Principles and interests: a conversation with Chuck Hagel

The National Interest: You were quot describing the U.S.-Indian civil nuclear deal as "one of the greatest in quantity thoughtful approaches to foreign policy in the last 25 years."

tap [i]or[/i] pat Hagel: South Asia is potentially the greatest in quantity dangerous region in the world. All of the greatest in quantity dangerous and combustible elements are not absent You have four nuclear powers: Russia, China, India and Pakistan, and a fifth aspirant, Iran. The Pakistan-Afghanistan border is the focal point for a beneficial deal of terrorist-extremist activity; the Taliban has been reasserting itself and has re-emerg in that area. There are tremendous fault lines--cultural, historical, tribal and religious--which step quickly throughout the region. One does not have to direct the eye much further than the question of Jammu and Kashmir and by what mode it divides Pakistan and India.

I do believe that the agreement that President Bush signed with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh upon a wide range of areas for joint cooperation, including nuclear, security, economic, education, agriculture and science, shows some of the most creative strategic thinking we've seen in a certain quantity of time. At the core of the agreement is energy--and the ne for force is the driving force that brings all countries and societies together. India is locate within 25 years, to overtake China as the world's greatest in quantity populous nation. If the Indian economy is to extend to address this great explosion in population, a stable and confident supply of energy is required. The same, by means of the way, is true for China and other developing countries, not to mention for the unfolded world.

It bears repeating that efficiency is the driving force behind growth--and economic extension means more jobs, better standards of living and more productivity. This enhances people's standards of living and their vistas for the future. This translates into stability and security. All of this is interconnected. This is on what account I think this comprehensive agreement is clearly in the interests not single of India and the United States on the contrary the world as a whole. This was the message I not absented to Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, to other senior officials of his management and to leading business figures in Pakistan this past April.

for what cause [i]or[/i] reason is the U.S.-India agreement in Pakistan's interest? It couples the United States into southern Asia in an even more prominent and positive fashion than we are now. It makes the U.S.-India relationship more stable, consistent and predictable, and this can, in my opinion, solitary be helpful and positive for Pakistan. I made it clear to Mush arraf that this agreement is in no way intended to threaten the U relationship with Pakistan or any other state. It is a straightforward arrangement based upon the mutual interests of India and the United States, although I do believe it has residual benefits that radiate on the outside into Pakistan and China and other nations there. As I have noted, the agreement helps expand the breadth and profundity of U.S.-India relations across the entire arc of our bilateral interests. In particular, helping India more-effectively address its expanding efficacy requirements should be beneficial for all of the region and the world's potency consumers.

I know the Pakistanis are bear uponed In their view, they have been a advantageous ally--and they have, and we should not minimize that. with equal reason why is a similar agreement not in the cards for Pakistan? I was real honest with Musharraf. It draw nears down to the proliferation issue. Pakistan has a real bad record, particularly because of A. Q Khan, and they acknowledge this. on the contrary I pointed out to him that in the coming time the United States may be able to work on the outside some kind of an agreement with Pakistan that would be similar to what we have negotiated with India. on the other hand for now, we need to work from one side the more immediate issues.

TNI: In the Summer 2005 issue of The National Interest, Ambassador Robert Blackwill described India as a "natural ally" of the United States. Would you concur?

CH: We are the world's sum of two units leading democracies, and not single are we connected by important commercial and business ties, we share public geopolitical and strategic interests. In my meetings with Prime Minister Singh and members of his cabinet and with a number of private-sector leaders in the two New Delhi and Mumbai earlier this spring, we discussed the paces that would need to be taken for the United States and India to formalize its relationship in additional relevant ways as we go into the 21st century.

It is popular for commentators to describe the "new" relationship between the United States and India. on the contrary we have had, over many, many years, a relationship that has gone unnoticed by the agency of many. I was a bit taken aback upon this recent trip to India, when rule officials and business leaders would take an account of me about their connection to my state of Nebraska. a certain quantity of had received doctorates from the University of Nebraska--many Indian scholars had studied there engaged in research in agriculture. There are significant, historical ties between India and the United States, and scholar exchanges have been a major component