Manmohan slams West for using force to change regimes

[Tronic]

Tronic, this particular case didnt make any sense. I mean of what consequence was this statement? Something like what we did in Vietnam is. We want to be allies with the west and look after out interest as well. Gaddhaffi was of no help to us and if anything falling to the Chinese. So with us allied with the west, stood a better chance to gain anything if at all.

We have to show our spine but need to chose the right place, time and issue!!

Yusuf, Gaddafi is history; its not about Gaddafi anymore. Iran and Syria are next in the crosshairs of the West. What MMS did at the UN was stand up and voice India's own opinions and policy and let the world know that India is no poodle which will be put in a certain camp, which the West is trying to do. We are not Pakistan, nor should we ever intend to be a client state like Pakistan. If us "allying" with the West means we bow down to whatever policy they come up with, than no can do, I would rather India remain independent that join any such alliance. Any alliance India gets into should be on the basis of mutual respect and a partnership where our own opinions and strategic interests are also taken into account; there is no way I will ever support India getting into an alliance where it has to bow down to whatever policy the West comes up with. That is not an alliance, that is a master-slave relationship, one Pakistan has been in for last 60 years. What MMS did at the UN this time deserves a standing ovation. It may not make a difference in Libya, but it surely will strike some chords in many other countries, namely Iran and Syria. It should also send a clear message to Washington.

Nothing speaks greater of the American mindset than the diplomatic noise made by the US over the elimination of the American fighters from the MMRCA competition. Any country which gauges its relationship on the basis of arms deals and India's reliance on them, only goes to show that the US is still wanting a client state, not an equal level partnership. Any Indians claiming that India should follow US and Western policy and not have its own say on the international level is simply being naive.

A Canadian colonel on another board put it best, "the US will not enter into an alliance where it does not lead, and India will not enter into an alliance where it is not treated as an equal partner".

 

[mayfair]

What MMS did at the UN this time deserves a standing ovation.

Yes, all bluster about West using force to change regimes, yet barely any mention of the terrorism being suffered by India and Indians. No hitting out at those who use terrorism as a state policy.

Standing ovation indeed.

 

[KS]

@All those people thinking that "India needs West to protect against China", go ask Pakistan how allying with the West against India worked for them.

Be confident in yourself that you are not Pakistan to be taken for a ride. Engage the US as your ally for "mutual" benefit

I believe in milking the West cow for what it is worth by playing up their China paranoia and positioning ourself as their counterweight.

 

[Tronic]

Yes, all bluster about West using force to change regimes, yet barely any mention of the terrorism being suffered by India and Indians. No hitting out at those who use terrorism as a state policy.

Standing ovation indeed.

Terrorism being suffered by India and Indians is well known and an issue which is often brought up. However, you cant expect India to go to the UN on a single point year after year, and project yourself as a world power. It doesn't bode well for a country which is trying to break the India-Pakistan hyphenation and grow out of the region and onto the world scene. You are playing into the hands of the Chinese, which have propped up Pakistan solely for this reason; to have India chained down with Pakistan in front of the world community.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

Did that Idiot really say that in the UN? We should have congratulated NATO for doing the right thing by not invading a country and helping rebels to win their own fight! Was gaddafi good for India or the world?

1) We should have said we support a Palestinian state but only if it takes the Israeli concerns seriously and recognizances the jewish state in return.

2) We congratulate Libya,Egypt on becoming a Democracy and getting rid of tyrants.

We use force in Kashmir and Maoists areas and we used force to Liberate Bangladesh, why do we become hypocrites when we go to the UN!!

 

[mayfair]

Terrorism being suffered by India and Indians is well known and an issue which is often brought up. However, you cant expect India to go to the UN on a single point year after year, and project yourself as a world power. It doesn't bode well for a country which is trying to break the India-Pakistan hyphenation and grow out of the region and onto the world scene. You are playing into the hands of the Chinese, which have propped up Pakistan solely for this reason; to have India chained down with Pakistan in front of the world community.

