Interview with Indian Foreign Minister Salman Khurshid

INDIA'S ruling Congress Party has often banked on the suave and articulate Salman Khurshid to project its views on government and party. Since last October, the 60-year-old Mr Khurshid has been given the charge of running India’s foreign policy as External Affairs Minister.

On a stopover in Singapore while on his way home from the Asean Regional Forum meeting in Brunei, Mr Khurshid on Wednesday discussed the new dimensions of India’s Look East Policy, its developing relations with major powers and its bilateral ties with Singapore in an hour-long interview with The Straits Times’ Foreign Editor Ravi Velloor and Assistant Foreign Editor Nilanjana Sengupta.

Here is the edited text of Mr Khurshid’s remarks.

Singapore is India’s largest trading partner in Asean. How is the bilateral relationship with Singapore progressing?

Our relations are positive, meaningful, warm, exceptionally communicative. There is a reciprocal interest in both sides and it is a very well informed relationship. The leaders here are familiar with what is happening in India, they are well informed, they have a lot of contact points. We have a lot of important people from the government and outside the government in India visiting Singapore, so there are any number of contact points. I think it is a very fruitful and a very meaningful relationship.

But having said that, we cannot take it for granted. Given the competition around the world, there cannot be a standstill and sitting on our laurels. We need to be creatively looking at new areas and avenues of collaboration. That is the sense I tried giving today to the leadership that I met. It also means we have to go back and do some creative thinking. We need to find potential for doing things together that we have not done before.

Do you have any specific ideas on how to take the ties forward?

I am not directly responsible for it, but instead of talking in general terms about investment in the Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor, I think we really have to amplify it, specify it and look at a creative model of how some portion of that corridor can be a dedicated Singapore corridor.

They (Singapore) can actually bring in institutions and develop the best infrastructure for having their own investment -- manufacturing or perhaps even services -- as well as indeed inviting other people who are interested in investing.

Not everybody may have the wherewithal or capacity or inclination to develop a whole area by themselves, so I am really looking for something like another Singapore, a virtual Singapore, being developed.

Which part of the corridor would that be?

Well that they must choose, it depends on what interests them. Right now their (Singapore’s) investments are going to Bangalore and around Bangalore for obvious reasons. There is air connectivity and then Bangalore is a hub for Information Technology. So they must decide. I believe they have an interest in Pune. So they must decide what is good for them.

In your talks today with the Singapore leadership, did this come up?

Yes, I mentioned it and indicated that we shall ask the CEO of the corridor to come here again and come with more concrete ideas and a menu of options that he could provide.

The Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement or CECA that India signed with Singapore in 2005 is the first major deal of its kind that India signed with any country. It is up for its second review, what are the outstanding issues?

The review is taking place now. There are a couple of issues where there is a lack of convergence. Banking is one such issue. I think their requirement for foreign banks in terms of deposit ratios is much greater than it is for their own banks so that makes it an unequal and uneven playing field. But we will study this and see whether this is something that works specifically against Indian banks or if it is something against all foreign banks.

But the important thing is that this is one issue, it is not the only issue. There are many issues where we have the experience of convergence. And I think at some point of time our colleagues will have to ring fence those areas that require much longer discussion and move forward with those areas on which we have convergence available. But I think there needs to be a political call on this and I am sure that India's prime minister and Singapore's prime minister will take a call.

Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong, whom you met today, is also a former chairman of the Monetary Authority of Singapore which deals with qualifying bank licences. Did he have something to say on this?

No, I think he flagged the issue himself and said he does understand but Singapore has a system in place and it is not that it’s handpicked for India specially. If there is a system that is divergent from what your expectations are, as indeed, would be the case with us, then we have to find a way of confining it, restricting it and moving ahead with all the other things.

Singapore is heading towards its 50th anniversary of Independence in 2015. Has there been any contact on Indian participation in the celebration?

Yes, we are drawing up a plan and we would want that to begin in 2014 because it is also 50 years of our ties with Singapore. So it would start in 2014, a fairly elaborate and extensive programme of events. Then we will build it up to 2015. Singapore, of course, would have its own celebration. This would be in addition to what they are doing for themselves, this would be our contribution and celebration of our relationship of 50 years.

We have been hearing about Look East policy since the days of the Narasimha Rao administration. Do you have any new ideas about this policy? It has become a cliche, everybody talks about the policy. Is there new flesh you want to put on those bones?

