Your Excellency, to what extent is growing violence inbuilt. It is not just an aggregate of factors that, taken separately, project an image of growing violence, that is the system. I mean with the power of that technology, and the ability without technology to plan and become extremely powerful for our well-being, it often gets out of hand and acts to the contrary for our self annihilation. The point is that we can make mistakes. As long as what we plan actually happens we should (?) . But if once we make a mistake that gets out of hand, we are annihilated. So it seems to be a statistical certainty that someway down the road annihilation is more likely than the opposite.

Conflict has not really ended. What has happened is that we are subject to an artificial delusion about the end of conflicts, primarily because in the English speaking Western World, their experience of conflicts is one of many centuries of conflicts. They finally managed to resolve it, perhaps through fatigue, perhaps through the certainty of mutually assured destruction. But they came to the conclusion this is it. But if you reflect on the reality of what is today taking place in Central Africa, it is catastrophic. I took at my own neighbor and see what is happening in Afghanistan, it is a consequence of the direct conflict of interests of the two superpowers. The invasion of Afghanistan by the then Soviet Union The United States standing up to bleed the Soviet Union using a particular country as a platform for doing it. The consequence is what is there in Afghanistan. For 20 years that land has been subject to the most inhuman of possible torment to the innocent men, women and children. It is regressed back at least to the 11th century, and endeavoring to reach the 7th century as we are moving to the 21" Century. Who remembers Afghanistan and who even speaks? Therefore, it is the selectivity of concerns which persuade us to think that there is no conflict. There is a conflict just here next door. This cycle of violence and the disproportionate response that we are witnessing in Palestine is unacceptable. Why is this a matter of concern? Of course it must be a matter of concern. But I don't say parochially when I say the pain is any
less in Afghanistan. So, conflict, Sir, continues. Is there an answer to conflict? I think there has to be greater awareness amongst us who are there. We are not have-nots, we are perhaps have-nots in the material sense, but we are not have-nots in any other sense. And we have to relate to the rest of the world on equal terms with equal rights and with equal demands, and do believe that as this consciousness of what you term as have-nots arises, then the need for resolution of conflicts in our area will also emerge. Countless of times I reflect on the possibility that these conflicts are perpetuated only so as to make and keep the have-nots continue as have-nots. But I have not come to a definite conclusion about it. 

A question by Ambassador El-Raidi 

Would India support the establishment of a worldwide monitoring system to monitor and report on nuclear power stations? Whether these nuclear power stations are for peaceful purposes or otherwise?

Yes, we would unambiguously without any doubt. We are members of the IAEA. We are in the governing body of the IAEA. I shared this information earlier with my distinguished counterpart. India had the first nuclear reactor going critical in Asia, outside of Russia, in 1956. We have been punctual in observance of established norms of IAEA. Our distinguished scientists have been in the body, and will certainly support any such global initiative.

A question by Mr. Ahmed Al-Sokari from the Shura Assembly.

Thank you Your Excellency, I would like to extend my condolences and my great Admiration for your outstanding speech. Actually, I have a question here related to the strategic alliance between Israel and India. According to some authors and some writers, there will be alliance between India and Israel and this will include also Turkey because of this special relations between Israel and Turkey. Don't you believe that this will open the door for arms race and for blocking in different regions of the world. That is the first point. The second, concerning the Non-proliferation regime. I think, after India and Pakistan declared their nuclear power there would be arms race in several regions of the world. So how can we talk about the efficiency of the non-proliferation regime. Before, I think five years ago there will be, I think six nuclear powers and there will be members of the nuclear non-proliferation regime. Don't you think that after India and Pakistan declared nuclear Powers., there will be arms race not only in the Indian peninsula but in Middle East and there will race with more extra conventional weapons. So how can we talk about the efficiency of the non-proliferation regime, how can nuclear non-proliferation regime, the NPT. 

