INTERVIEWER: Namaskar. Excellency. How are you?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER (SHRI YASHWANT SINHA):Namaskar. Fine, thank you.
INTERVIEWER: First of all, I would like to thank you for giving us an opportunity to talk to you.
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: Welcome.
INTERVIEWER: I would like to start by asking a rhetorical question. What is the state of Indo-Nepal relations at the moment?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: I think the state of Indo-Nepal relations is very good. We have an excellent relationship. There are no major issues between us. But, that does not mean that there are no problems with Nepal.
INTERVIEWER: When we talk about the relations today, that is 2003, have the relations been like this all the time or do you see anything special at this particular moment?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: Well, I suppose the special thing that I see at this moment is that many of the things which had remained pending for some time have moved forward. Agreement has been reached. That encourages me to say that we have an excellent relationship at this point of time.
INTERVIEWER: Can you elaborate the areas where things were pending and areas where they have moved forward?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: For instance, the Railway Agreement for the Customs Zone in Birgunj, that has been concluded. All those arrangements have been concluded. It had remained pending, I remember, for quite some time. So, this has moved forward.
INTERVIEWER: Let me ask you a philosophical question. As India’s international stature is growing, how important Nepal is for you now?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: I think Nepal will always remain very important for us. It was always important in the past. I think the relationship between Nepal and India is not dependent on the growing stature of India as you say, or the growing stature of Nepal. It is a relationship between two countries which by geography have been put as neighbours. It is a relationship which binds us, if I may use that expression, through an umbilical cord.
INTERVIEWER: When I said the stature, I was also meaning the priorities of India are changing in the global context. So, where does Nepal fit in?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: All our neighbours will always remain our first priority. Therefore, Nepal, as the closest neighbour of India, will be always a very important priority in our foreign policy.
INTERVIEWER: Do you consider Nepal to be the closest neighbour India has?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: I suppose we are the closest neighbour because your boundary on two sides is with India.
INTERVIEWER: I would like to go a few weeks back when Prime Minister Thapa was here and the Ministry of External Affairs issued a statement saying that in Nepal we should have a kind of national Government or something like that. What was the meaning and intention behind this statement?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: We had suggested that perhaps an all party Government would be better able to handle the situation which has arisen in Nepal. Our impression, our understanding, was that the political parties in Nepal were striving for such a Government. Now, to reply to your first question on the situation in Nepal: It is a difficult situation; it is a situation which is creating problems within Nepal; it is a situation which is impinging on us; and therefore, we would like stability to return to Nepal. We have been given to understand that what is in the best interest in order to be able to resolve the issues is a national consensus to be brought to bear on the problems which have arisen; and that national consensus is best represented by an all-party Government. Unfortunately, you have not had the elections which were due last year. Therefore, there is a situation where a one-party Government may not appear to be representing the national will, the national political will, of Nepal. It was in that context and based on our, as I said, understanding that this is what the political parties want, this is what the situation of the moment demands. I had made that point when the Prime Minister of Nepal visited here. It was not that we said it only in the statement; it was a point that we made to him also.
INTERVIEWER: The MEA statement, while talking about the national Government, also, I think, was hinting towards close cooperation of work between the Monarch and the political parties. Am I correct?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: Well, the Nepalese people themselves have chosen a system under which there will be a Constitutional Monarchy and a multiparty democracy in Nepal. That is a choice which we have not made; that is a choice that you have made for yourself. What we are doing is that we are sticking to the choice that you have made; and we are saying if this is what the Constitution of Nepal envisages, namely a Constitutional Monarchy and a multiparty democracy, then this is how it should be until this arrangement is changed by popular will in Nepal. So, at the moment a multiparty democracy and a Constitutional Monarchy is what we are also suggesting, and this is no different from what you yourself have accepted. In this context, it is very important for the Constitutional Monarchy and the multiparty Government to work together in order to be able to tackle the problems that you face.