Of course, policy begins with a statement of intent. You work out what appears an attractive option. You then give it substance and then you build it up to a declaration and that becomes a policy.

What has happened with the Look East policy is that other than the impetus and the energy that we have given to it, it is now locking in with our growing role in the Asean, with Asean Regional Forum (ARF) with the Asean Defence Ministers' Meeting-Plus (ADMM-Plus), with the Asean Dialogue partner and of course the commemorative summit we did last year.

So, I don't think we should see Look East Policy and our engagement of Asean as two separate things anymore. They have obviously merged into one larger picture.

Amongst the various things that we have agreed to do with Asean, they are areas of our expertise and strength. For instance, pharmaceuticals is an area of our strength, and we will work together as a co-chair with Australia on that.

From our point of view and as part of the impetus we give to this policy as indeed to our engagement of Asean is the connectivity issue.

We are already working on a trilateral highway with Myanmar and Thailand. We have 2016 as our target date. There are 71 bridges on the Kalewa road in Myanmar alone. This would be not just a major link between India and Asean but it would actually provide a stepping stone between India’s northeast and Asean and unlock what we have been wanting to unlock for a long time, the potential of the northeast.

This has been difficult westwards because of the kind of geo-political difficulties we faced. But we think that potential can get unlocked by the connectivity towards Asean and then we will serve the purpose of having added this very major dimension on land connectivity with Asean.

Then the sea connectivity with Asean is again a very important matter, which we are pursuing and which we hope we will be able to move even faster than on the issue of land connectivity.

Finally, there is the air connectivity. Now air connectivity is always very difficult because as you know there is always resistance from airlines that have a vested interest. We are looking at again the northeast as an inviting option. We think there are enough Asean aviation slots available to begin that exercise. But I think we need to have further conversations and I will certainly take it up with (Civil Aviaton Minister) Mr Ajit Singh when I get back.

Is Asean now the cornerstone of your Look East policy?

It has to go beyond Asean. We are actually looking at Indo-pacific now. We are not in the Apec yet. Once we get into the Apec then it gives us further opportunity.

What are chances of getting into Apec, membership to which is at the moment frozen?

It is in Bali this year. I don't think anything major can happen now but we have had a good conversation with Indonesia, which is the chair at present, I think we can re-energise the process and hopefully that will begin soon.

Any indications on how soon?

No, I cannot give a dateline, because they have to move away from a moratorium.

Both in your talk earlier and now you mentioned the Asean Defence Ministers’ Meeting (ADMM) and Asean Regional Forum (ARF). You have just come from Brunei. Do the Southeast Asians want you to take a bigger profile in this region's strategic area? What is your response to that?

I think we are taking a big enough profile. We are not a country that subscribes to policing any part of the world. So we need to do this step by step in terms of the engagement that ARF is developing. We are there, we are bilaterally doing it, we are willing to do it with Asean. The areas we are comfortable with are capacity building, intelligence sharing, exchange of ships, calling on each others’ ports, joint training and joint exercises. And we are willing to enhance that at the pace at which Asean collectively desires it to be done.

Do you foresee an Indian base at one of these countries at some point?

I don’t think that is something that is either wished for by anyone in Asean nor something that fits into our present scheme of things. But extensive exchanges, exercises, we are quite ready to do.

India will soon be launching its home-built aircraft carrier. With another undergoing trials in Russia and due to arrive in December, India will have three aircraft carriers. Where will all these ships be sailing to?

We have a vast coast, no, on the east and west? If you have a carrier on each side and a third in reserve, that is not really too much. We could do with many more carriers but obviously there are limits to what we can spend and the need that we have at present will be well served by three carriers.

And proposals for a fourth coming up before Cabinet?

I am not privy to the plans of the Navy to that detail but they obviously have futuristic plans that they keep ready.

This region is the stuffing in the sandwich, so to say, between the great tectonic plates of Asia - India and China. And what we read in the press a couple of months ago about the border really shook up a lot of people and made them wonder what was happening. Could you give a sense of how that issue was resolved? And is it true that India backed off and agreed to dismantle a whole lot of things?

We are not using this language of backing off and scoring points, and victors and losers. That is not the relationship we have with China, that is not the kind of relationship we want to encourage people to believe we have with China.