The international community would not have failed to notice that the so called emerging world power is incapable of protecting its own citizens from terror attacks whose sources are well known. It does not bode well for a country trying to project itself as a world power to come across as a gutless and spineless hag in face of extreme provocation by means of terror attacks.

A country which appears to give an impression that it does not give a flying farthing space for the lives of its citizens as long as "Aman ka tamaasha" goes on, will hardly gain the respect of those it is aspiring to. The PM could have easily highlighted the menace of terrorism facing the world and how for a better future this menace needed to be eliminated. That how India as a country that had suffered innumerable losses due to terrorism understands this well. This could have jolly well be done without explicitly bringing up India or Pakistan into it. How is that playing into Chinese hands?

 

[Yusuf]

Tronic,

It may not be about Libya anymore, but Iran is vital. India shares god relations with the Iranians. Direct people to people contact. Thousands of Iranians live in India. A refine change only helps India for the better.

About the Colonel's statement, America is changing and so is it's policy. One example is America asking India to take the lead and project itself more aggressively in Asia. America needs India and there is no doubt in that, and that we need the US there is no doubt in that. I am sure there is a common ground between the two countries.

 

[Tronic]

The international community would not have failed to notice that the so called emerging world power is incapable of protecting its own citizens from terror attacks whose sources are well known. It does not bode well for a country trying to project itself as a world power to come across as a gutless and spineless hag in face of extreme provocation by means of terror attacks.

A country which appears to give an impression that it does not give a flying farthing space for the lives of its citizens as long as "Aman ka tamaasha" goes on, will hardly gain the respect of those it is aspiring to.

Agreed, India needs to adopt a stronger covert strike policy. We need to start seeing terrorist leaders in Pakistan being assassinated and reciprocal strikes against Pakistani military targets conducted through covert proxies. All in all, that is a whole different topic.

The PM could have easily highlighted the menace of terrorism facing the world and how for a better future this menace needed to be eliminated. That how India as a country that had suffered innumerable losses due to terrorism understands this well. This could have jolly well be done without explicitly bringing up India or Pakistan into it. How is that playing into Chinese hands?

When has India not done that? India has been bringing fourth and exposing Pakistan's terror links since the early 90s and continues to do so till date. To say that India should only be doing that and not responding to global issues, is what I am disagreeing with you on.

You are playing into Chinese hands by fixating on Pakistan at a time China is expanding its say on other world issues. Yes, Chinese stance backfired in Libya, but there are a dozen other countries which the Chinese have under their influence. The Chinese have forced themselves into other regions by having a say and a clear stance in the world arena. Today, many small countries approach China, seeking political support for their regional issues, because the Chinese have come out with a voice, where Indians have been seen as fence sitters, or, subservient to a certain camp.

 

[Ray]

China has been favoured by many a country because it follows the Soviet style of relationship:

1. Gives aid and no string attached upfront.
2. Not concerned as to what Govt runs the country or what it does with or to its people.
3. China is a permanent member of the UNSC and can have a say in blocking or abstaining in tricky issue concerning a country.
4. China can balance the US from taking unilateral action in the name of the 'international community'.

 

[Tronic]

Tronic,

It may not be about Libya anymore, but Iran is vital. India shares god relations with the Iranians. Direct people to people contact. Thousands of Iranians live in India. A refine change only helps India for the better.[

About the Colonel's statement, America is changing and so is it's policy. One example is America asking India to take the lead and project itself more aggressively in Asia. America needs India and there is no doubt in that, and that we need the US there is no doubt in that. I am sure there is a common ground between the two countries.

Yusuf, Iran is indeed vital, but why does India need a change in Iran, when this Iranian regime has always been more than friendly to India every since the revolution? Are the Americans overthrowing their Wahabbi funding Saudi despots? No. Than why should India dump its good friend? I can understand if the Americans apply the same standards to all, but when they retain their Wahabbi despots and ask us to dump Iran, I think it is only proper that we tell them to take a hike!

