Question: My question is related to Sri Lanka. There has been Chinese-Sri Lankan collaboration going on in the area of space and they are going to launch a communications satellite among other things. India’s National Security Council called on March 25 for an inter-ministerial consultation to decide on possible approaches to protect Indian interests in the neighbourhood. I was just wondering, because it has been about a week since that consultation, whether you had any feedback on the consultation and what was discussed.
Official Spokesperson (Shri Syed Akbaruddin): I think we follow a norm here. I do not respond on inter-ministerial issues of a nature where we have not conducted. If you say that this is conducted by the National Security Council, I would direct you to please contact the National Security Council Secretariat and try and get a response from them on this matter. I have said previously, inter-ministerial discussions are normal in any country, in any democracy, in any system. If you would like us to expose our entrails and indicate that this is what somebody wrote on a note and this is what the reply was, I am afraid I am not the right person. You ask me for an explantion of any foreign policy stance and any such related question, I am more than willing to respond.
Question: There are some reports that seek to create an impression that President Zuma did not have enough time to meet Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in Durban last week. Could you also give us a sense of the bilateral meetings our Prime Minister had with African leaders, if he had any?
Official Spokesperson: I think the first point that we need to understand in any multilateral meeting is that the principals spend as much time as possible together, and this is the norm in any summit of a multilateral nature. Therefore, this was a norm which was followed in the recent BRICS summit. The Prime Minister had adequate opportunities to interact with President Zuma on more than one occasion. If there is a feeling that there has not been any interaction, this is absolutely wrong.
I can confirm, and this is not something to hide, that there was no structured delegation-level meeting due to scheduling issues, but that does not mean that there was any problem in terms of the principals meeting. The principals met not once but on several occasions. They exchanged their views on a whole host of issues including bilateral relations. So, let me clarify on that. Since you are on that issue I would also like to take the opportunity to clarify there is this talk perhaps this was a snub or some sort of a premeditated effort. Absolutely no! Anybody who has followed multilateral meetings is aware that at times schedules slip and it is not possible to have every goal accomplished during the course of a day or a couple of days.
Yes, we did not have a delegation-level meeting, so the only person who lost out is people like me. Yes, we could not have the benefit of listening to what the Prime Minister interacted with President Zuma. But he did interact with President Zuma on several occasions during the course of the summit. The summit was structured to enhance principals meeting, and because of that the schedule slipped, and we can acknowledge that there was no structured delegation-level meeting.
There was also another story I think along with that on something about 40 kilometres etc. Those of you who have travelled to South Africa are aware that the infrastructure there is so good and the way the roads are available for travel of VVIPs, it does not take more than 20 minutes to go. And where the Prime Minister was staying was also the place where the entire retreat for all 18 African Heads of State along with BRICS Heads of State was held. You had a place where the Prime Minister was staying, where 23 Heads of State were brought for a retreat. So, I do not see an issue about the facilities of that place or the quality of that place because that place was absolutely first class. Anybody who has been to Durban, South Africa would know that Zimbali is an outstanding place where the facilities are the best of their kind.
So, I would suggest let us not confuse process for substance. There was a substantial discussion. Every requirement that we wanted was met in the summit. We have listed out what the summit achieved in terms of where we began in New Delhi. The idea for the BRICS Development Bank was sown in New Delhi. The Currency Contingency Swap Agreement, the idea started in New Delhi. It was piloted by our Finance Minister. So, look at the substance and the substance was something that we are proud of and we are happy with the outcome on those.
Question: My question is on the security situation in Afghanistan. Is there a worry on Indian Government’s side over the worsening situation as the American troops withdrawal gears up?
Official Spokesperson: We are in 2013. The situation is dynamic, it is fluid, and it is evolving. Therefore, to make deterministic assessments of what will be the outcome in 2014 is neither realistic nor helpful because it depends on how various stakeholders respond to the situation. You talked about the withdrawal of American forces but my understanding is that they are also currently negotiating a bilateral security agreement which will provide for numbers in terms of American soldiers who will be left behind, what the mandate of that mission will be and other modalities of US troops’ presence beyond 2014. But it is not for me to talk about the US and I am certain you can find responses from the US Government on this.
As far as India is concerned, our engagement with Afghanistan is something which goes back millennia. We have had people-to-people contacts; and our engagement, and our interests, and our involvement in Afghanistan is neither transitory nor transient. Our focus is on continuing to provide Afghanistan with the wherewithal to assist them in their reconstruction and to support the Afghan people in their desire for a peaceful and stable Afghanistan to which we stand committed.
Question: What is the state with of the Hajigak tenders? Are they in trouble or are we on course to sign it? Official Spokesperson: My understanding is we remain on course to sign that.
Question: Could you please give me an update about the discussion going on in the Government on the issue of the Italian marines? Yesterday it was in the Supreme Court and again they went about the problem of the special court that the Chief Justice asked since 18th of January. I know that the discussions are on but it is not clear from the media what is going on.