Did they behave excessively aggressively this time, more visibly than in the past?

We have not gone into details of what happened. I did, when I met with the Prime Minister Li Keqiang and the foreign minister Wang Yi, indicate that it is important that we do some analysis on both sides to learn from that experience. Unless we know why it happened, we will not be in a proper frame of mind or proper position to prevent it from happening again.

We have just had the 16th round of special representatives’ talks, both sides have said the talks were good, meaningful and that peace and tranquility on the border remains the high priority for these discussions. I think the body language and the articulation of our concern about each other between China and ourselves, which has been noticed by the people at the Brunei meeting, augurs well.

We know that there are some difficult issues that need to be resolved but we also know we have in place some mechanisms that address those issues from going out of hand. The need is to strengthen those mechanisms.

We already have a draft given to us by China for co-operation on the border. We are looking at the draft and will get back to them. I think if people did get alarmed and got distressed by what had happened, I would tell them to concentrate on how reasonably and sensibly it was resolved without loss of face or any other distress caused to either countries.

You are sure there was no loss of face caused to you on that?

No, loss of face was to the people who were prophesying doomsday but unfortunately they do not spot loss of face to themselves.

This new draft has new ideas?

I have not looked at it. Defence people are looking at it and the National Security Adviser is looking at it. Once they are ready with the analysis I will come into the picture.

But you think there is movement forward or is it just another...?

Every step we have taken with China over the years is a positive step. I think we have constantly, if not rapidly, made progress. I feel there is no reason why we should continue to feel a sense of alarm or discomfort. But it helps to remain cautious and vigilant and careful. Because it is not a relationship that has finally overcome the difficult issues that caused us to actually come into a confrontation.

So, those issues needs to be resolved, we are both determined that it will be resolved and we are also are very clear that it does not help to hasten resolution if you are not ready for resolution, you must take it a step at a time.

What is your assessment of the new leadership? Is there any change in their postures towards India?

Our prime minister had a very good relationship with the previous leadership. The new leadership has signalled very positively both in South Africa, where the president of China met our prime minister and when Prime Minister Li came to India. My own meeting with him (Mr Li) in Beijing was extremely warm and friendly. I think he made a good impression during his visit to Delhi. He truly represents the new generation of leadership in China. He is an open, he is outgoing, he is comforting person. I think he is familiar with the way the diplomatic exercises are done in our times. I think he would build a very good relationship with our leadership.

What about Japan, where is that relationship going?

There is significant movement with Japan. Japan is a big contributor in the new initiatives and investments we have offered to the world. Japan plays a major role there.

I have been emphasising again and again that there are very few countries that can deal with two competing countries, with the same kind positive agenda as we do. Japan and China, for instance, we are engaging both of them at the same time and almost on similar issues. We are looking at China's investment in India, we are looking at Japan's investment in India.
Japan already has a very strong foothold both in terms of development aid and investment. The Chinese, I think, have a very strong support base amongst the people and of course they have great compatibility because of our desire to develop the Buddhist circuit for tourism.

What about strategic ties?

Strategic ties are that you share information, that you do exercises together and that you are willing to cooperate in the area of defence production. We have signalled that we don’t want to be merely at client stage purchasing defence equipment from our strategic partners. We want to share research, development and joint production and that's at a very nascent stage but that is the fundamental basis on which we want the strategic relationship to build.

The Japanese Defence Minister, Mr Itsunori Onodera, spoke to The Straits Times last month. As you know they are really building up their domestic defence industry. He also said Japan will use Overseas Development Assistance (ODA) with friendly countries to help build up their defenses. Would you accept Japanese ODA in defence?

We have Japanese ODA but I don’t think they have ever discussed with us linkages of ODA with defence. We have a standalone arrangement. And I would imagine that when he spoke of that, he wouldn’t have had India in mind. But they have sought to supply to India and they are very keen to supply to India amphibious aircraft, which they don't share with most people.

Of course, to keep within their law they will not have on that particular model of aircraft given to India any lethal equipment or any weapons. But the craft itself is very important.

But we have our own systems and it will have to go through those systems. So, we are looking at which is the best way in which this matter can be taken forward.

US Secretary of State John Kerry was in Delhi and now Vice-President Joe Biden is coming on a trip that will only take him to two places - India and Singapore. Where is India now in the US' strategic pivot to Asia and where will it be in the future?