 

[Tronic]

China has been favoured by many a country because it follows the Soviet style of relationship:

1. Gives aid and no string attached upfront.
2. Not concerned as to what Govt runs the country or what it does with or to its people.
3. China is a permanent member of the UNSC and can have a say in blocking or abstaining in tricky issue concerning a country.
4. China can balance the US from taking unilateral action in the name of the 'international community'.

Sir, China rarely gives away aid without strings attached. Money out of China usually flows in the form of soft loans, export credits, or aid which is only used to supplement Chinese investments. China gives away no money where it doesn't expect greater returns. As for not being concerned about the government of the country, I think India is picking up as we have seen in Burma. The UNSC is most definitely the biggest reason for whatever clout the Chinese have.

 

[Yusuf]

Yusuf, Iran is indeed vital, but why does India need a change in Iran, when this Iranian regime has always been more than friendly to India every since the revolution? Are the Americans overthrowing their Wahabbi funding Saudi despots? No. Than why should India dump its good friend? I can understand if the Americans apply the same standards to all, but when they retain their Wahabbi despots and ask us to dump Iran, I think it is only proper that we tell them to take a hike!

I have reasons for why we should support a regime change in Iran.

1) The Mullahs are unpredictable. Their recent Kashmir statement is not inspiring. A statement on Kashmir cannot be in response to India's vote on it's nuke program as the two are not on the same field.

2) we have better people to people contact. A democratic Iran with it's people having true power helps India.

3) As long as Iran and US are at loggerheads, we will keep having problems with our relations with Iran.
India will benefit from a democratic Iran as it will not have to chose between Iran and US.

 

[sandeepdg]

Agreed, India needs to adopt a stronger covert strike policy. We need to start seeing terrorist leaders in Pakistan being assassinated and reciprocal strikes against Pakistani military targets conducted through covert proxies. All in all, that is a whole different topic.



When has India not done that? India has been bringing fourth and exposing Pakistan's terror links since the early 90s and continues to do so till date. To say that India should only be doing that and not responding to global issues, is what I am disagreeing with you on.

You are playing into Chinese hands by fixating on Pakistan at a time China is expanding its say on other world issues. Yes, Chinese stance backfired in Libya, but there are a dozen other countries which the Chinese have under their influence. The Chinese have forced themselves into other regions by having a say and a clear stance in the world arena. Today, many small countries approach China, seeking political support for their regional issues, because the Chinese have come out with a voice, where Indians have been seen as fence sitters, or, subservient to a certain camp.

I absolutely agree with you here. What Manmohan is saying is something general, not specific, though the current events suggest that he is pointing fingers at Libya, but its much more than that.

Using force to bring about regime change and then help establish a pro Western government will not work as formula for the world'd problems. It never has, as history is itself evident. Saddam may be an evil man, but wrong had he done to India. He was the only Arab nation which was truly friendly with us. And see the mess Iraq is in now, there is no formula with the west to curb sectarian violence and friction between the tribes. I am quite sure that same thing is gonna happen in Libya in the foreseeable future, already we can see major group forming the NTC to be increasingly orthodox Islamist and extremist. The west will then again live Libya in the same mess that Iraq is currently in.

This is another example of this failed policy. Other such examples are very well known in history, most of them in Latin America, America's own backyard.

And please don't bring Pakistan issue in this discussion, it is entirely different. This issue is global, and the Pakistaniterrorism one is local, about which the whole world is now very clear, that Pakistan is the epicenter of global terrorism. And India has brought up this issue since the beginning of 90's in the UN, right since troubles in the valley started.

 

[Tronic]

I have reasons for why we should support a regime change in Iran.

1) The Mullahs are unpredictable. Their recent Kashmir statement is not inspiring. A statement on Kashmir cannot be in response to India's vote on it's nuke program as the two are not on the same field.