Let me answer the first part, your suggestion that there is any strategic alliance between India and Israel, is a total illusion and a canard that is spread. There is no strategic alliance between India and Israel. We do have diplomatic relations with Israel and we have trade with Israel as a number of countries have, but to classify that as strategic alliance is to do injustice to India's foreign policy, possibly also throws many doubts on the effectiveness of my publicity department, that I'm suggesting.
On the second aspect about the non-proliferation Treaty, we did not subscribe to the Non-proliferation Treaty when it came into effect in December 68, because we had rigorously imposed upon ourselves in India a regime of no testing. In fact, India was the advocate of the partial test ban treaty was the forerunner of the comprehensive test ban treaty, both of the ideas that India had strongly advocated. We had strongly advocated comprehensive test ban treaty and then in 95 the NPT, the non-proliferation treaty to which we are not signatories because we said it artificially creates a category of haves have-nots. The treaty of 1968 as a defining line, which in India's case should never have applied, because we had our first nuclear reactor in 1956. So, it is a very artificial line to us, and we definitely did not sign it. In 1995 when the NPT was extended indefinitely and without any amendments, we had to perforce take a stance in regard to the compulsions of national security. The aspect of it the suggestion that India's nuclear programme against any one particular country, is totally erroneous. India's programme is not 
Country Specific. It answers what I have just said, the complexity of the whole question of deterrence and if nations are  permitted to use this weapon of deterrence which is not a war fighting weapon it must never be a war fighting: weapon then a country with a population of one billion that India has, it becomes obligatory :for India to take certain necessary steps. We have thereafter clearly said as a nuclear weapons states of minimum credible deterrence. We have formally proposed in Nations a kind, of de-alerting of the nuclear weapons. NATO in the strategic review of April. 99 reaffirms the relevance of nuclear weapons. NATO is supposed to be a body that is really formulated in case Europe faces an aggression from Warsaw Pact  countries Now, there is no Warsaw Pact left, there is no Soviet Union left, so against, whom is NATO keeping itself armed with nuclear weapon against reaffirming the relevance of nuclear weapons? And NATO and the United  States of America and Russia have continued to follow a nuclear doctrine. You talk about Pakistan, arms race conventional, the question does not arise please Sir, do not reinvent, I think, the dead and the irrelevant physiology of the cold war years. Arms race simply does not apply in this case. On the first of January this year, Pakistan and India as per a treaty agreement exchanged information about nuclear installations in each other's country, because we are committed not to committing any strike against each other's nuclear installations. India's program is not country specified and we start from the premise that because these are Asian nations, therefore, they will automatically be irresponsible is for me an unacceptable notion.

A question by Ambassador Hossam Hawas

Mr. Minister, I will try try modify to modify or improve the last question, you have been kind enough to talk to us about global, regional and national security aspects. Here in this area we are seriously worried. We always think about Israel creating and enlarging its nuclear weapons and arms. There were a few month ago news about Indian Israeli cooperation. I don't say strategic cooperation in the nuclear field and it was said that Israel is doing some of its experiments through that cooperation with India. Could you kindly tell us if the news is true and if it is true to what extent that cooperation is? 

I think it is proper you should ask because these reports were brought to my notice too. I think these are born of a statement that was wrongly attributed to my distinguished colleague in the cabinet, the home minister of India, who had visited Israel and following his visit some statements were attributed to him. The statements that were attributed to him wrongly were carried and the minute he learnt of what was attributed to him and his clarifications completely denying that were not carried. Now that having been said let me assure you please, we have nuclear cooperation with the state of Israel. If you could reflect that if one of our nuclear reactors could go critical in 1956, then we have developed in India entirely on own, from the early 50s to now, in the last 50 years, by slow movement, a nuclear technology that is entirely indigenously Indian, and in this development, no country, no one, has given any assistance to India, we have not sought any assistance to India, we have not sought any assistance from anybody. We have despite not being member of nuclear suppliers group, London club or various other bodies observed impeccably every regulation of IAEA.