The US does not use the word ‘pivot’ anymore. They have talked about rebalancing, which is fine because Asean wants them to be engaged, Asean wants them to make a major investment in Asean in more than just financial terms. We are fine with that, we have no problem.

They are part of the ARF, and they make their contribution. We are quite happy with that. We want to be strategic partner and friends with the US without being part of any camp. And I think they respect us for this, they have understood that we have engaged with them in a manner which is different from any set pattern of engagement they may have had with allies elsewhere. We want to develop that relationship.

Now they have some expectations from us, which is that they did make, and we were happy to recognise it - that they did make a departure from their past policy when they agreed to do the 123 civil nuclear agreement with us.

But the fruits of that agreement have neither come yet as a fact for us or for them because we are still negotiating the fine print. And we haven’t even been able to do the early works agreement or the small agreement as they call it now.

And we have tried to give ourselves just a notional deadline which is before our prime minister goes to the US and meets with the American president, we should have done at least this stage of the work, completed it and moved forward, so that the American industry, which is in a desperate need today of sustenance and support in terms of commercial agreements, would be able to accept that the decision that was taken by the US government was ultimately a positive one and useful one.

Do you see yourself working closely with the Japanese, Americans and Australians in strategic matters in Asia?

Well, we are happy to work with anyone. We don't want to exclude anyone. I think it is important that working with a larger number of people at least keeps one element very clear of our foreign policy which is that we will neither gang up against anybody nor become camp followers of anybody. We have strategic autonomy and that strategic autonomy gives us the freedom and gives us the opportunity to deal with anyone willing to deal with us on reasonably acceptable mutual terms.

What are your concerns in Afghanistan now with the Americans leaving? What did Mr Kerry tell you?

I think it is too early for the Americans to give us the full picture. Afghans themselves are unable to give a full picture. I have been to the Heart of Asia (ministerial) conference and apart from the fact that eveybody was clearly remaining committed to the future of Afghanistan, as we do, there are no clear roadmaps about what can happen during 2014.

We still don't know how the elections will proceed, we don’t know whether President (Hamid) Karzai will have a candidate to endorse or whether he will just want the political system to throw up somebody who is acceptable to some extent, not to the same extent that he was when he came.

Americans are still talking about - we still don’t know whether it will succeed or not succeed - about talks with Taleban. We have, as have other countries, flagged over and over again the red lines that were drawn for the future of Afghanistan and yet we don’t want to stand in the way of inclusive dialogue which President Karzai himself took an initiative on.

But because he and the Americans and the Qataris are not being able to get on to the same page, there isn’t very much that we can do at this stage, except wait for the dust to settle, for things to become clear and then see whether our formulation that whatever happens the peace talks must be Afghan-led, Afghan-owned and Afghan-controlled can be a viable step for future directions.

Mr Karzai has given you a long list of weapons he is requesting. Are you going to give them to him?

I think we are going to help with non-lethal equipment but I don't think we are either in the position to or willing to contribute lethal weapons right now.

The important elements of supporting equipment, transportation - which includes helicopters - I think we are already delivering a couple of helicopters. As far as those are concerned we are happy and willing.

But we think it is not advisable to go beyond that. It is a fragile area, there are stakeholders, there are other people. We don’t want to become part of the problem.

There are lots of people who have perceptions about the future of Afghanistan, if we can help Afghanistan without creating further problems for them, I think that would be a preferred way to do it. We are in touch with them constantly, and we are committed and have said very categorically, and we said it yesterday at the Asean meeting that we are not looking at exit routes for ourselves which means we are there to stay for a long term. We are very comforted by the fact that Afghans have confidence in us. We won’t let them down.

Pakistan after the elections? Is there any new movement?

There's a lot happening. But the actual dialogue, the resumed dialogue, has to be re-resumed because, as you know, there were events that caused matters to come to a virtual halt.

Many of the important decisions we were taking as confidence-building measures were, sort of, slowed down. Public opinion was, unfortunately, obviously against any attempt to have a meaningful dialogue with Pakistan. But the messages given out by the new prime minister both during and after the campaign, publicly as well as privately have been very positive and meaningful. We have also responded to that in a meaningful way.