INTERVIEWER: In that sense, Sir, can I take that statement as saying that it implies Monarch and the parties should work together in Nepal? Is that what India’s official stand is?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: It is quite clear, I suppose that the Monarchy and the political parties should work together in order to be able to take care of the problem that you are facing at the moment; because we believe that a problem can be tackled only, as I said, if a national consensus is backing that solution.
INTERVIEWER: Some section in the Nepalese society was taking this statement as interference, while others were saying that it is a friendly advice. Do you have any comments on that?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: I would very humbly plead, I would plead with all the humility at my command, that the statements issued by India should not be taken as interference in the internal affairs of Nepal because we have no such intention at all. We have scrupulously kept away from any interference in the internal affairs of Nepal. I am aware of the fact that there are elements which often bring this up as a sign of India’s interference. We have not done so. We give our advice only when we are asked for this advice. We give this advice only when it becomes absolutely essential.
INTERVIEWER: What are India’s interests in Nepal? Or, is India totally apathetic?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: No, we are not apathetic. As I mentioned to you, you cannot be apathetic to what is going on in your neighbourhood, immediate neighbourhood. So, we cannot say that we are apathetic to whatever is happening in Nepal. We have an interest, especially because of the fact that we have had, we still have, an open border. I mentioned to you that on two sides India and Nepal have a common border. So, if you have such an arrangement, then the events which happen, the incidents which take place, cannot be a matter of unconcern to the other. If there were developments within India they will also be a matter of concern to Nepal. Similarly, if incidents or events are taking place in Nepal, they will be of concern to India. So, that is the situation in which I would like to assert once again that we have an interest as a friendly neighbour, just as Nepal has an interest in India as a friendly neighbour.
INTERVIEWER: Can you specify the areas of interest?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: The areas of interest are all areas which are covered in the bilateral relationship between the two countries. It is economic interest, it is trade interest, it is cultural interest, it is political interest, it is security interest, and everything is covered in this.
INTERVIEWER: Can you find the areas where the interests between India and Nepal converge with each other? And, are there any areas where they collide with each other?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: I think in all these areas that I have mentioned just now to you, our interests only converge. I cannot think of an area where the interests clash. I cannot.
INTERVIEWER: You must have talked to the high-ranking Nepalese officials on many occasions. Do you think or do you find that there are areas where the Nepalese interests do not exactly follow the Indian lines or Indian interests?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: I have no such impression.
INTERVIEWER: What kind of Nepal would India like to see?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: I mentioned to you a little while ago that you yourself have chosen an arrangement of a Constitutional Monarchy and a multiparty democracy. We would like that system to continue until you change that system by popular consent. We would like to have the friendliest of relation with Nepal as we are having at the moment.
INTERVIEWER: Sometimes India raises this question of security concern which is not exactly appreciated or taken in the same sense that Delhi wants it. A section of population says that in Nepal. Do you agree that security interests of India and Nepal do not exactly follow the same track?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: No. I think it is based on some misunderstanding, some misperception. I say this because if we remember that we are two of the closest neighbours, then our security interests are bound to converge. If we maintain friendly relations, our security interests are bound to converge. So, therefore, I cannot think of any situation where we will have a difference of opinion with regard to common security concerns of Nepal and India.
INTERVIEWER: Are you trying to say that between India and Nepal everything is converging and there are no areas of difference?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: You referred to some elements either here or there who often tend to misunderstand. In their mind, there might be an area of divergence. But since I do not tend to misunderstand, I will say that on most issues we have areas of convergence.
INTERVIEWER: Hon’ble Foreign Minister, you have just said that there are elements there and here. That means that even in India there are elements that do not understand the things in the right perspective.
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: There could be. Yes. Everyone cannot understand everything. Those of us who are involved in this on a day-to-day basis, those who are concerned about it, those who study these relationships, they will have a complete understanding. The rest of them may not have complete understanding. The rest of them can be misled on occasions as you have seen. This might lead to misunderstandings in their mind.