Well, even the Israelis have invoked Kashmir in international arena, so its not only the mullahs. What I do know is that it were these same Mullahs which supported India's stance on Kashmir in the 90s. Whether their statement to invoke Kashmir was in response to the IAEA vote or not, I don't know, but the Israelis certainly had no reason. Yet, I don't see anyone saying we should dump Israel.

2) we have better people to people contact. A democratic Iran with it's people having true power helps India.

Yusuf that policy kept our doors shut to Burma. We should work with any power sitting in Tehran. An American sponsored government in Tehran will only serve America's interests, and possible as an extension, Pakistans', as we saw with the Shah governement.

3) As long as Iran and US are at loggerheads, we will keep having problems with our relations with Iran.
India will benefit from a democratic Iran as it will not have to chose between Iran and US.

Yusuf, just keep in mind;

1.) It was the US which toppled a democratic Iran to install a pro-US puppet Shah.
2.) A pro-US Iran has never been pro-India. Infact, a pro-US Iran supplied weapons to Pakistan in its wars against India.
3.) Things may be different today, but again, a pro-US Iran will again only serve America's interests, not India's.

 

[Yusuf]

Well, even the Israelis have invoked Kashmir in international arena, so its not only the mullahs. What I do know is that it were these same Mullahs which supported India's stance on Kashmir in the 90s. Whether their statement to invoke Kashmir was in response to the IAEA vote or not, I don't know, but the Israelis certainly had no reason. Yet, I don't see anyone saying we should dump Israel.



Yusuf that policy kept our doors shut to Burma. We should work with any power sitting in Tehran. An American sponsored government in Tehran will only serve America's interests, and possible as an extension, Pakistans', as we saw with the Shah governement.



Yusuf, just keep in mind;

1.) It was the US which toppled a democratic Iran to install a pro-US puppet Shah.
2.) A pro-US Iran has never been pro-India. Infact, a pro-US Iran supplied weapons to Pakistan in its wars against India.
3.) Things may be different today, but again, a pro-US Iran will again only serve America's interests, not India's.

The times are different. We want the people to come to power not any Shah. What is also to note that we are not going to engineer any change. We can continue to play both sides. My only contention is, a democratic Iran which is integrated with the world is in Indian interest. We dont have to keep choosing a side at the expense of the other. The Israelis, well its surprising that they do it, but i think they are driving by the fact that we also support Palestine. Rough diplomatic tussle.

To say in the end, the statement made by Manmohan was not required as it was not warranted from him. I think he would have been better suited to talk about the South China Sea and how no country can arbitrarily declare an entire sea its own. If he had made that statement, it would have "shown more balls" and gained international support.

 

[Virendra]

Why would Iran and Israel expect us to follow a zero sum game when the west doesn't, on the same questions?
Nobody can actually, you always want to make as many allies as possible. Only the desperation of circumstances and our core national interest should be the dictating factor whether and which side we should take among the two (Palestine/Israel ... Iran/West) if at all it arrives to that stage.

Regards,
Virendra

 

[nrj]

The international community would not have failed to notice that the so called emerging world power is incapable of protecting its own citizens from terror attacks whose sources are well known. It does not bode well for a country trying to project itself as a world power to come across as a gutless and spineless hag in face of extreme provocation by means of terror attacks.

Has world-community completely succeeded in protecting its citizen's from terrorism?? Why are you making a standard out of them? They do not share geographical trouble like we do. Double-standard losers who just lost their War on Terrorism should first look at themselves.

A country which appears to give an impression that it does not give a flying farthing space for the lives of its citizens as long as "Aman ka tamaasha" goes on, will hardly gain the respect of those it is aspiring to.

Why we need west's respect now? Our country is respected all over the world. We are not in business of buying respect in excahnge for licking western strategy. India has never been like that & will never be!

Yes, all bluster about West using force to change regimes, yet barely any mention of the terrorism being suffered by India and Indians. No hitting out at those who use terrorism as a state policy.

Standing ovation indeed.