Their urgency for supply of power and gas - we sent an experts team right way and they are now sending their team back to us. So we are already looking at one major area of importance to them. As far as the actual dialogue is concerned we will get back gradually. It is important to let them settle down, let them take stock of the situation. And hopefully start giving us signals that they mean business on those issues which are of immediate concern to us, and that includes accountability for the 2008 terror attack on Mumbai. That is something we can’t wish away and should not wish away.

You think this is not the same Prime Minister Sharif who started the Kargil War?

Kargil War is now history, we don't want to go into that. I think he, like anyone else, comes with a lot of experience and a lot of tough experience of his times in the opposition.

I think that he is showing signs of great statesmanship. He has certainly become a focal point of tremendous amount of hope in Pakistan. He has given out a good message all around. We are responding to it, with an open mind and in a positive attitude and hope that we can move forward rather than look back at what happened in the past.

Do you think the Indian prime minister will be able to visit Pakistan before the end of his tenure?

Can't say. I know he wants to go but if you want to go as a person you may not be able to go as a prime minister. Mr Sartaj Aziz (Nawaz Sharif’s special advisor on Foreign Affairs), when he met me, said he was very keen that the prime minister should find any excuse - be it his school, be it his village, be it any other excuse - to come to Pakistan.

But this is really a call the prime minister will take, I cannot predict and cannot anticipate anything. But obviously, I think the story would remain incomplete if there isn't a face to face meeting between him and Nawaz Sharif. But there has to be a considerable amount of background work done. Once that work is done and we place it before the prime minister, he will take a call.

How long along the road are you to doing that?

We work every day, we are working right now. People who are concerned with that desk are working now but it really depends on expectations on either side and the important points on which there must be some movement before we can go to the prime minister to say we have something to place before you.

Russia is still India's No. 1 arms supplier. The Russians and the Chinese are holding their biggest military exercises soon. How does India view that?

Well, we do exercise with the Chinese ourselves so why should we have a problem if somebody has exercises?

We do exercises with the Americans, Japanese, the Australians, we do it with Singapore. That is not a problem. That is a good thing to get to know each other and by getting to know each other being able to set aside inherent reservations that we may have about each other is a good thing, and we welcome it.

You are more than a foreign minister, you lead the Congress Party in Uttar Pradesh state. What is the situation in the ground in India now, do you see shifts on the ground?

We are all in a tumblewash right now, we are all being spun around because the whole nature of coalition politics in India is unravelling.

I think the experience of coalition for everyone has brought in positives and negatives and people are reassesing recreating platforms on which restructured coaltitions can be produced before the election.

I think everyone agrees it is still too early to move away from coalitions to break the coalition barrier, as it were, so we will have to continue to look at coalitions.

We have appointed senior leader Mr AK Antony to come up with coalition solutions. I think he is talking to leaders from different parties and Congress leaders from different states. We still don't know if he has come to any firm conclusions, he may be discussing it wth the Congress president, and in due course it may be known to us.

But we don't know of any major movement yet at least in my state of Uttar Pradesh where I would be able to say we probably have a particular inclination of a coalition.

The Bharatiya Janata Party's (BJP) decision to make Mr Narendra Modi their prime face of the campaign. Does that worry you?

No, it does not worry me, why should it worry me. They can get any leader and it should worry the BJP.

Why should it worry the BJP, they see him as a charismatic leader?

No, they haven't admitted the rest of them are not charismatic. So it should worry them, no?

What are the chances of early elections in India?

We still have a lot of work to finish. We have the food security bill, the land reform bill, the Unique User Identification Number still has to pan out. We have got a lot of things to do which are still in the pipeline, which are very important.

People talk about them as being gamechangers and so on. But we see them as very important delivery commitments that we have made in our manifesto. We should be able to do that before we go to the people. To go to the people and say that we didn’t have enough time at the end of five years is not such a good idea.

So we would like to go to the end of our five-year period and I don't think anybody else is asking for an early election either.

Even if it is a little earlier, it couldn't be this year?

Little earlier, little later does not matter. A month this way, a month that way, that is hardly something you need to talk about.

I was very impressed when I went to UP during the last state elections. There was a shift in the ground among the young. Even the Muslims, your own community, seemed to have dropped their antagonism towards the Congress and seem to be coming back.

I hope that is true. I know there is a lot of rethinking going on.

Elections do two things. They get the true opinion of the people out in the open but they also sometimes distort preferences. I think UP has suffered from distortion of preferences in the last few elections. What is important is to run a campaign in which the distortion will be as limited as possible and the true aspirations will get reflected.