A question by professor Mohammed El-Sayed Selim from Cairo University

I think there is a fundamental change going on now in the framework of the Indo-Arabian relations. When we see reports in the Arab press that India is turning its back to the Arabs, whether it is true or false, it reflects a certain perception that there are some Arab intellectuals who feel that there is a basic change in India's foreign policy. This could be true or false. This is not the issue here, but the question here is perception and the countries and leaders act on perception rather than realities. The statement which attributed to Mr. Advani in Israel, you have confirmed that it was not the first time that statements like this were made in Israel and later on were denied. Mr. Jasjit Singh the Director of IDSA visited Israel in 1998 and he made several statements and later on he said it did not happen. Now it happened with Mr. Advani in June 2000. Now, the question is who is falsifying these statements. I remember the league of Arab states had called Ambassador of India in Egypt and expressed its deep concerns. I don't think there is a strategic alliance between India and Israel, but there are emerging distributing signs, which certain elements in the Indian government are trying to promote, and I don't want to pinpoint who exactly. I am sure that you are doing you best order to promote the Indo-Arab relations, but there are those no are trying to radically change or destroy the long-standing relations between India and the Arabs. I 'm also concerned about the debate that has been going in India concerning the question of the Babri mosque. Of course, there are increasing concerns in India about the emergence of Hindu fundamentalism and  we have the same problem in Egypt. But the difference between us is that there are those inside the Indian government who are supporting this fundamentalism. The statement concerning the destruction of the Babri mosque is an unfinished agenda is quite disturbing. They intend to build a new temple on that site. 3000 people were killed in 1992 when the mosque was destroyed. Now, I think if something was built on its top, I think this will have tremendous repercussions on Egyptian Indian relations and Indo-Arab relations. And I want you to assure me Mr. Minister that this will not because I'm for or against it, as this is for something for Indians to decide, but for because of its repercussion on the Egyptians, the Arabs and relations in general.

His Excellency's answer:- 

Thank you very much. You said two or three different things, one is about perceptions and reality, and you are suggesting that relationships between nations is depending more on perception than on reality. I am afraid Sir, it is not my understanding of the foundation of international conduct. If nation permitted themselves to be governed more by perceptions than the reality, then the diplomats of those two nations need to address this. Nations do not conduct international relations on perception. Yes, the relevance of perception is certainly a factor that we need to address ourselves to. You talked about the traditional Indo-Arabs relations. I don't see how they have altered other than your perceptions. Are you addressing perceptions in a truly unbiased fashion or are you being a victim of you own perception? To perceptions, I have no answers, but to reality I can answer. The trade that India has with Israel is less than the trade that Egypt has with Israel. Are we, therefore, to be faulted because we have trade, and the majority of that trade are related to agriculture. You can therefore fault India because it has trade with Israel. We have never in public or private complained about Egypt's neglect of India. It is not at all my purpose here, but let me point out to you that India is the second largest Moslem population in the World outside of Indonesia. We have more Moslems than any other country in the world. I have never heard from you Sir, if India is not, a member of  the Organization of the Islamic Country, then possibly injustice has been done to all the millions of Moslems who are in excess of 150 millions. They have been excluded as part of the Islamic nation of the World.

The relationship that India has with any nation is certainly not at the cost of any. Has there been any drift? I have just in the last six month had more visits to Arab countries and more visits from Arab countries than ever in the last 10 years. The chief guest at our Republic day has been a head of state of an Arab country. I have in the last fortnight had the honor of visiting 4 Arab nations and have been greatly honored and received, and I regret Sir, that despite all these efforts, you Sir, in Cairo University continue to harbor such perceptions. We are not a nation that subscribe to denomination and nationalism. The term Hindu fundamentalism is an error, because a Hindu cannot simply be a fundamentalist. It is not a faith that is born of a book or identified with one personality. I can deny God hood and still be a Hindu. I can purse any faith that I wish to and still be a Hindu. So, the question about Hindu fundamentalism in the phrase that you use simply does not apply so far as the secular character of India is concerned. It will remain unaltered and it cannot be anything else. Governance is secular, it cannot be anything else. You cannot have a road that is built for use by one faith and not by another faith, or development project or water or electricity. Governance has to be secular, it will be nothing else. So far as the Babri mosque is concerned, repeatedly it has been said, why should you be worried? We as government are committed to upholding the law of the land that will never be permitted to be broken. The matter is in the care of the court of law. Whatever the court of law decides, is the law of the land, we will follow it. There is no question of permitting anyone to build anything on that site. Please, I can only appeal to you as someone so responsible in you university, don't let perception cloud your judgment. 

A question by Professor Mustafa Kamal El-Sayed.

I would like to express my feelings about three issues. I would also like to convey my sympathy over the victims of the earthquake. And I would like to express my admiration for the achievements of your country in science, technology, agricultural development and industrial development. And I would like to express my admiration of the fine quality of your diplomats, and I hope very much that you will appoint to Cairo an Ambassador who is so confident as the previous Ambassador who has moved to South Africa. My question is, but I hope I'm mistaken, I listened carefully to your speech, but I don't remember that you mentioned Non-Alignment, the Group of 77 or the Group of 15 developing countries. Is this an indicator of the level of importance attached to these movements by the Indian Government? 

