Questions and Answers
Lord Hurd, UK
Dr Narayanan gave us a very vivid account of the activities of Al-Qaeda. India has a very big Muslim population, I wonder if I could ask him whether there are traces of activity by Al-Qaeda to try to pass their destructive message to India Muslims and, if so, what particular steps the government of India has taken to frustrate that.
Mr Narayanan
Thank you Mr Hurd. I think the question is very relevant in today’s conditions. We have been greatly concerned at the possibility of infiltration of the Al-Qaeda mentality and mindset into our very large Muslim population. As all of you who are present here will be aware, we have the second largest Muslim population in the world, over 150 million Muslims. We also have the second largest Shia population in the world, which is about 27 or 28 million. It has therefore been an essential axiom of our thought and policy to ensure that no segment of our population, least of all any of the important minorities, feel disaffected and alienated, and that is what we have achieved. What we have seen so far, it has been a boast, but it is no idle boast, is that no India Muslim has been involved in terrorist activity that has an Al-Qaeda network. What we are concerned about at the moment is not those who are living in India, but those who go out to different countries. Sometimes they get affected, and we are beginning to wonder whether some of them have come back with the seeds of this kind of thing. So far we have no evidence, and none of the major terrorist incidents that have taken place in India have involved Indian Muslims. Almost all of them have been done by foreign terrorists. I am not saying that they are not involved in violence of some kind of another, but all communities in India tend to do so.
What have we tried to do? We have tried to ensure that those sections of the population who may feel alienated because they are under-privileged, or they have not had the benefits of better education, or better options in jobs, have been set right. The most remarkable venture of this kind is what has been set afoot by the Sachar Commission. We had a judge at the supreme court, Judge Sachar, who went into the question of where the Muslims were at different levels in our country, and came up with a number of suggestions as to what needed to be done. These are being implemented, but by and large I think it is the past. I do not think that Indian Muslims ever felt disconnected with India, they are part and parcel of India. It is quite different from what happens in other parts of the world, for instance, where they may be immigrant populations.
Yet, we are on our guard, we realise that it is possible to infect. What we are most concerned with is it is not those from broken homes, those who do not have the privilege of a better education, or do not have jobs, we find that some of those who are trading ideas in regard to radicalism philosophies are those occupying high positions, sometimes they are professionals who are in the world of ICD, you have those who are doctors, and what not. That is the thing that concerns us most. What do we do to people who have no reason to feel attracted to this? Obviously there is something wrong, and that is a problem, not of one country, but a problem that all of us need to address carefully. I think the people who live in this region probably can contribute a great deal. Thank you.
Sir Hilary Synnott, IISS
Thank you. Another question for Mr N K Narayanan if I may, and thank you for your presentation. My question is about the security implications of climate change. You alluded to climate change, and if I can just introduce the question by remarking that it is very understandable that India might be impatient with lectures from countries that consume far more energy and contribute to global warming much more than India does, at least per capita. On the other hand, it is incontrovertible that China and India’s economic growth will contribute to climate change, massive use of energy, massive use of water. Energy is supplied very cheaply to the poor people of India. This, in itself, may impinge on India’s relations with its neighbours. My question is, how are these sets of issues being addressed by the government of India? You, sir, have referred to the desirability of regional partnerships. So what is the prospect of regional cooperation over issues, such as the use of water from the Himalayan basin, because what we see now is a series of rather prickly bilateral relationships over such issues? Can we the prospect of a wider regional approach? Thank you.
Geoffrey Kemp, US
Thank you to all three speakers. Again, my questions are to our Indian colleague, who raised some extraordinarily important questions. Could he give us a status report on three rather interesting energy security issues? First the status of the proposed Iran – Pakistan – India gas pipeline, which has raised some eyebrows in Washington, but obviously makes sense from India’s point of view. Second, could you comment on the status of the US – Indian nuclear dialogue, particularly the agreement to sell India nuclear technology? Again, controversial in India more, I think, than in the US at this point in time. Third, could you say a little bit about your maritime expansion, given the importance of the Indian Ocean and the Gulf to you, and whether or not the rumours that you are interested in purchasing the US Kitty Hawk have any truth to them? Thank you.
