a sense of destiny of their country in the world and, in my opinion, the real benefit of Wuhan was the fact that the two of them, President Xi and the joker.

Modi could actually spend on just, I mean, just the two of them, he was looking at the pictures of the two of them and the performers, okay, so now you know a lot of the way business is done in China. It's very choreographed. choreographed yeah yeah so you know we meet at these long tables and you know we give our directors their talking points and they give this and they exchange them somehow now these were real conversations there were real free billing conversations without an agreed agenda. I think, in my opinion, this is an extremely important development, very significant, because look at what we know.

I mean, we can debate the pace and complexity of the process, but today it is a fact that you know that China will be among the key global powers of our era. and you know that India will be in its own way, maybe at a different pace on a different timeline, so if these two powers in the next 20 to 30 years are going to play such an important role, then we must start to prepare for that and I need to start preparing for that by fostering a balance between these two powers because their relationship with the world is changing, but the relationship between them will also be very dynamic and neither of them are really static at home or static in the relationship with the rest. of the world, 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 us and We hope we do.

I'll see a repeat of that in the not-too-distant future, and I personally know someone who has dealt with this challenge in the field. I'm very glad that we've reached this stage um and having said that, look, these are not negotiation sessions, so when some of the observations that you made, you know that you have a boundary problem and you know that you have it, We have our point of view on Delta Road, yes, of course we do, but we have a time and place to talk about it and negotiate it. This is not a negotiation between the two leaders, in reality the two of them are a kind of discussion about exchanging views on the world in the broadest sense of the term, if you think about the future of China and you mentioned it before. trajectory in terms of becoming a major global power, the economic trajectory has been there for some time and India has its own trajectory if we look at some of the current challenges facing China's own political economy model as it seeks to sustain the growth and their very difficult relationship. between party and market, between state-owned enterprises and private companies, and you see the ebb and flow of this political debate within China, flowing through two slower growth rates for the Chinese economy in recent years, does Delhi see this as a potential opportunity? to accelerate its own economic reforms in the domestic market, by which I mean that there is now a large amount of capital in this country coming from this country, the United States, which is disinvesting from China not only because of the uncertainties of the trade war between the two.

It's not an argument or a dispute but a war and an uncertainty about whether this leads in a broader direction of economic decoupling, so I don't get into the binary business as a matter of political preference, but I was wondering if our friends in Delhi had seen some change in global perceptions of the, so to speak, eternal riches of the China market relative to what India could now provide well. I look, I would make a series of dots and you can connect the dots number one. What is happening in China is not economically, it is not unexpected.

I mean everyone knew that the economy would mature and as it does, the growth rates wouldn't be what they were before, so that's my first point. Secondly, as far as India is concerned, you know we are certainly in this a little bit on the economic side for us, if you know. It would become a more attractive destination for foreign investment and even for domestic investment, not because it is a foreign policy issue, but because it is an economic issue, it is economic common sense, so today, let's say, if I reduce my tax corporate, which is what we did last time. week with the intention of stimulating investments, that is a decision of India, you know, you don't take that saying, what do you know, it is not part of much strategic design of modern policies when we have opened ourselves today to Chinese investment.

In fact, in many sectors over the past five years we have seen an increase in Chinese foreign direct investment. Obviously we are very open to receiving it from the United States, if for some reason I mean the US supply chains are relocating and it may not just be from China, I mean, it could be from other countries as well. I would love to receive them. That's largely, there's a sort of merit in doing it for its own sake, not necessarily as part of a calculation about China, hmm. I have some questions from the audience, so I'll select them with a degree of difficulty if it ends well because I know you can happily adapt to any of them.

What should Pakistan do as a precondition for talks on Kashmir? Well, they loved me. To go question by question, yes, look, I think we are making a mistake. First of all, Pakistan has to do something for its own good and doing so would allow for a normal neighborly relationship with India. The problem between India and Pakistan. I mean, it's not like we agree on everything else and we have a wonderful relationship and there's a Kashmir issue. Did you know we had an attack in Mumbai city last time I checked Mumbai city was not part of the cash?

Hmm, so you know Pakistani. We risk and attack states and regions that are far away from Kashmir, we are going to recognize that there is a bigger problem out there, so what is the problem? The problem is really a way of thinking. I mean, look what we have today every time there is a change of government in Pakistan, someone says. First of all, it is new and has nothing to do with the previous ones, it is all their fault. The second position, by the way, has nothing to do with us as a country, it's all Americans, you know, Americans taught us bad habits by doing the Afghan jihad.

We were good people until you came along, by the way, I know you didn't make it up, so it's true, but the point is that there is a fundamental issue that they must understand and we must encourage them to do so, and that is that moving away from terrorism is not It's, you know, it's not on a level beyond, you know, it's a big problem on one level, it's a very obvious problem, I mean, these are not activities that are underground, they are activities in broad daylight, so They know where the caps are. I mean, anyone knows where it counts, just Google them, we'll find them, which leads to another question from the audience, which is now what's the first question we in Asian society should ask you when you come here to speak on Friday.