I would like to thank you for your words of sympathy. If you reflect on the theme of this evening, the theme that was given to me was about the security perception, regionally and internationally. Yes, I did not mention NAM or the G-77 as any security challenges, because they are not security related issues. If I had faced a threat from NAM or If I consider the G77 is a grouping that poses security problems, I would certainly have mentioned it. For you, therefore, to come up with the conclusion that my absence of any reference to the NAM or the G-77 is a departure is certainly not at all a correct deduction. It is simply because of the 
limitation of the theme and the limitation of time that did not permit me to do so. We are a member of the NAM, we continue to work for its vital movement. I have spoken, for example, about the haves and the have-nots, and globalization, but not the in the umbrella of the G-77, it is axiomatic, which other umbrella would be huge.

A question by Great thinker and writer Dr. Milad Hanna.

Your Excellency, I think it is a fantastic occasion for us to see you here amongst us and since the commentators before me have spoken about contemporary issues, which I am quite frankly not clever at. Therefore, I shift back time-wise and space-wise. Time-wise, I say that both Egypt and India are very old civilizations. Nevertheless, they looked historically including China as isolated civilizations. But; surely, digging down in history, we might trace some type of relationship between these 3 very big old agricultural civilizations. And probably at the 7th century, this could well be the foundation of the future, not about contemporary political problems, but I think about the problems of our peoples. And there is a great deal of similarity regarding the rural areas for example, The problems of development of the rural areas. You have a great deal of experience in housing in the rural areas. We do need that and probably you might need to know something about our experience. The question of bio-gas, the question of solar energy, many other issues. The West will never produce that for us. These are our problems and. probably, the big nations with intellectual scientific base could help in that respect. Therefore, I'm looking forward to the scientific progress: you have done in computer and software programmes. We trying to catch up with you, and I'm sure that negotiations respect would be largely welcomed by the Egyptian government. To cut a long story short, I go back to history to find bridges and common grounds of civilization and look to the future and real problems of our people, which I believe that scientific and cultural cooperation between India and Egypt would serve most of the underdeveloped world in bridging the gap between the North and the South.

Yes, China like Egypt and India is a great civilization, and it is a great civilization in part to the people's almost invincible, imperceptible strength as society. We need to build on that strength together. Yes it is our obligation somewhat.

India had on account of the unequal relation that we had with the British for three centuries almost, and really on account of the great wealth of India that flowed into Britain, missed the industrial revolution. We are now determined not to miss the revolution, which is now announced bv the arrival of the digital industry. So it is not simply informatics, it is pharmaceuticals, it is bio-technology, it is genetics, space. We are determined not to be left behind and the government and creative genius of India. We are ready to share with you both our mistakes that must not be repeated by others and what we have achieved. There are talks going on in this regard. We will do what we can between Egypt and India, as indeed some other countries. What is the great moral, economic and political issue of our time? I believe the great moral, political and economic issue of our time is fight against poverty. We have no option. Any government, which does not address itself to that is certainly failing in its primary duty. 

A question by Fatima Bassiouni 

Let me first courtesy before your tremendously enjoyable and insightful speech concerning post cold war security issues and post cold war disorder, as one might call it. The first part of my question relates to the thortetical issues you discussed . In this post-war world, this order we are living. What is the future role for Middle powers such as India, and the second part of my question relates to security specifically and one you face in Kashmir. We in the Middle East in the past several month have wreaked havoc with respect to the deadlocked peace process between the Palestininas and the Israelis, and now my question is what is your assessment of a route to negotiations and peaceful dispute settlement with respect to Kashmir? 

The first part of your question regarding the role of middle power. See the suggestion in your question. It is a kind of stasis. What obtains today is a degree of
permanence, in life as in international order as in international affairs to work on the certainty of permanence is a great error. I believe that as long as the United States maintains its economic, industrial and technological primacy, including the military, it
will continue to have the preeminence that it has, but it will strain the globe and the US very greatly. And I shared this view with my friends from the U.S. that it will be difficult to sustain this, as any kind of preeminence the world does not accept and reality does not accept. On the question regarding a settlement in Kashmir, we continue to believe that the answer to violence is peace. Violence has to be defeated by peace. We are set upon that cause. We persist in it, and we will be challenged but then the caravan of peace and amity has set on its path, There is an Arab saying which says if the caravan were to stop every time the village dogs bark, it will never reach. We have to persist. 