INTERVIEWER: How big is the area of differences between Nepal and India, what are the areas where things are not exactly converging?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: I mentioned to you that I cannot think of any such thing. We have processes of negotiations, for instance. When an issue comes up, we negotiate. Negotiations often might take time, but I would not describe them as area of divergence and not of convergence.
INTERVIEWER: Do you feel that relations between Nepal and India are progressing at the speed at which they should?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: We could perhaps speed it up. There are many areas where we could perhaps speed up the cooperation and collaboration that we are trying to build or we have been talking about.
INTERVIEWER: Do you agree with the school of thought that there will be always one kind of grievance between India and Nepal or another kind of grievance and we should learn to live with those things?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: The grievances have to be dealt with. If there are grievances at any level, among any section of people in either country, I think those grievances should be addressed and they should be dealt with because there is no reason why any section of people should nurse those grievances.
INTERVIEWER: What are the areas that India has grievances with Nepal, or you feel that Nepal could …
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: I think you are coming back to repeating a question which I have repeatedly answered. I do not think I am going to get into that situation. You seem to be getting back to me, to get out of me, areas of divergence, areas of difference, areas of whatever; and I am repeatedly telling you that I cannot, as Foreign Minister of India, I cannot think of such an area.
INTERVIEWER: Let me rephrase the question.
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: You will still not get the answer you want.
INTERVIEWER: Let me put the question. Do you feel that there are areas where Nepal could do more?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: I just now mentioned to you that there are areas where we could speed up action. There are areas where action in the past has been slow. In those areas we could perhaps speed up things. That is up to how much I am going to concede. But if you are wanting to know from me whether there is enmity between Nepal and India, whether there are great differences of opinion, I very politely say I will not agree with that approach.
INTERVIEWER: I am not going that far but I was trying to figure out if there are … Let us flip the point of this question. What are Nepal’s grievances against India? In the official level talks and in interactions with different sections of the people, do you find or are you aware that there are some differences …
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: I think this interview is taking a twist which is not entirely to my liking, I must make it clear to you. I say this because you are emphasizing, repeatedly, on differences. I do not know what you expect of me.
INTERVIEWER: No, no. In fact we are working on a lot of convergences …
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: If you are working, let us come to the convergences. Why should we talk about differences when I am repeatedly telling you that we do not have differences? However much you try and dig this information out of me, it is not going to come out because if it is not there, I am not going to invent those differences.
INTERVIEWER: There is a perception in Nepal that when Nepal deals with India, and India deals with Nepal at political levels, things are really very fine, normal and very cordial. When it comes to the level of execution, when it comes to executing those understandings made at the political level, the picture at the bureaucratic level is not that good.
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: This again, I will say, is a misperception. I do not get that feeling. I think the bureaucracy in both countries is working under the guidance of the political leadership. If the political leadership is keen that decisions taken at political leadership level are implemented, those decisions will be implemented.
INTERVIEWER: So, this is just a myth.
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: I should think so. I do not think that bureaucracy either in Nepal or India is determined to sabotage or …
INTERVIEWER: I am not saying that they are sabotaging. But are they representing the level of cordiality that exists at the political level?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: If they do not, then we should deal with them. I mean, if there is any instance where the bureaucracy fails to implement decisions taken at the political level, then we should deal with that situation.
INTERVIEWER: Recently, a Nepali leader, General Secretary of UML, Mr. Madhav Kumar Nepal, met the Maoist leader Prachanda. This was the second time he officially met Prachanda on the Indian soil. First was in Siliguri. How does India feel about this incident?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: We feel embarrassed when such an incident takes place. I mentioned to you a little while ago that we have an open border with Nepal and, therefore, it is very easy to cross from Nepal into India, and from India into Nepal, and to have the kind of meeting that you are mentioning. We also have a large Nepalese ethnic population living in India. Therefore, it is not difficult for people from Nepal to take advantage of the open border, to take advantage of the fact that there is an ethnic population of Nepalese living in India, and perhaps arrange such meetings or such getaways.
