[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 3]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 3216-3217]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




        THE NEED FOR A PRAGMATIC AND COHERENT SOUTH ASIA POLICY

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. FRANK PALLONE, JR.

                             of new jersey

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, February 25, 1999

  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to draw attention to recent 
developments in South Asia, a region of growing importance to U.S. 
diplomatic, political, security and economic interests.
  This past week, the news from the region has been positive. India's 
Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee personally inaugurated the new bus 
service with Pakistan. Prime Minister Vajpayee crossed the border into 
Lahore, Pakistan, where he was greeted by Pakistani Prime Minister, 
Nawaz Sharif. Their embrace, seen on television sets around the world, 
was full of powerful symbolism, which we all hope will be matched by 
progress toward easing tensions between these two South Asian nations.
  During 1998, of course, the news from this region was dominated by 
the nuclear tests conducted by India and Pakistan, which resulted in 
the automatic imposition of unilateral American sanctions on both 
countries. The result, particularly in the case of India, has been a 
set-back in the promising trend towards increased trade and investment 
we saw during most of the 1990s. Late last year, through bipartisan 
cooperation between Congress and the Administration, we succeeded in 
easing some, but far from all, of the sanctions that were imposed.
  Today, Mr. Speaker, I wanted to outline a new approach, a new 
pragmatism, that I hope will mark our future relations with India--the 
world's largest democracy, a country whose population will exceed one 
billion people in the next decade, a country with enormous potential 
for trade and cooperation, and a country with legitimate defense 
concerns that we must recognized and respect.
  While we may not necessarily welcome a world with more nuclear 
powers, I believe that India, in particular, would be a responsible 
partner in non-proliferation efforts. This would require a major shift 
in our focus, from simply condemning India for becoming a nuclear 
power--which, whether we like it or not, is the reality--to adjusting 
our thinking to this new reality and working to promote peace, 
security, confidence building and non-proliferation in South Asia.
  This will require on our part a greater recognition of India's 
legitimate security needs and the prospects for greater Indo-U.S. 
cooperation in responding to the threats posed by another Asian country 
that must be taken into consideration when we address the India-
Pakistan issue. That country is China.
  I believe that China is the real threat to India, as well as to U.S. 
interests and to regional security. It is in this context, India's 
potential role as a partner for peace and stability should be 
understood.
  In particular, India has legitimate concerns about China's support 
for Pakistan's nuclear and missile programs, as well as potential 
Chinese designs on India territory. Since the U.S. must also view China 
as a potential adversary, there is a growing convergence of American 
and Indian objectives for responding to China.''
  Talks between our Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott and Indian 
Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh have shown some progress, but I believe 
the U.S. needs to do much more to create a framework for cooperation 
that recognizes the new realities in the region. I believe we have to 
be more pragmatic and flexible in working with India, including a 
greater appreciation of the security concerns that prompted India to 
conduct nuclear tests in the first place.
  I would like to draw attention to a recent report by the Center for 
Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) South Asia program, which 
noted that India and Pakistan are beginning to define ``minimum 
deterrence'' in similar ways.
  The U.S. should work to build on this emerging notion of minimum 
deterrence, combined with a declared policy of no-first-use of nuclear 
weapons.
  I also wanted to mention a report that appeared in the January 19, 
1999, edition of the newspaper India Abroad, outlining the views of Mr. 
Tariq Rauf, director of the International Organizations and Non-
proliferation Project at the Monterey Institute of International 
Studies in Monterey, California. Mr. Rauf sees Washington opting for a 
strategy of greater accommodation in its negotiations with both India 
and Pakistan, recognizing that neither nation is likely to give up its 
nuclear weapons. Writing in the latest edition of ``The Bulletin of 
Atomic Scientists,'' Rauf said India and Pakistan should not only be 
encouraged, but assisted, to consider a variety of bilateral and 
multilateral discussions and agreements ``to maintain their current 
tacit non-deployment practices regarding nuclear weapons and ballistic 
missiles.''
  Rauf also said both countries should be encouraged to agree ``on some 
measure of sufficiency in terms of weapons-usable fissile material 
stocks, warheads and weapons systems; to negotiate and implement a 
package of regional confidence and security-building measures; and to 
actively contribute to the universalization of current global non-
proliferation norms.
  Rauf's conclusion: ``a nuclear South Asia is here to stay.'' Thus, he 
calls on us to help address the security concerns that led both nations 
to develop nuclear weapons in the first place. He stresses that, 
``Pragmatic arms control strategies must therefore focus on 
accommodation, not appeasement or confrontation.''

[[Page 3217]]

  Our goal should be to make India a partner in the American foreign 
policy goal of minimizing the threat of nuclear war. One way of 
accomplishing this is to take the long overdue step of accepting India 
as a permanent member of the UN Security Council. The key is to make 
India a partner for peace, and not to isolate India and further 
contribute to the perception that India's legitimate security concerns 
are not receiving adequate attention or respect.
  Mr. Speaker, I hope that 1999 will be a better year in U.S.-India 
relations than 1998 was. Karl Inderfurth, Assistant Secretary of State 
for South Asian Affairs, recently indicated that President Clinton is 
hoping to visit India and Pakistan this year, pending progress on the 
current talks. It's been 20 years since an American President was last 
in India, Mr. Speaker. I hope we don't have to wait too much longer.

                          ____________________