Official Spokesperson: Let me start with what has not been done so that we can discount that. Despite several of you saying so no formal notication has been issued about the investigating agency. No formal decision has been taken yet. Therefore, consequently whether it will be held in A type of court or B type of court is moot at this stage. So, let us discount that. As far as we are concerned, there are obviously discussions under way which will decide on what we would provide to the Supreme Court on the 16th. The Supreme Court has provided till the 16th, in terms of time available to give a response on the special court. Now, you can well ask why is it taking time and it is a legitimate question I think. My answer to that is this is a sui generis situation. It has never happened before that you set up a special court of the type that is being suggested by the Supreme Court under the supervision of the Central Government to make that choice.
There has to be a court which is unique which does not follow a previous pattern. Therefore, we need to be cautious and careful, and act with circumspection before we do that. That is because, as you are aware, these are all open to legal interpretation and questioning. So, the time that is being taken is only to ensure that we follow a very rigorous process, a very well thought-out process, and a process which will ensure that it is legally viable and stands up to judicial scrutiny.
Question: Finally when is the Indian Envoy reaching Rome, or when is he supposed to join?
Official Spokesperson: That is a legitimate question and I think it deserves an answer. If you recollect, Mr. Basant Gupta, the Ambassador designate to Italy was to travel from India to Rome on the 15th of March. However, there were some circumstances whereby it was decided to place this on hold. And we did share this with you that we were undertaking a study and part of that was also an issue of his movement.
Since the circumstances that precluded his move then have now passed us and we have moved forward in that context, my understanding is that if all things go as expected, the officer will start completing his administrative and personal requirements and we expect that during the course of this month, perhaps towards the latter half of this month or towards the end of this month, we hope that he will be able to move from Delhi and assume his new responsibilities in Rome.
Question: You were talking about the investigating agencies. Is it the case that we are not satisfied with the investigation conducted by the Kerala Police?
Official Spokesperson: I already told you that there was no formal decision on that. So, this issue is at this stage moot. If there is a formal decision to the effect that you are suggesting, then I could answer that question. I cannot answer a question of hypothetical nature which does not reflect the circumstances of the situation today.
Question: You said that no investigating agency has been appointed in this case. But the Home Ministry has actually asked the NIA to be the investigator.
Official Spokesperson: As I mentioned to you, as of now no formal orders have been issued. Once this is done, and there are formal notifications for this process we can respond. Those formal notifications have not taken place. That is what I am saying.
Question: Will there be some contact with Rome in this process to decide the procedure and structure of a special court? Official Spokesperson: This is an internal process limited to India and various Ministries like Ministry of Home Affairs, Ministry of Justice and Legal Affairs, Ministry of External Affairs, etc. And as you are aware, the discussions on this are on.
Question: Since matters have become stabilized, what about the review that we were doing about relations with Italy? Is it on? What is the status of it?
Official Spokesperson: I think I indicated to you that one of the first steps in that review was to say that the Indian Ambassador would not move. I also indicated to you now the decision is taken that he would begin preparations to assume his new charge. As a corollary to that there is an indication that things have passed beyond that. I think I have indicated more than enough on that.
Question: There was a statement by the External Affairs Minister in the Parliament on this issue. But does this assurance by India have a legal sanctity, or is it binding on India that they would not be attracting any …
Official Spokesperson: First of all, I think the External Affairs Minister did not use the word that you used, that is ‘assurance’. I would suggest that you have a look at his statement. He said ‘clarifications’. These are all things of the past. The matter is now sub judice. Let us wait for the courts to decide on every aspect of that matter. What I say, what you interpret, is hardly of any relevance now because it is now the courts who will decide. I do not want to say anything further. The External Affairs Minister is on record for having said the type of clarifications he has indicated. The matter is now sub judice. We await the outcome. And I do not want to get involved in ifs and buts on that issue because you have seen how our judiciary is very actively pursuing this matter. Let us wait for the outcome of that. Question: There are reports that Indian projects in Sri Lanka have slowed down. Could you tell us about these projects and give us an update on them? And there is also growing clamour that the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting should be shifted out of Sri Lanka, and two Union Ministers have in fact joined this clamour. Could you please give us your comments on that?
Official Spokesperson: As I said, I never answer on intra-mural issues. So, on this clamour within India, if there is a decision taken I will want to explain but let me try and provide you some information in terms of our projects especially focussed onn the Tamil speaking people in Sri Lanka.
Our major flagship project is the housing project. On October 2, we launched what is called the second phase of that project after completing the first phase. In the first phase, 1,000 houses were constructed and handed over. In the second phase, construction of 43,000 accommodations was initiated. Now we are following what is for us a new system of conducting our development partnership. That system involves direct cash transfersto beneficiaries. These are owner-driven projects in a sense. We select the owner through a very transparent process. If any of you would like to know who the owners of these 43,000 dwelling units in Sri Lanka are, you just have to go to the website of the High Commission of India in Colombo and get information about every owner that is available.
Next, we then have audit at the community level so that if anybody has a grievance, if anybody has an issue, those are sorted out there. Finally, we do not construct these houses but we do direct transfer of funds to banks. This is for us a unique and first of its kind development partnership project where we have started these direct transfers. We have these reputed implementing agencies which are UN Habitat, International Red Cross, Habitat for Humanity. These are our implementing partners. They go and check whether that phase is complete. Once that phase is complete, the money is released for the next phase and that is how it goes on.