INTERVIEWER: Does it not substantiate the theory that Maoist leaders are operating from India. I say this because it is not the second time, there is a third time also. Once I interviewed Mr. Chakraprasad Bastola. He said that he met Prachanda – he said it on television – in India. Now, one after another, when these things happen, while fully sympathizing with your theory saying that Nepal and India have open border, anybody can cross here and there, do you not think that this substantiates the doubts…
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: You are saying that there was a meeting here, there was a meeting there; and then you are trying to conclude from that that they are operating from India. There is a world of difference between these two positions. For somebody from Nepal to sneak into India, or for the Maoist leaders to operate from bases in India are two entirely different things. I would like to say with all the emphasis at my command that India provides no sanctuary to these elements from Nepal. Whenever we have had information, we have not only arrested these people, we have even repatriated them to Nepal or we have held them in prison in India. Therefore, this accusation against India as if they are being permitted to operate from our soil is entirely misplaced.
INTERVIEWER: Could it be possible that they are operating with or without your knowledge in India?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: When I told you that we were embarrassed, it clearly means that they were operating without our knowledge, and that if there was any knowledge, then we would have acted under our law.
INTERVIEWER: India has such an elaborate security system, intelligence agencies etc. People in Kathmandu ask why they are not working and figuring it out when all these things are happening.
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: Why do not the intelligence agencies in Nepal figure it out? How do they cross from Nepal into India or from Nepal into any other country – into Bhutan, into Bangladesh? After all, you also have your security forces, you also have your intelligence agencies. The point I am making is, however elaborate the arrangement may be, you cannot check every individual when there is an open border. Are we able to check every individual even where we have a closed border? I dare say no, it is not possible. We would not have had this problem of cross-border terrorism, if we were able to check everyone.
INTERVIEWER: If you were a Nepali, when you see these Maoist leaders meeting, going around in India, what would you feel?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: If I see a Maoist leader as a Nepalese, I would immediately pass on this information. If as a Nepalese official, as a Nepalese citizen, I had information that somebody was crossing into India, I would immediately share that information with Government of India so that Government of India could take action. You see, you must go by the record of Government of India. Please go back and ask your Government how many people we have apprehended within India from amongst the Maoists and repatriated them. If we were not interested, we would not do that. Why should we do that? I am telling you repeatedly that we feel concerned about this problem because we are also aware of linkages of these people with insurgent groups within India. If we were to encourage the Nepalese Maoists, then we are encouraging the PWG and the MCC in India. Would any sane Government want to do that?
INTERVIEWER: In that context comes a question. What is the role India is playing in solving this problem, if any, though it is a problem of Nepal?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: There are two-three things that we are doing. One, on the open border we are trying to improve our vigilance as much as you can without changing the nature of the border that we have. Let me also tell you that if we were to change the nature of the border, then it is going to result in great hardship to the people of Nepal. So, that is not an immediate option that is available to us that you close the border and check everybody.
The second, whenever the authorities in Nepal want any advice we will be ready to give that advice. Third, we share intelligence with the authorities in Nepal. Fourth, we have told them that whatever assistance they want in terms of equipment, etc., India will be willing to provide that assistance. Whenever such a request has been received, we have tried our best to meet that request, to meet that need. So, there are various ways in which we are cooperating. But I would like to go back and tell you something else.
I was in Nepal, immediately after I took over this assignment, in August last year. I met with the then Home Minister. In the meeting with the Home Minister, a senior official of Nepal told me that the Maoists had taken a helicopter from Nepal and they had gone and landed in India. I was very surprised by this information. So, I said immediately that we would check it up. We checked it up and then we kept on pursuing this, as long as that Government lasted, to give us details of the helicopter. No details were forthcoming. Our own enquiries revealed that no such helicopter had ever flown from Nepal into India or landed in India. I am making this point to emphasise the earlier statement that I made. Often, even people in authority, people in senior positions, might be misled by information which may not be correct. So, if people in position can be misled by information which is not correct, why should I blame the general people.