I think between assembly and parliament elections we have seen a different attitude of the voter in UP because we lost the assembly and we won the parliament elections. I think, there is, prima facie, a difference of attitude in those two elections. But it is only prima facie. It has to be consolidated, worked upon. We will try to do that but it’s still too early.

You were the most articulate spokesperson for the party in the last couple of years on so many issues. How much has corruption hurt the Congress' image and how much will it affect the election?

One simple answer is to look at Karnataka. It is not corruption specifically that hurts the party. It’s a major issue in our country.
But corruption is almost like not having electricity. You can ask is shortage of power hurting Mayawati, or shortage of power going to hurt Samajwadi Party. Why don’t people not come out on the streets when there is shortage of power, when they don’t have power for 20 hours or they don’t have water. These are very important issues but there is a much larger combination that works during the time of elections.

What the so-called corruption can do is that it can sap up energy of a party and a government and cause it to be more vulnerable to electoral viruses. But I don’t think corruption is a killer virus.

Look at what happened in Karnataka. A lot of people will say Karnataka was a defeat of corruption. Maybe it was but it may also be defeat of corruption in combination with the breakup of the caste arrangement. The BJP was split. If the BJP was not split would they have lost due to corruption? It is a big question. Corruption is an issue that is important but it is important along with a lot of other issues.

When corruption becomes a major dent on the perception of good governance and responsible governance then corruption I think has a more damaging impact. But if it does not become a major dent on impressions of responsible governance then I don’t think it matters, a lot of corrupt people get elected. They get elected because it is the larger issue of responsible and responsive governance that matters. Whether that is correct or not correct is for a scholarly person to argue about.

But responsive governance is what people look for, not corruption or lack of it. If corruption becomes a detraction, a distraction for responsive governance then it can be lethal. Otherwise corruption is ignored, people come back.

But at the same time, with or without the possibility of it damaging your electoral prospects, combating corruption can be converted into an element of responsive governance. What really matters is responsive governance, which is only a part of responsible governance.

Do you think with the developments in India and within the BJP, the Left may be tempted to come back to the ruling coalition?

I don't know. I think the Left is completely lost. I think they are praying and hoping that the changing perceptions about Mamata Banerjee’s government (in West Bengal) will give them back what they have lost. I don't see a great deal of clear thinking in the Left right now. I hope they find their own place and know how to deal with people, etc. But right now, they are completely lost.

Are you welcome to having them back?

I am no one to welcome. As I said, Mr Antony will decide who will engage with us and who will not engage with us. Ultimately it will depend on the leadership and the equations that various groups can build with our leadership and to some extent the kind of groundswell support that they may have within the party. But it is too early to suggest who we will take or who we won't take.

What is being done to adress the small size of India's foreign service, which is comparable to those in Singapore and New Zealand?

We already have committed ourselves to doubling our service in ten years. Three years of those ten years are over. In ten years we will double the service and we have already increased the intake in the last two years. At one stage we had gone down to eight or nine new officers a year, now we are up to 30. So the intake is growing.

We will find other innovative ways of getting in people with their main knowledge in other sectors and bring them in a few years. They will work in Delhi and with one posting abroad. All that is in the pipeline.

Unfortunately, we have hit this air pocket of less money being available so this is a wrong time to say we want more positions, more posts, more structures but maybe in a year's time or two things will improve again and things will get back on track.

We in Singapore were quite interested in your choice of foreign secretary, whom you announced on Tuesday to be Ms Sujata Singh, current envoy to Germany. What was the criterion of that selection? Because there was also Mr S. Jaishankar, former High Commissioner in Singapore, who is very well regarded and many here were hoping he would make it.

There are some very good people in the foreign service at the top. But there has to be a much more of a convincing reason to overlook the standard policy of seniority. But somebody of seniority getting it does not mean that person is not outstanding.

People at the top are all very very good. There may be marginal difference between one or the other. But I think, by going by seniority, taking a a top person who is the seniormost does not upset general expectations that people have.

She will be the third woman to lead the foreign service and it is good to have our commitment to gender justice. If not in a positive way at least in a negative way we should not be undermining our commitment to gender justice.

She is an outstanding officer and has worked extremely well wherever she has served and she is the seniormost in leaps and bounds. It is only fair that she gets the job.