Tillerson's speech set tone of India-US bilateral ties for 100 yrs: official

Agencies
October 19, 2017

Washington, Oct 19: Secretary of State Rex Tillerson in his first major India-policy speech set the tone of bilateral relationship between India and the US for 100 years, a State Department official said, observing that the talk had many audiences, including China.

"China's obviously an audience of the speech. But this is a speech, obviously, which we hope all countries in the Indo- Pacific region will take to heart, that the Secretary and the President has placed a priority," a State Department official told reporters.

He was speaking after Tillerson described India as an opportunity for the US.

"It's a speech that was designed for many audiences," the official said.

Noting that a free and open Indo-Pacific is a priority for both the President and the Secretary of State, the official said, because India is one of the anchors of an Indo-Pacific strategy, the Trump Administration wants to devote a lot of time to this country.

Tillerson is travelling to India next week. President Donald Trump is scheduled to travel to Japan, South Korea, China, Vietnam and Philippines next month.

"So that's the reason for the speech today; there are many audiences for this. But we really view this as a speech with a global audience," the official said.

The speech on US-India relations for the next hundred years to implement President Trump's new strategy for South Asia is culmination of several months of deliberation within the national security cabinet on the best approach to address challenges in South Asia and on the opportunities.

"The Trump Administration considers India as an opportunity and he wanted to present extended remarks and reflections on many ways that US can deepen its ties with India for the next hundred years, and how it is a critical component to a free and open Indo-Pacific," the official said.

"There is a lot of bilateral benefits that follow deepening economic, cultural, diplomatic, and security ties with India. But there are a range of benefits that also follow for the region, the Indo-Pacific region," the State Department official said.

China has risen alongside India, but China has done so less responsibly and China has undermined the international rules-based order while countries like India operate within this rules-based order, the official said.

"We obviously want constructive relations with China. The Secretary is in regular contact with Chinese leadership. But we are not going to shrink or ignore China's challenges to the rules-based order, or where China subverts the sovereignty of neighboring countries," the official said.

"What we like is for many decades, the US has supported China's rise, we have also supported India's rise, but those two countries have risen very differently," the official said.

As Tillerson said about the shared values, shared security, shared national security interests, shared economies, shared democracies, this is a great friendship that US wants to expand and deepen on all areas.

The official argued that there are good reasons bilaterally for the US and India to deepen its ties, but there are opportunities to grow the connectivity in the region.

Referring to the India-US and Japan tri-lateral in New York last month, the official said Japan is very supportive of a free and open Indo-Pacific.

"I've had many consultations with the Japanese about this. We have also talked with the Australians, and we envision a quadrilateral sort of -- an anchoring - the Indo- Pacific anchored by these four countries of Australia, the US, India, and Japan, he said.

While the speech was mostly about India, the subtitle of the speech was "The Foundations of a Free and Open Indo- Pacific."

"So that's what he talked about, including financing mechanisms, and he did talk about some of the predatory economics that we see in the area, and you have countries that are looking for better financing mechanisms and better partners, and we believe that countries like the US and India are those partners," the official said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 23,2020

Jan 23: Pakistan's Prime Minister Imran Khan called on Wednesday for the United Nations to help mediate between nuclear armed India and Pakistan over the disputed territory of Kashmir.

"This is a potential flashpoint," Khan said during a media briefing at the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, adding that it was time for the "international institutions ... specifically set up to stop this" to "come into action".

The Indian government in August revoked the constitutional autonomy of Indian-administered Kashmir, splitting the Muslim-majority region into two federal territories in a bid to integrate it fully with the rest of the country.

Kashmir is claimed in full by both India and Pakistan. The two countries have gone to war twice over it, and both rule parts of it. India's portion has been plagued by separatist violence since the late 1980s.

Khan said his biggest fear was how New Delhi would respond to ongoing protests in India over a citizenship law that many feel targets Muslims.

"We're not close to a conflict right now ... What if the protests get worse in India, and to distract attention from that, what if ..."

The prime minister said he had discussed the prospect of war between his country and India in a Tuesday meeting with US President Donald Trump. Trump later said he had offered to help mediate between the two countries.

Khan said Pakistan and the United States were closer in their approach to the Taliban armed rebellion in Afghanistan than they had been for many years. He said he had never seen a military solution to that conflict.

"Finally the position of the US is there should be negotiations and a peace plan."

In a separate on-stage conversation later on Wednesday, Khan said he had told Trump in their meeting that a war with Iran would be "a disaster for the world". Trump had not responded, Khan said.

Khan made some of his most straightforward comments when asked why Pakistan has been muted in defence of Uighurs in China.

China has been widely condemned for setting up complexes in remote Xinjiang province that Beijing describes as "vocational training centres" to stamp out ""extremism and give people new skills.

The United Nations says at least one million ethnic Uighurs and other Muslims have been detained.

When pressed on China's policies, Khan said Pakistan's relations with Beijing were too important for him to speak out publicly.

"China has helped us when we were at rock bottom. We are really grateful to the Chinese government, so we have decided that any issues we have had with China we will handle privately."