INTERVIEWER: There is a perception in Nepal, which is not blaming India directly but feels that India is not doing enough. Probably you can pick up more Maoist leaders than you have done in the past.
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: No, no. I am aware of the fact that there are sections of opinion within Nepal which, unfortunately, would like to believe exactly what you are saying – that India is not doing enough, that India is deliberately promoting, India is doing this, India is not doing this – which is generally not in the interest of our relations.
INTERVIEWER: Sorry to interrupt, Sir. This particular section does not believe that India is doing it, but this section believes that India is not doing enough
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: I will be quite frank with you. I am aware of the fact that any change which takes place in Nepal is often ascribed to, or placed at the door of India. I am telling you, whether it is Nepal or any of our neighbours, our policy is of a strict non-interference in their internal affairs. There is no question. If the Government of Nepal, if the authorities in Nepal, do not want to discuss an issue, we will not discuss it. We are not going to impose ourselves. It is only when we discuss it as close neighbours and friends, as I mentioned to you, that we give our advice or assistance.
INTERVIEWER: What will be your final words if you have to address Nepalese public about India’s role or its desire vis-à-vis this Maoist problem?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: It is not merely about the Maoist problem, which is an immediate problem, I think India is interested in the stability of Nepal. India is interested in a democratic Nepal as has been envisaged by the Nepalese people themselves. India is interested in this problem being resolved in a manner which will enable elections to be held. India would like to give whatever assistance India can in order to resolve this, because, in the final analysis, we are interested in the welfare and prosperity of the people of Nepal. As our closest neighbour, it is very important that there must be stability and progress in Nepal. Only then India itself will feel safe and secure.
INTERVIEWER: Sometime back, American Assistant Secretary of State Christina Rocca made a statement that India should use its traditional influence on all sides to solve the problem in Nepal.
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: We will go by our judgment, not by Christina Rocca’s judgment.
INTERVIEWER: How are you viewing the increased western military assistance to Nepal?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: We have clearly told our friends in the West and shared this with the authorities in Nepal also that we are ready to meet the needs of Nepal. To the extent which we are able to meet their needs, we will meet their needs. To the extent which we are not able to meet their needs, they could look elsewhere to meet those needs.
INTERVIEWER: Do you have any objection as such or do you feel …
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: I just explained our policy to you.
INTERVIEWER: Do your interests collide with the western powers’ interests in Nepal or…?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: I do not think there is any collision. I mean, no western power can be an immediate neighbour of Nepal like India is. So, why should there be a competition?
INTERVIEWER: What about the interests of China?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: Absolutely none, there is no clash of interest in Nepal between China and India.
INTERVIEWER: What could be the implications of this growing Maoist problem to India?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: I mentioned to you that if there are linkages between insurgent groups within India and the Maoists, as some of our reports do indicate, then it is a matter of great concern to us.
INTERVIEWER: Do you have any gut feeling about a solution of this problem? How long will it take? Or will it make this region …
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: The gut feeling that I have is that solution to all problems will emerge only out of dialogue. Howsoever much military conflict you might have, clash of arms you might have, the solution will have to come if people sit down across the table and talk to each other like you and I are talking.
INTERVIEWER: Let me go back to the India-Nepal relations. Despite having such a long and unique base, why do you think, Excellency, that both nations have failed to convert this base into the realities of the 21st century where the people from both sides could …
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: As I mentioned to you, there are areas where probably we should have worked faster. I would like to say that energy cooperation is one such area where things could have moved faster than they have in the past. We are now trying to give the necessary speed to some of these projects so that it creates a win-win situation for both Nepal and India. I would like to mention to you we have a hydroelectric project in Bhutan for instance, the Tala project. As a result of the execution of that project, the per capita income of the people of Bhutan is going to go up from something like 600 US dollars per year to about 1200 US dollars per year. This is the kind of change which a project can bring about in a country or in an area. Now we need energy. Nepal can produce energy. We need water management. Nepal needs water management. Did you not have floods this year? Would it not be better if floods did not take place in Nepal or in India in the rivers that we share? Therefore, energy and flood control are areas where there could be tremendous cooperation between Nepal and India and it could create a win-win situation for both the countries. But, unfortunately, we have not moved as fast in this area as we should have perhaps done.