The PM could have easily highlighted the menace of terrorism facing the world and how for a better future this menace needed to be eliminated. That how India as a country that had suffered innumerable losses due to terrorism understands this well. This could have jolly well be done without explicitly bringing up India or Pakistan into it. How is that playing into Chinese hands?

Have you gone through the speech? Have you even read what was Indian briefing to general meet? Please go through them before commenting.

No selective approaches to fighting terror: PM

Pitching strongly for an "unrelenting" fight against terrorism, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh today said there cannot be "selective approaches" in dealing with the scourge that needed to be fought across all fronts.

Addressing the UN General Assembly here, he noted that terrorism continues to rear its ugly head and take a grievous toll on innocent lives.

"Developing countries need a peaceful external environment to grow," Singh told the world leaders assembled for the annual meet.

"The fight against terrorism must be unrelenting. There cannot be selective approaches in dealing with terrorist groups or the infrastructure of terrorism. Terrorism has to be fought across all fronts," he said.

While delving upon the continued threat posed by terrorism, the Prime Minister referred to the assassination of Afghan President Burhanuddin Rabbani and said it was a "chilling reminder of the designs of the enemies of peace" in Afghanistan.

He said it was essential that the process of nation- building and reconciliation in Afghanistan succeeds, which was vital for enduring peace and security in the region.

"India will play its part in helping the people of Afghanistan to build a better future for themselves, just as we are doing in other countries in South Asia," he said, adding, "We will do so because prosperity and stability in our region are indivisible."

The Prime Minister said India wishes to see "an open, inclusive and transparent architecture of regional cooperation in the Asia Pacific region and peaceful settlement of disputes".

He said there were "encouraging signs" of cooperation in the area of security in South Asia, "exemplified in India's cooperation with Bangladesh".

Such cooperation is adding to the security of both the countries, Singh said.

In the midst of controversies over the "interventions" in the Middle East, the PM said terrorism continued to rear its ugly head. "New threats to international security have emerged," he said and added, "we will succeed if we adopt a co-operative rather than a confrontationist approach."

"The UN must be seen as an impartial, credible and effective body. I will stress the need for early reform of this unique organisation, particularly an expansion of its Security Council."

"This is the time for UN to resume its global leadership role," he said.

And here's the entire text of his speech -

Text of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's [ Images ] speech at the 66th session of the United Nations General Assembly in New York.

Your Excellency, Mr President,

Excellencies,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Allow me at the outset to congratulate you on assuming the Presidency of the General Assembly. I wish to assure you of India's [ Images ] full cooperation in the conduct of the sixty-sixth session of the Assembly.

It is also my great pleasure to welcome in our midst the new State of South Sudan.
Mr President,
We meet at this session of the United Nations General Assembly at a time of great uncertainty and profound change.

Till a few years ago the world had taken for granted the benefits of globalization and global interdependence. Today we are being called upon to cope with the negative dimensions of those very phenomena. Economic, social and political events in different parts of the world have coalesced together and their adverse impact is now being felt across countries and continents.

The world economy is in trouble. The shoots of recovery which were visible after the economic and financial crisis of 2008 have yet to blossom. In many respects the crisis has deepened even further.

The traditional engines of the global economy such as the United States, Europe and Japan [ Images ], which are also the sources of global economic and financial stability, are faced with continued economic slowdown. Recessionary trends in these countries are affecting confidence in world financial and capital markets.

These developments are bound to have a negative impact on developing countries which also have to bear the additional burden of inflationary pressures.

Declining global demand and availability of capital, increasing barriers to free trade and mounting debt pose a threat to the international monetary and financial system. Questions are being asked about the efficacy of the Bretton Woods institutions.

There has been unprecedented social and political upheaval in West Asia, the Gulf and North Africa. People of these regions are demanding the right to shape their own future. Energy and food prices are once again spiraling and introducing fresh instability, especially for developing countries.

The Palestinian question still remains unresolved and a source of great instability and violence. India is steadfast in its support for the Palestinian people's struggle for a sovereign, independent, viable and united state of Palestine with East Jerusalem as its capital, living within secure and recognizable borders side by side and at peace with Israel. We look forward to welcoming Palestine as an equal member of the United Nations.