Daniel Fung, IISS Council
Thank you, this question is for former defence minister Yuriko Koike. Thank you so much for your very thoughtful presentation. The question is that, given energy security is a theme of this session, I would like to stray a little further east. What is your prognosis for Sino-Japanese rapprochement over joint development of the gas fields in the east China sea, given the thaw in bilateral relations following Premier Wen Jiabao’s visit and the thaw in military to military relations. This is a matter of considerable interest to China, as well as to the Institute of Justice and Reconciliation, which has started a dialogue with Judge Hisashi Owada on the Japanese side, and Councillor Tao Jashwin [?] on the Chinese side. Thank you.
Ellen Laipson, US
Thank you. Our two speakers from outside of the region talked about the importance of changes in behaviour at the human level and the society level in response to global climate change. I wonder if we could ask Sheikh Sabah to talk about whether anything similar is happening in this region. We understand that the recent GCC summit did address global climate change and a commitment to a fund to try to mitigate its effects, but I am also wondering whether at the society level within GCC countries there is any discussion of changes in consumption patterns, and responsibility at the individual level to deal with climate change.
Yuriko Koike
Thank you very much Mr Fung for asking me about the possibility of a joint project in the East China Sea. I think the field of the environment and using energy to develop energy efficiency in between Japan and China is very helpful. To exchange the views and ideas, and also the technology in an appropriate manner would be welcomed for both countries, and it will raise more good communication between the two countries. I think the cooperation in the area of the environment is a win-win cooperation between China and Japan. Thank you.
Sheikh Mohammed Al Abdullah Al Sabah
Thank you for your question ma’am. I just have two quick points. First of all the fund that was established came in the OPEC meeting that was held in Riyadh, not in the GCC meeting. Secondly, and I am sorry to say this, the available data points to the fact that the Middle East region contributes less than 2% of the total CO2 emissions that account for global warming. However, given that, there are certainly many changes in consumption patterns. For example, now in Kuwait many of the co-op societies are offering paper bags as opposed to plastic bags. Also, the use of catalytic converters has become the norm in the Middle East region even though they, and the production of lead free petrol cost more. We are part of a global community, and whatever affects you in Europe and the West will surely have an effect on the mindset in the Middle East. There is no doubt that global warming is starting to take a hold in decision makers’ minds as well as the population. However, it is of course not as pronounced as it is in the West.
Dr John Chipman [summary of Geoffrey Kemp's question]
I think counting upwards, regional co-operation on water, the Iran/Pakistan/India gas pipeline, the USA/India nuclear dialogue and whether you are going to buy the US Kitty Hawk, or otherwise how your maritime expansion capabilities will be pursued.
Mr Narayanan
I’d like to say something on climate change because I think it is something that is close to our heart; at least the heart of the Prime Minister. I think firstly, although most of the time we would like to be equated with China, this is one issue on which we would not. I do not think we are a large emitter. As I mentioned a couple of minutes ago, we had 17% of the World’s population, but I think we have produced less than 3% of GHE (green house emissions). I think we need to get that out of the way. I know the whole world tells us that China and India should be on board, because otherwise you cannot get the United States on board. We would like to be included in the China, India, USA trial. I think that is important, but I would like to say that climate change and what we need to mitigate the effects of climate change have very high priority. I think that we have a very high power delegation today in Bali who are looking at this kind of thing. We have a great deal of people with knowledge but for this audience, it is not a thing that I say with pride. I say it with a sense of sorrow. We are a country with a very large population who are below the poverty line. Our policies have been that we cannot take on the commitments that are required of us if it means reducing. I think, as our Prime Minister is want to say from time to time, the best method of reducing GHE emissions is to raise the level of the population. However, having said that I want to make this point. We are concerned because our glaciers in the Himalayas are coming down at an alarming rate. What we are seeking from the rest of the world is greater attention to adaptation and mitigation procedures. That requires that the richer nations of the world should come to the rescue of not merely India, but of all countries that are similarly placed. Those countries that cannot afford Carbon marks and that type of thing. Please rest assured that this is a matter that we are not merely interested in because climate change has become the buzz word across the world today. In all of the discussions that we have had, whether it was at Helegonum [?] recently or combined heads of government, I think we have made our position clear. We will never be part of the problem; we will be part of the solution. We will ensure that at no stage will our per capita emissions reach a level that will cause problems across the board. We are applying new technologies. I think just as Sheikh Abdullah said a few minutes ago, we have transformed many of our lifestyle practises.