INTERVIEWER: Presently, a very important step has been taken. When I was coming to Delhi, I read in the papers that a Power Purchase Agreement between India and Nepal in the West Seti has been reached. I think for the first time a benchmark price has been agreed upon. Do you have any knowledge about that?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: I do not think the power purchase agreement has yet been concluded. But the point I would like to make is that if this is a good example of cooperation, let us multiply such cooperation. There are other projects in which similar cooperation could be envisaged.
INTERVIEWER: What are the biggest strengths of India-Nepal relations and what are the pitfalls that can come in the way?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: I mentioned to you the relationship between and Nepal could be described as an umbilical relationship. The relationship between India and Nepal transcends all relationships that two countries can have because we are civilisationally linked, we are linked through geography, we are linked through history. What we need is to, I agree with you, give a modern dimension to this ancient relationship. That modern dimension to the ancient relationship will come, if we started cooperating more with each other in the economic field, we started cooperating more with each other in the area of science and technology, in the area of human resource development so that the people of both countries, and especially of Nepal, could benefit from the achievements that India has made in about six decades of its independent existence.
INTERVIEWER: Excellency, how do you foresee the relations between the two nations in the decades to come or at least a decade to come?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: I should like to think that the relations will always be very close, very cordial and that we will continue to work together to further strengthen this relationship because there are no full stops in history. You cannot say we have reached the end of history. So, the relationship will continue to evolve. We will continue to deal with new issues; we will continue to deal with new projects; we will continue to deal with new dimensions of our relationship. As long as the authorities in both countries deal with that evolving relationship in a spirit of goodwill, in a spirit of understanding, I am quite sure this relationship will continue to prosper. This is how I would like to see the future of this relationship and not be misguided by the thoughts of a few.
INTERVIEWER: Please do not tell me again that I am asking negative questions all the time. What kind of troubles or pitfalls you expect in this growth that both nations should be aware of?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: The troubles and the pitfalls could come from where? They could come from external forces; they could come from internal sources. You are a democracy; we are a democracy. In a democracy, everyone has a right to express an opinion. Sometimes those opinions may not be to the best liking of a certain section of opinion in the other country. What, therefore, we need to do is to ensure that such opinions are not allowed to prevail; that misunderstandings based on misperceptions, on facts which are not true, which are rumours, are not allowed to take possession of the minds of the people. That is the most important thing. Also, we have a fraternal relationship with Nepal. We should keep this fraternal relationship. There is no question of India being the big brother, Nepal being at the receiving end. You can be an elder brother and younger brother and you can have the best of relations as between brothers.
INTERVIEWER: How about genuine grievances?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: They should be addressed. There will be genuine grievances on both sides. I can tell you the other day some people came and met me here and they said they face enormous difficulty in Nepal when they travel by car. There are various points in Nepal and in India where you have to traverse through each other’s territory. If you do not have free movement, you are going to face a lot of difficulties. Now, this is a situation where Indians come and complain to me that they are facing such difficulties in Nepal. It is not merely those who are traveling to Kathmandu but from one point in India to another point in India. If they go through Nepalese territory, they have this problem. We should sit down and resolve it.
INTERVIEWER: When can we expect to see you in Kathmandu or Atalji making a visit there?
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: Very soon. I am very keen to come. I love Kathmandu. It is a very nice place. Wherever I have been, and I have been there a number of times, I have always enjoyed my visits.
INTERVIEWER: We look forward to seeing you soon.
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER: Thank you.