Terrorism [ Images ] continues to rear its ugly head and take a grievous toll of innocent lives.

New threats to international security have emerged. At a time when the world needs more international commerce, the sea lanes of communication across the Indian Ocean are under siege. Acts of piracy are being carried out with impunity from lands that are beyond the writ of any functioning state or international accountability.

Iniquitous growth, inadequate job and education opportunities and denial of basic human freedoms are leading to growing radicalization of the youth, intolerance and extremism.
Mr President,
We have no choice but to meet these challenges. We will succeed if we adopt a cooperative rather than a confrontationist approach. We will succeed if we embrace once again the principles on which the United Nations was founded --internationalism and multilateralism.

More importantly, we will succeed if our efforts have legitimacy and are pursued not just within the framework of law but also the spirit of the law.

The observance of the rule of law is as important in international affairs as it is within countries. Societies cannot be reordered from outside through military force. People in all countries have the right to choose their own destiny and decide their own future.

The international community has a role to play in assisting in the processes of transition and institution building, but the idea that prescriptions have to be imposed from outside is fraught with danger.

Actions taken under the authority of the United Nations must respect the unity, territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of individual states.

Correspondingly, governments are duty bound to their citizens to create conditions that enable them to freely determine their pathways to development. This is the essence of democracy and fundamental human freedoms.
Mr President,

There are many other things that we can do. We must address the issue of the deficit in global governance. We need a stronger and more effective United Nations. We need a United Nations that is sensitive to the aspirations of everyone - rich or poor, big or small. For this the United Nations and its principal organs, the General Assembly and the Security Council, must be revitalized and reformed.

The reform and expansion of the Security Council are essential if it is to reflect contemporary reality. Such an outcome will enhance the Council's credibility and effectiveness in dealing with global issues. Early reform of the Security Council must be pursued with renewed vigour and urgently enacted.

We should not allow the global economic slowdown to become a trigger for building walls around ourselves through protectionism or erecting barriers to movement of people, services and capital. Effective ways and means must be deployed to promote coordination of macro economic policies of major economies. The reform of governance systems of international financial institutions ought to be pursued with speed and efficiency.

The development agenda must be brought firmly back to the centre stage of the United Nations' priorities. We need a much more determined effort to ensure balanced, inclusive and sustainable development for the benefit of vast sections of humanity. Each of us can contribute to this task, but we can achieve far more if we act in partnership.

In the last few decades India has lifted tens of millions of its people out of abject poverty. We are in a position to feed our population better, to educate them better and to widen their economic choices. But we still have a very long way to go.

We wish to quicken the pace of India's transformation in partnership with the international community. A fast growing India can expand the boundaries for the global economy. A democratic, plural and secular India can contribute to tolerance and peaceful co-existence among nations.

Developing countries need investment, technology and market access for their products. They need assistance in the areas of education, health, women's empowerment and agriculture.

During the recently held 4th United Nations - Least Developed Countries Conference, India has strengthened its partnership with the LDCs through significantly enhanced lines of credit and assistance in capacity building.

We have to pay particular attention to Africa. Africa's richest resources are not its minerals but its people. We have to empower them and open the doors for them to human advances in technology, education and skill development.

At the second India-Africa Forum Summit in Addis Ababa earlier this year India offered lines of credit worth five billion US dollars and an additional 700 million US dollars grant assistance for human resource development, transfer of technology and building new institutions.
The United Nations should lead efforts in the area of food security. We need more cooperation in agricultural technologies, water conservation, land usage and productivity and stability in commodity prices.
Mr President,

Developing countries need a peaceful external environment to grow.

The fight against terrorism must be unrelenting. There cannot be selective approaches in dealing with terrorist groups or the infrastructure of terrorism. Terrorism has to be fought across all fronts.