Paper rather than plastics, we are getting new types of light bulbs which provide less emissions. This is taking place, but it is true that we have a problem because we cannot suddenly switch. If the rest of the world, particularly the richer parts of the world assist the poorer nations with regard to adaptation and mitigation, and by providing the finding for this purpose, I think a great deal can be done. With regard to water, I think water is a lifeline. Strategy experts say that water is going to be the next cause of international conflict. We are conscious of that. Once again, this is becoming a scarce resource for us. I think we have arrived at deals with Bangladesh and Nepal; politics sometimes plays a role. But, more importantly, at the moment we in a dialogue with China with regard to the harnessing of (from our side) the waters of the Ramacotra [?], and their big water systems. We recognise the fact that water has to be handled in a manner that will not create problems for us. That answers the first question. On the other three questions, the status of the proposed Iran/Pakistan/India pipeline is still at a preliminary stage. There are problems concerning transit fees, pricing and transportation costs. Therefore, we are discussing it, but are a t a very preliminary stage. We are willing to take gas from wherever it comes. That is the bottom line. However, there is no ideology or politics involved in this and we are committed to taking the gas from the Pakistan border and we have to come to an agreement with Pakistan as to the cost. I would say that, while there are newspaper reports from time to time that we are on the brink, we have not reached that stage. Pakistan and Iran are probably much closer to an understanding than we are.
The USA and India nuclear deal is close to my heart because I been associated with this from May or June 2005 – even before the July 2005 agreement between President Bush and our Prime Minister. We have a very good deal but there are certain political problems internally which we are meeting step by step. We recognise that this is a deal that is good for India and the United States and for the world. I think civil nuclear cooperation is something that might take us out of what I call energy bondage. It will overcome the energy deficit. We are hopeful. It is a political problem and nothing else, and we believe that when we have overcome that, free nuclear commerce would be possible. I am discussing this tomorrow and our teams will be at the IEA (International Energy Agency) the day after. I think that it is possible to arrive at an understanding with the IEA.
Hopefully, if we get the political clearance we should be able to go to the NSG [?]. We are optimistic. I think that is also important from the point of view that nuclear energy is the least polluting source of energy; we are anxious to move it forward. I think I mentioned a figure of 40,000 kilowatts. If our three stage process takes place and we move from the present pressurised, heavy waters, to the fast breeder and then to the thorium cycle, we would then be energy plus in every sense of the term.
It has been talked about, but I must confess we are having enough problems with the Gorshkov, we have not even looked at the Kitty Hawk. We will come to that. To be honest, I do not think we have moved on the Kitty Hawk. It is a possibility, but we have to consider. The Prime Minister and President Putin had a discussion on this point and I think that we have reached some kind of understanding. Let us see where we are after that. We will see if we need a Kitty Hawk.
Dr John Chipman
Ladies and Gentlemen, thank you very much for your three presentations and your answers to questions. I think this issue of energy security and climate change and security will be with us for a very long time indeed and it is a subject to which we should return in future Manama dialogues. The IISS is also committed to doing work on climate change and energy security. I saw a number of my staff members taking note and we hope to do smaller specialised meetings on this subject that will be inspired by the points of view and perspectives presented here. Thank you very much.