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 3,2020

Mar 3: Just hours after the ending of a week-long “reduction” in violence that was crucial for Donald Trump’s peace deal in Afghanistan, the Taliban struck again: On Monday, they killed three people and injured about a dozen at a football match in Khost province. This resumption of violence will not surprise anyone actually invested in peace for that troubled country. The point of the U.S.-Taliban deal was never peace. It was to try and cover up an ignominious exit for the U.S., driven by an election-bound president who feels no responsibility toward that country or to the broader region.

Seen from South Asia, every point we know about in the agreement is a concession by Trump to the Taliban. Most importantly, it completes a long-term effort by the U.S. to delegitimize the elected government in Kabul — and, by extension, Afghanistan’s constitution. Afghanistan’s president is already balking at releasing 5,000 Taliban prisoners before intra-Afghan talks can begin — a provision that his government did not approve.

One particularly cringe-worthy aspect: The agreement refers to the Taliban throughout  as “the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan that is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban.” This unwieldy nomenclature validates the Taliban’s claim to be a government equivalent to the one in Kabul, just not the one recognised at the moment by the U.S. When read together with the second part of the agreement, which binds the U.S. to not “intervene in [Afghanistan’s] domestic affairs,” the point is obvious: The Taliban is not interested in peace, but in ensuring that support for its rivals is forbidden, and its path to Kabul is cleared.

All that the U.S. has effectively gotten in return is the Taliban’s assurance that it will not allow the soil of Afghanistan to be used against the “U.S. and its allies.” True, the U.S. under Trump has shown a disturbing willingness to trust solemn assurances from autocrats; but its apparent belief in promises made by a murderous theocratic movement is even more ridiculous. Especially as the Taliban made much the same promise to an Assistant Secretary of State about Osama bin Laden while he was in the country plotting 9/11.

Nobody in the region is pleased with this agreement except for the Taliban and their backers in the Pakistani military. India has consistently held that the legitimate government in Kabul must be the basic anchor of any peace plan. Ordinary Afghans, unsurprisingly, long for peace — but they are, by all accounts, deeply skeptical about how this deal will get them there. The brave activists of the Afghan Women’s Network are worried that intra-Afghan talks will take place without adequate representation of the country’s women — who have, after all, the most to lose from a return to Taliban rule.

But the Pakistani military establishment is not hiding its glee. One retired general tweeted: “Big victory for Afghan Taliban as historic accord signed… Forced Americans to negotiate an accord from the position of parity. Setback for India.” Pakistan’s army, the Taliban’s biggest backer, longs to re-install a friendly Islamist regime in Kabul — and it has correctly estimated that, after being abandoned by Trump, the Afghan government will have sharply reduced bargaining power in any intra-Afghan peace talks. A deal with the Taliban that fails also to include its backers in the Pakistani military is meaningless.

India, meanwhile, will not see this deal as a positive for regional peace or its relationship with the U.S. It comes barely a week after Trump’s India visit, which made it painfully clear that shared strategic concerns are the only thing keeping the countries together. New Delhi remembers that India is not, on paper, a U.S. “ally.” In that respect, an intensification of terrorism targeting India, as happened the last time the U.S. withdrew from the region, would not even be a violation of Trump’s agreement. One possible outcome: Over time the government in New Delhi, which has resolutely sought to keep its ties with Kabul primarily political, may have to step up security cooperation. Nobody knows where that would lead.

The irresponsible concessions made by the U.S. in this agreement will likely disrupt South Asia for years to come, and endanger its own relationship with India going forward. But worst of all, this deal abandons those in Afghanistan who, under the shadow of war, tried to develop, for the first time, institutions that work for all Afghans. No amount of sanctimony about “ending America’s longest war” should obscure the danger and immorality of this sort of exit.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 17,2020

Jan 17: President Ram Nath Kovind, on Friday, dismissed Nirbhaya convict Mukesh Singh's mercy petition, according to multiple media reports.

Mukesh Singh - one of the four convicts in the Nirbhaya gang rape and murder case had filed a mercy petition on Tuesday after Supreme Court dismissed curative petitions filed by him and Vinay Sharma (another convict).

More to follow

 

MHA forwards mercy petition of Nirbhaya convict to President; recommends rejection

New Delhi, Jan 17: The Union Home Ministry on Friday forwarded to President Ram Nath Kovind the mercy petition of one of the convicts in the Nirbhaya gangrape case, recommending its rejection, officials said.

Mukesh Singh, one of the four death row convicts in the 2012 Nirbhaya gangrape and murder case, had filed the mercy petition a few days ago.

"The Home Ministry has forwarded the mercy petition of Mukesh Singh to the President. The ministry has reiterated the recommendation of the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi for its rejection," the official said.

The Delhi LG had sent the mercy petition of Mukesh to the Home Ministry on Thursday, a day after the Delhi government recommended its rejection.

The four convicts -- Mukesh Singh (32), Vinay Sharma (26), Akshay Kumar Singh (31) and Pawan Gupta (25) were to be hanged on January 22 at 7 am in Tihar Jail. A Delhi court had issued their death warrants on January 7.

However, the Delhi government had informed the high court during a hearing that execution of the convicts will not take place on January 22 as a mercy plea has been filed by Mukesh.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.