If I try and see the information that is available, in this phase by the end of the financial year in March 2013 we had hoped that 10,000 dwelling units would have started. This was our plan. I am happy to tell you that we are ahead of that. We have in fact 11,379 beneficiaries who have begun work on that. Of these 3,488 have also availed their second installment, about 700 have availed the third installment, and almost five hundred have completed their houses. The point that I would like to make is in terms of our flagship project in Sri Lanka which is focused on rehabilitation of internally displaced persons primarily of Tamil ethnicity, we are way ahead of schedule for this project. If you would like information on for example the two rail lines, and this is the other major project we are doing in those areas, these rail lines are based on an US$ 800 million line of credit. If I am not mistaken, one is in Kankesanthurai and the other is in Thalaimannar. In both cases we are ahead of schedule. We hope to complete these projects well ahead of schedule, perhaps by the end of the year. So, let me tell you, in terms of implementation of projects in Sri Lanka we are doing very well.
Question: Is India worried about growing Chinese engagement in Sri Lanka, and growing investment, and growing cooperation which now includes satellite technology.
Official Spokesperson: Let me give you some facts. India is the largest trade partner of Sri Lanka. India is the largest investor in Sri Lanka. India is also the destinantion of largest number of Sri Lankanstourists travelling outside Sri Lanka. We also have a large number of Indians travelling there. There are large amounts of Sri Lankan investments coming into India. We are on the cusp of working on the next phase of the CEPA because the CEPA we already have. We are now already starting to work on that. As far as we see our relationship with Sri Lanka, we do not see it in competitive terms. We see it as a win-win situation both for India and for Sri Lanka and we are quite comfortable with that situation.
Question: I just want to ask you what steps the Government of India is taking for the return of the 19 Indian fishermen whose remand was extended I think yesterday?
Official Spokesperson: We are in active touch with the Sri Lankans on this and we have raised this both here in Delhi previously and in Sri Lanka. Our Consulate is working with legal officials on this. We hope that this will be amicably resolved. As has been the case with all other fishermen who have from time to time strayed into Sri Lankan waters, we hope this too would be amicably resolved.
Question: This is on Arms Trade Treaty. RIC of BRICS were on the same page on this issue. India found the treaty soft on terrorism, and Russia as well as Syria found it soft on non-state actors and rebel groups. Now that the treaty is all sewn up and it will be implemented as and when fifty states ratify it, till that period would India think it is unfinished business, and would India be in touch with Russia and China on the unfinished agenda as far as this treaty is concerned?
Official Spokesperson: The negotiations for the treaty are over. The voting for the treaty is over. Now what remains to my understanding is that it is opening for signature on June 3. Subsequent to that, after fifty states sign it and upon the ratification by the fiftieth state and after 90 days, the treaty would enter into force. As far as we are concerned, you have listed out the rationale in some ways of what made us abstain on that treaty, but also we had said that we will undertake a full and thorough assessment of the Arms Trade Treaty from the perspective of our defence, security and foreign policies. We have enough time for that. We are doing that assessment in terms of the experts who will understand what these implications are not only for the things that you have said. There are other issues relating to defence cooperation agreements and defence contracts. And that is an important factor for us because we are a large importer of defence equipment. We would not like anything that constrains our options in terms of defence contracts to be impacted by that treaty. We are having a look at it. There are people who have indicated that perhaps this meets the Indian needs. It is not us but there are others who said. But what we are saying now is we would like to conduct a thorough study, understand it, and in due course we will decide on this. At this stage the negotiations part is over.
On the RIC out of the BRICS that you mentioned, this is not an issue on the agenda of those countries. Therefore, each must have come to the same conclusion through different means. It is possible to come to such conclusions through different means and reach the same conclusion.
Question: Regarding this issue there were some reports saying that India got assurances from some countries that deal with defence deals that the Arms Trade Treaty would not be taken into consideration when it comes to contracts with India. Is it true?
Official Spokesperson: There are some countries which made statements at the ATT on this. These are statements which are on the record in terms of the ATT negotiations. But as far as we are concerned, while we do appreciate those who have spoken out in support of our concerns, we need to examine the treaty document itself and take a decision. We certainly appreciate those countries who spoke up for our concerns. And my understanding is that France and Russia were among the two countries who did speak fairly vociferously in defence of Indian concerns on this specific matter relating to defence contracts.
Question: What is the Indian Government’s assessment of A.Q. Khan’s contribution to North Korea’s arsenal?
Official Spokesperson: I think we have made this clear on several occasions that you need to assess the proliferation not only in terms of the ability of North Korea to conduct such a test but also from where did the technology come on this. And we think that it is for the international agencies concerned to examine this and pursue this. We made this clear several times including in the IAEA that we need to pursue this further. And should this be pursued further, we have some views on that, we will make those views clear. Let us await the outcome of that.
I think we have had a long session, let us end it now. Thank you.