You don't need that answer, I just thought I'd give it a try, yeah, and it's interesting. Someone in the audience has a genuine sense of humor. Donald Trump has offered to mediate and help in Kashmir. Will you accept his offer? I'll move on to any other questions from the audience. The only point I was going to raise was a question here. I'll take this one from this gentleman. Mike is coming to his senses. Yes, my name is Farooq Siddiqui and I am from Kashmir, the foreigner. The minister spoke about the Instrument of Accession by which the Maharaja acceded to India, but on the basis of three conditions, one was foreign policy, the other was defense and the third was the communication that at that time there was no a Constitution of India, so the Constitution of India came into force in 1950, right 49 26 now yes 40 come to me, it was finalized, so article 37 370 and article 35 a, which are two things Separately, Article 370 was provided in the Constitution of India to honor the Instrument of Accession that the Indian government took to the United Nations as proof that India has acceded to India on the basis of that Instrument. of Adhesion.

You need to make sure your questions yes, my question is how is it possible that India can remove this particular condition of 370 and 35 a because it reflects I guess let me complete the question. No, I think we answered the question, sir, and I think perhaps the answer is that once Article 30 75 370 is removed, that means India's relationship with Kashmir is over and what is there? There are 800 thousand armies. I think we have three questions and I think I'm going to take the microphone away from you. Well, actually I'll chair the meeting. No, thanks. So let me give you a short and clear answer. the questions which I think required two misconceptions, first, 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 point of the Instrument of Accession and remember that the British bureaucracy at that time was very strong and had shocked us all, all the princely states got exactly the same document to sign, this document was typed. it had a blank space for the name of the ruler a blank space for the name of the state a blank space for the date and a blank space because Lord Mountbatten of Burma wanted to sign his full name with a fountain pen because you are known to itself otherwise 520 times yes, otherwise each of these instruments of accession are exactly the same.

They all started by saying that now we are overcoming and handling the pass related to defense of foreign crimes and communications to the Union of India, now the Constitution drafting process which happened from 1947 to 49 involved all the states princely ones who are now aligning themselves with the Constitution in process, as I explained in the case of Jammu and Kashmir, the feeling in the Constituent Assembly with the participation of Kashmir II was that they needed more time to make that alignment, so As I said, I had a provision with the word temporary written in the title and in the text of the article.

Now the gentleman raised the issue that you know 370 when it was a temporary article, that is its relationship with the state of Kashmir. There is actually no article in article one of the Constitution that actually lists all the constituent parts of India, so the relationship is not based on an article, it cannot be based on a temporary article, obviously it has to be based in a permanent article, so I think there are two factual inaccuracies or misunderstandings of the Constitution of theIndia. Believe me. I have read it many times. I am also a student of political science, so I respectfully urge you to go back and look at the Constitution of India.

Let me go beyond Kashmir, to Afghanistan, which you think is the optimal landing place for negotiations between the Taliban and the Americans, but more generally for the long-term stabilization of the country and where Indian policy fits. I think this is today. One of the big vexing issues in our part of the world and I must tell you that on this trip it is a topic that is good to talk about with several people yesterday. I met with Ambassador College SOT. I also had a meeting with the Iranian Foreign Minister. Javad Zarif and I will be there.

From here on out I'm going to Washington, so I look forward to discussing it with Secretary Pompeo and many others who are here as well. Yesterday I met with many of the Central Asians Tajikistan Uzbekistan and they all really have something in common. set of concerns anxieties interests about this issue, you know, on one level we understand the coercions to the United States. 18 years is a long time to be fighting a war, you know? and in fact, frankly, I take my hat off to the United States for having the durability, the persistence, the commitment and the fortitude to do it for so long, so clearly this is going to change.

Well, the question we have to answer is how many changes, in what way, what are the consequences of those changes now, that is some of what 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 that different countries have also been involved in some of In this process, our point of view is to recognize the compulsions of this church. We believe that many of the achievements of the last 18 years and for which so many countries have fought, you know that they shed blood, they spent money on those achievements. must not be lost in the process, so whatever the outcomes, whatever the likely direction Afghanistan is heading, must be such that these are not compromised by my you know what could be agreed, ourselves, you know, we've had a very strong history of development assistance day in terms of project delivery, we've really been among the best providers, you know, whether it's bringing electricity to the city of Kabul or building a dam. in Herat province, health clinics, radio stations, schools, build a road.

Throughout western Afghanistan we have done a lot of that, but obviously now we will have to look in a broader direction, which is quite a bit, but our preference, obviously, our interests are that the achievements of the last 18 years are not put into danger to the country. in which Prime Minister Maria pays special attention and in which you have obvious connections with interest. I guess Japanese is one of their seven languages, of course, Tokyo and it's based on and Marie's son has what appears to the rest of us to be a solid working relationship if you were to try it byThis audience to explain where they see the meaning strategic of its relationship with India and with it and Japan in the next five years gives us an idea of ​​the texture of that well.