In South Asia there are encouraging signs of cooperation in the area of security, as exemplified in India's cooperation with Bangladesh. Such cooperation is adding to the security of both our countries.

The recent assassination of Professor Burhanuddin Rabbani in Kabul is a chilling reminder of the designs of the enemies of peace in Afghanistan. It is essential that the process of nation building and reconciliation in that country succeeds. This is vital for ensuring peace and security in the region.

India will play its part in helping the people of Afghanistan to build a better future for themselves, just as we are doing in other countries in South Asia. We will do so because prosperity and stability in our region are indivisible.

We wish to see an open, inclusive and transparent architecture of regional cooperation in the Asia Pacific region and peaceful settlement of disputes.

I call upon the United Nations to evolve a comprehensive and effective response to the problem of piracy in the Red Sea and off the coast of Somalia. As a littoral state of the Indian Ocean, India is ready to work with other countries in this regard.

Simultaneously, the international community should continue with efforts to restore stability in Somalia. We have joined international efforts to provide humanitarian assistance to the countries afflicted with severe famine and drought in the Horn of Africa, specifically Somalia, Kenya and Djibouti.

Nuclear proliferation continues to remain a threat to international security. The Action Plan put forward by Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi [ Images ] for a Nuclear-Weapon-Free and Non-Violent World provides a concrete road map for achieving nuclear disarmament in a time-bound, universal, non-discriminatory, phased and verifiable manner.

I commend the United Nations for its efforts in focusing world attention on nuclear safety. Our plans for utilizing nuclear power to meet our energy needs hinge upon full satisfaction about the safety of nuclear energy. We have undertaken a thorough review of the safety of our nuclear plants. We support international efforts under the aegis of the International Atomic Energy Agency to enhance levels of safety and security.

Mr President,

The perspectives that I have outlined to this august assembly are the ones that have guided our actions in the Security Council since India became a non-permanent member of the Council in January this year.

There are still millions living in poverty across the world. Their plight has worsened, for no fault of theirs, due to the global economic and financial crisis of the recent years. The actions of governments around the world are therefore under close scrutiny.

It is vitally important that through our actions and deeds we renew people's faith in the charter and objectives of the United Nations. I am confident we can do this through statesmanship, foresight and collective efforts.

India stands ready to play its part in this noble endeavour.

I thank you.

READ: PM Manmohan Singh's speech at UN General Assembly - Rediff.com India News

Here's what Mathai made clear -

Referring to India heading the Security Council's Committee on Counter-Terrorism, he said at a special meeting on September 28 India will reiterate the need for strong international cooperation and collective action against terrorism.

"We have time and again insisted on full compliance by all states of their obligations under various UN resolutions and mechanisms on counter-terrorism. We will also push for an early adoption of the Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism (CCIT) that will provide a global normative framework against terrorism," Mathai said.

With terror back on radar, no Indo-Pak meet at UNGA

 

[nrj]

And people please go through this report as well. This stand does not reflect anti-US or anti-west approach. Its posturing as people should understand the composite sense of various developments happening between India-US & other international policies of India.

Its a 67 page first ever Indo-US joint-study report-

View attachment USIndia_jointstudygroup_IIGG.pdf

Some highlights by one of the authors -

India's relationship with the US, and the shadow of China and Pakistan on that relationship, is the subject of the first- ever joint India-US report on the bilateral relationship published this week and released simultaneously in Washington, DC and New Delhi.* The report of the joint study group set up by the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and Aspen Institute India (AII), titled "The United States and India: A Shared Strategic Future", sums up the "core convictions" of the authors of the report as:


"(1) An ever more powerful and influential India in the international arena is deeply in the United States' national interest. (2) A United States that maintains its power and influence in the international arena, especially in Asia, is deeply in India's national interest. (3) The closest possible policy collaboration between India and the United States in all the dimensions of their relationship is increasingly important to both nations, helps sustain a favourable balance of power in Asia and beyond, and promotes international peace and stability beginning in Asia writ large."


