Charlie Rose

Venkat  06/13/2008 10:40 AM Report

Good interview. What I like about Charlie Rose interviews are that it allows the guest to talk without interruptions so that you get complete viewpoints rather than sound bytes. Though I agree he was giving lot of credit to his Congress party(that is the politician in him working), he gave an excellent and lucid overview of India's policies. Bottomline, excellent talk.

Chandra  06/09/2008 08:08 PM Report

Same old nonsense from a 70-year old Congress I hack - Rajiv Gandhi this, Sonia Gandhi that, and Indira almighty. He was one of chief architect of socialism and continued poverty in India for decades - that proud badge of planning commission chair on his shelve.

And that talk of continued recognition of mainland China even after post-war in the 60s was funny, if it isn't tragic.

bengali babu  06/09/2008 08:08 PM Report

Useless interview,

Sunil  06/09/2008 08:08 PM Report

I never expected a present day indian politician to speak so well and articulate indias position and views in clear concise manner. Good interview.

Allan Ramesh  11/02/2007 03:52 PM Report

It was refreshing to hear again India reiterate that the nuclear powers should agree to disarm if they demand non-proliferation. Given the license to bully other nations that the Bush administration has assumed under the disguise fighting terrorism, this opinion must be re-stated. It is even more relevant now than it was when India declined to sign the NPT.

Bush said that you are either with us or against us. He thought that most countries would fall in line with the US. Instead everyone but a handfull of countries said goodbye. Even the ones that initially supported Bush have now left and the US stands naked in the community of nations.

This failed administration and its fiasco in Iraq may have unwittingly defined the watershed in international diplomacy where the US has lost its credibility and relevance on moral and military grounds. Enter China, India, and the EU to fill the gap.

ram  10/15/2007 08:02 PM Report

Remove this useless guy from foreign ministry.

Appointment Mr. Manishanker Iyer as foreign minister, or at least give his petroleum portfolio back. Don't appoint ministers to please US.

Sama  10/05/2007 03:36 PM Report

The Indian government cast its vote against Iran (for sanction) in an IAEA meeting a few months ago. As it turned out later, this was done under the U.S. pressure. More recently, the Indian government's representatives did not show up for the final round of negotiations with Iran and Pakistan on the "Peace" gas pipeline project using a lame excuse (high transit fee requested by Pakistan). This will also turn out to be under the U.S. pressure that is trying to economically suffocate Iran. India may be big, but some of its politicians are small. Where is the evidence for the "independent" foreign policy that the FM was talking about?

Guido Continelli  10/05/2007 01:27 PM Report

The Indian policy probably reflects the thinking of the majority of people outside Western Europe and the USA. As long as Iran or any other country abides by the commitments it makes by signing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, it should be free to enjoy the fruits of its efforts to develop a civilian nuclear programme that includes enrichment. Indians or Iranians should stay the course and not allow this dangerous, neocon, apartheid-inspired precedent of telling other members of the human race that they have no right to scientific and technological advancement. The neocons in the US and this new kid with Napoleonic delusions in France are trying to foist on the rest of the world a colonial scientific policy that says some people are more equal than others when it comes to exploiting science and technology. I would never contemplate or accept some nation that neither spoke my language nor understood my culture telling me what and how much fuel I can have to face the winter from this day forth to perpetuity. Neither France nor America would ever accept to have its energy supply held hostage to the whims of foreigners. No nation would tie its hands and willingly subject itself to perpetual dependency on another nation when it legally can arrange matters otherwise. Get real. As for weapons, Americans have shown us that the right to bear arms is a fundamental one and so essential to the pursuit of liberty, life and happiness that it needs to be enshrined in the Constitution. India or Iran should say â??â?¦from my cold dead handsâ?¦â?? if it has any balls or wishes to be taken seriously as a member of the human race.

AJ Stevens  10/05/2007 11:37 AM Report

Part of Charlie's conversation with Pranab Mukherjee dealt with

hypothetical rules of conduct that should govern the actual use of

nuclear weapons by nations in

conflict ; specifically the No First Use Rule, and the no use against

a non-nuclear power rule(redundant). What other situations

might we add to this list that would require careful judgements

and rules? For example, should a country be allowed to destroy itself

with nukes if a large majority of the population simply wants to commit

suicide, or if an invading conventional military force enter its

territory? If a true global-warming calamity strikes suddenly

might we use F-bombs (pure fusion nukes, not French pastries or

forbidden media expletives) to turn mountains into

global-cooling dust clouds? There are many other situations

requiring enforceable rules that are possible.

The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty does not recognize that

there are legitimate reasons for presently non-nuclear countries

to obtain nuclear devices, and it presupposes that there will never be

an adequate control system to prevent unauthorized use. If there

was such a system, the end result would probably be a more widespread

distribution of nuclear devices in a foolproof security blanket,

and a vast Decrease in the total number of them. Some believe that

unseen under our very noses a network of

advanced energy weapons has grown up that already provides

that security system,

and that all is needed is a change in information policy to move

ahead to a more sane global situation. Most people, understandably,

would think such a belief to be a hallucination. This problem

can be sidestepped by simply taking the pieces of technologies

that are lying about and cobbling it together again in a more public

way into a new Third Party - our supreme Nuclear Nanny!

Milton  10/04/2007 11:40 AM Report

A wonderful interview and a awesome projection of where India wants to be going forward.

Paul Mathew  10/03/2007 07:02 PM Report

A fine interview and a good summary of India's view of itself, its region and the world.