First of all, I must tell you that the reports about my language skills are greatly exaggerated. as much as the rumors about my tact and diplomatic skills, so with that disclaimer out of the way, you speak Australian as well as English. I am working on it. I'm taking lessons. I watch cricket to understand each other. It's good to win the ashes. but I won't stop at that reservation, you notice? I am not contradicting you and it is true, we have our own shadow. Kalani will pass in a strange way about what you know about coming to Japan.

Look, I think it's really very in the moment or very under-analyzed or should I say a relationship that doesn't have 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 that Asia has changed the world. is changing Asia is changing and probably these changes would be better if we saw in many ways greater Japanese involvement in international

affairs

because if it is, if the stated goal is a multiple of the world, in my opinion the prerequisite is a multipolar Asia mmm and if you are talking about a plurality of Asia, obviously, one of the natural poles, one of them is Japan.

Now, how much the Japanese do, what they do and how they do it, that's up to them, but we've seen much greater interest in their We engage in participatory and security-related conversations. Political conversations. We work with them on the quad. In fact, we have a trilateral with Japan and the United States that, coincidentally, is called J. We worked with them on reform of the UN Security Council. A G fo is meeting this week at the foreign masters level, but the Japanese have also been much more active in investing in India and collaborating with us on connectivity initiatives to look at a variety of global issues, so you know, I was in Japan . 20 years ago, well, they were much more reticent about their own potential and their big change in the area and I think those changes are good.

It is not for me to say whether they are good for Japan. I think they are, but you know, that's it. for them to decide but it's certainly good for India hmm let me try to start closing this conversation because I know you have to go see Donald and it will be fun to meet the but India and the future of global trade are right and wrong India has been criticized in the past for being overly protectionist for not being, say, a full and open participant in global trade negotiations - the particular role India played in the fate of the Doha round - but let's not review history by looking back. the future and opening of markets within the broader Indo-Pacific region.

Give me an idea of ​​where our ensemble is going. Give me a sense of where broader Indian trade policy is going and challenge me. you on the issue of India joining APEC and where you would like your country to move towards that mm-hmm, but look at my understanding of the r7 ago she ministers met earlier this month in Bangkok. I think it is very advanced in The key point we want to make is that I am a foreign minister, and what I do is that our ship is a trade agreement and its merits and demerits must be weighed on the scale of trade;

It has strategic political implications and connotations, but they cannot be the main criterion for evaluating a trade agreement a trade agreement must stand on its own there must be good trade offers to justify that agreement now what are the big concerns What worries me the most, of course , is that we have free trade agreements with many of the current countries or exhausted sub-countries, so the new ones are the important ones because we do not have any agreement with them, one is China, another is Australia, when it is the newest, all They know they have. its own particular complications and wrinkles, which is why we have a huge trade deficit with China that everyone knows about, which is a source of concern for Indian companies.

How well are these challenges addressed? How well are our challenges addressed? You know it and there are creative solutions. I don't think this is beyond the realm of imagination. I think trade negotiators can find solutions in terms of coverage and time and there are answers. There is another set of issues that, as I understand it, relate to the services, which is what they actually have. good service offerings on the table because it is something that is important for India, so I think the call would be to see if those gaps close in the near future, then there are big chances that we will have enough ship now in terms of what you said about APEC you know that India has been constantly pushed eastwards.

Well, it started in 1992 with what was called the look east, but in the look east we really looked at Southeast Asia in many ways as a kind of model, as a lesson and as a justification for the changes that we were trying to inspire for those changes now, in the 25 years that have passed, Lucas became at least because the connectivity developed, the conversations expanded and the relationships expanded, so today we have secure relationships with all of these. countries that before we did not have MIDI tape RCM we have many more flights we have a lot of investment many Indian companies operating there now the next stage was to go beyond the Indo Pacific because beyond ASEAN we really find that today our main trading partners are actually China, Japan, Korea and, now to a large extent, Australia, so if you were to look for us, the center of gravity in terms of our economic interests and, consequently, our strategic interests, has constantly shifted the lost words in such a way that Given the other events that have happened, the repositioning of the United States and the rise of China, many of the artificial silos between the Indian Ocean and the Pacific Ocean have also become irrelevant, so you have the Indo Pacific, so for me , if you really make our ship. agreement and you have it and that becomes your trade economic framework and you have the Indo-Pacific as your strategic focus in a way that obviously that brings you much closer to epic.

I mean, epic has its own process challenges, but it means the case for it. APEC would grow, yes. I mean, my argument about APEC is not simply that it was an Australian idea 25 years ago, but that it has actually worked for all member states in their own way, not least because all these disconnected economies at various stages of the economy The openings in officer class level were forced to work together for the first time, so they suddenly found colleagues and friends in the relevant ministries with a civil aviation or domestic energy of God knows whatever, from Laos, Philippines, South Korea and wherever and they were all in this together, it was quite interesting and in fact it was largely driven nationally, so I've always seen that it's been a great thing for India itself, but also for the region in general, having India as a part.

I think this pan-regional institution is useful when we still do not have a pan-regional security organization, which I believe is still a missing element in our architecture. Today we were privileged to have the Foreign Minister of India with us to spend some time. I would like you to express your gratitude in the conventional way.