A question by H.E. Ambassador of Zambia

Thank you your excellency. I would like to join my colleague to convey most profound condolences on the massive loss of lives following this grave calamity. I would like also to thank you Your Excellency for this very inspiring speech and not only inspiring but it is also well-balanced and non-controversal, and my question is , Your excellency, is that recently as senior American official in Washington or New York was addressing African Ambassadors and among other things he said that the Non-aligned Movement was no longer pertinent as far as the modern times are concerned that message has been ringing in the minds of a lot of us, and I would like to hear your views since you are one of the senior or co-founders of this movement.

Thank you Sir for your question and let me share with you a historical fact. When the movement was launched and the initial founders India, Yugoslovia, Malaysia, Egypt. Even then questions were raised about the relevance of the Non-aligned movement. This question has been raised every time since our movement came to existence. And I believe and India believes and continues to believe in the continuity and relevance of the Non-aligned movement. You can say that after all NAM was away from the two powerful blocks so what are you now aligned with. So as I came to another example, the NATO was a reaction to Warsaw Pact. Now, that there is no Warsaw Pact, why does it continue to be in existence. Every such organization redefines and rediscovers for itself the aspects of relevance, I think the NAM as a continuing relevance and we need to be quite clear in our minds about it. Notwithstanding what some observations could be, we will not be deflected from our purpose. We will continue as a grouping of the have-nots of the world. And even that fact of the grouping - the voice of the have-nots of the world-continues to have a relevance.

A question by Dr. Fawzy Hamad 

Before I ask my question, I would like to join Dr. Shaker in expressing our welcome and thank you very much to give us the opportunity to share with you your valuable thoughts. 

My question is Islamic terrorism or Moslem fundamentalism, sometimes associated as some times referred to by officials or politicians. For us in this part of the world, it is sometimes misleading and even offensive to associate particular religion with terrorism. I would like to know your interpretation of what you mean when you speak about Islamic terrorism? Does this refer to local insurgencies? Or you have a wider interpretation of it? If you have a wider interpretation of it, does India involve itself in combating what you call Islamic terrorism? 

No, I think, there would be a great error and even greater and graver injustice done If on account of the manifestations of terrorism, which is a reality, the great faith of Islam. was considered as such . That has never been India's position. It simply cannot be. We have as I have just said the second largest Moslem population the world are our citizens. They are equal citizens, they have equal rights and the question of treating a faith in just one color certainly does not apply. Certainly, there is no such thing, but there is such thing as terrorism. India has today been subjected to it and it is a reality, it is encouraged. And it is, I believe, a negation of faith. It does not subserve faith. Will India work?. We have proposed in the United Nations a comprehensive convention against terrorism and it received support. We have not called it Islamic terrorism, it is against terrorism and all its manifestations, and please be disabused of this sentence otherwise your observation is entirely justified.

Ambassador Mohammed Shaker commented

May I add that in Egypt, also, we have put forward before the United Nations a proposal for a convention on terrorism. We are very supportive of it. 

A question by Dr. Fawzy Hamad.

Your Excellency, let me express my great admiration to the great early vision of India to go into science and technology, the determination to go this way and the capability to manage it. First, nuclear revolution, you mentioned 1956 Aspara reactor, which was really based on self-reliance, Indigenization to the extent that you built your nuclear power plant by 90% Indian and you have gone even now into nuclear desalination. My question is related to your nuclear capability. I understand the motives for India to go nuclear which led to the nuclearization of the subcontinent in the 1998. I would like to know if the subcontinent has become more secure after nuclearization, especially that it did not inhibit the military conflict over Kashmir? I was really worried if this escalates what would be the fate of the subcontinent? And also in deterrence mistakes can take place, miscalculation can take place and this can lead to nuclear war. 

What you term as the nuclearization of South Asia in 1998, what happened in 1998 was that what was implicit became explicit. You simply cannot conduct nuclear tests whether with reaction or without a reaction unless a great deal of preparations have taken place including in physical terms the digging of bore-wells, which has to go in many depth. Therefore any suggestion to make that India nuclearized the region in 1998 flies in the face of facts, for repeatedly, year after year, successive US presidents failed to testify before the congress as they are required by law that one of our neighbours is not a nuclear state, and within days of India conducting test, as a reaction to it, someone is able to conduct tests in the barren hills of Chagai in Baluchistan, then what was implicit became explicit.