The authors of the report are realistic enough to recognise that there are issues on which the two countries would differ — for example, India's relations with Iran and the US role in West Asia. The more important point the report drives home is the growing convergence in thinking in both countries about China and Pakistan, about nuclear proliferation and terrorism, about dealing with global economic slowdown and climate change.


The importance of the CFR-AII report is that it takes the India-US relationship away from a "transactional" framework – "what's in it for me versus what's in it for you" – and places it firmly within a wider strategic perspective. A rising India and a declining US can work together to ensure the former's rise and arrest the latter's decline! In doing so, the two can fight the threat of terrorism together more effectively and ensure stability within a rapidly-changing Asia.


At this point in time, the leadership in both countries would find an observation of the group particularly relevant: "Both states are transitioning to new roles in the international system. For India, great power status means that it will have greater responsibilities in managing global problems.

On controversial subjects, avoiding taking positions is inappropriate for such a potentially major contributor to the international system. For the United States, which became accustomed to often leading alone, it means encouraging a more prominent role for a state like India, even though India's more prominent voice may periodically disagree on matters of policy." The relationship will have to be based on such honourable, if onerous, principles.


If the politically beleaguered President Obama and Prime Minister Singh are able to find time to read the CFR-AII report and think of the future, rather than being preoccupied with the problems of the present that both understandably face, they may be able to breathe new life into what was at one time viewed in both countries as the "defining bilateral relationship" of the 21st century.

Sanjaya Baru: Partnership in progress

 

[mayfair]

Has world-community completely succeeded in protecting its citizen's from terrorism?? Why are you making a standard out of them? They do not share geographical trouble like we do. Double-standard losers who just lost their War on Terrorism should first look at themselves.

Britain faced Irish terrorism for ages and are facing a spectre of home grown Islamists
Spain has faced ETA terror attacks and attacks by Al-Qaeda
France, Germany, Russia, Japan have had their own share of terror attacks (OAS, Red Army faction etc.)
Sri Lanka faced LTTE terrorism

How many lost their war on terror?
How many acts of terror are reported in these countries now compared to the past?

Why we need west's respect now? Our country is respected all over the world. We are not in business of buying respect in excahnge for licking western strategy. India has never been like that & will never be!

Did I say anything about the West? Our country is admired around the world for many things, but we are also laughed at for many things, not in the least for being soft on terror and corruption. I was responding to Tronic's point about India aiming to becoming a world power. The world respects those who respect themselves.

Have you gone through the speech? Have you even read what was Indian briefing to general meet? Please go through them before commenting.

I did not read his complete speech before, which I have done now. Thanks for posting the entire contents and I admit I erred in taking on face value some of the views that PM spoke diddly squat about terrorism and am happy to be corrected. I was particularly impressed by this from our PM

The fight against terrorism must be unrelenting. There cannot be selective approaches in dealing with terrorist groups or the infrastructure of terrorism. Terrorism has to be fought across all fronts.

I only wish that he would actually walk the talk. After all actions speak louder than words. Indeed, our PM's (in)actions speak far louder than his words.

 

[nrj]

Britain faced Irish terrorism for ages and are facing a spectre of home grown Islamists
Spain has faced ETA terror attacks and attacks by Al-Qaeda
France, Germany, Russia, Japan have had their own share of terror attacks (OAS, Red Army faction etc.)
Sri Lanka faced LTTE terrorism

How many lost their war on terror?
How many acts of terror are reported in these countries now compared to the past?

These countries do not have epicentre of world-terrorism several hundreads of miles away. They are not basked between rouge states engaged with only mission to destroy Union of India.

Did I say anything about the West? Our country is admired around the world for many things, but we are also laughed at for many things, not in the least for being soft on terror and corruption. I was responding to Tronic's point about India aiming to becoming a world power. The world respects those who respect themselves.

Even US is laughed on for corruption & vietnam blunder, 10yr astan war. So are we for other issues. My only point is we shouldn't appoint west as standard for our policies.