“We are the strongest supporters of civil nuclear energy for India”

In 2003, when Sir Michael Arthur was appointed as the British High Commissioner to Delhi, tension between India and Pakistan was quite palpable. A year ago, Western diplomats had left India fearing a conflict between the two nuclear warriors. Then things began to change. Sir Arthur was a witness to the thaw that swept South Asia and the growing warmth between India and United Kingdom.

Sir Michael told Hardnews about how UK was backing US efforts to help India access civilian nuclear technology. He categorically states that Pakistan is a proliferating country and does not merit similar preferential treatment. He was very happy with the way the strategic alliance between the two countries was playing out on the ground.

Sanjay Kapoor Delhi

This is your first posting to Asia. How has it been?

It has been fantastic. For a British High Commissioner, India is a great place to be in. The last two-three years in India has been particularly nice. And I keep saying to London, that it is a continent and not a country. India is changing dynamically.

How do you quantify these changes?

The buzz of change is affecting economy, education, science, IT etc. India is the eighth largest investor in Britain as 500 Indian companies have a base in Britain. It is an enormous change from the situation that prevailed fifteen years ago. The Indian Diaspora comprises 2 per cent of Britain’s population. NRIs are most successful of all minorities residing in Britain.

Even though it is about 60 years since India became independent from Great Britain, Indians have never nursed any hatred for its colonial rulers.  How do you explain this?

That is interesting. I think this has something to do with Gandhiji and the quality of his revolution, which was non-violent and peaceful. Our good relations are a legacy of that revolution. I think India’s first generation did a fantastic job in putting itself together after independence. It may also have some thing to do with the fact that Britain focused in India on areas of health and education.

Well, after the 1998 nuclear tests, people who watched the Indo-UK relationship thought it had deteriorated considerably.

We are in a much better position than we were in 1998. Since Pokhran, there is much better level of understanding. We did disapprove of the nuclear tests back in 1998 but we are working positively to give India civil nuclear energy and for it to join the world community. We recognise it now. There has been an ongoing debate on how to preserve the authority of the NPT regime.

Do close ties with United States and its offer to give India civilian nuclear energy upset United Kingdom?

On the contrary we worked quite privately with your government and the United States government. We are very much involved in that process because we now support it. We are the strongest supporters in giving India the technology for civil nuclear energy as we understand India’s need for it. And we support US president Bush in his recent interest in India regarding nuclear energy.

Pakistan has demanded a similar deal in nuclear energy.

That is a different situation. We do not approve of proliferation and it looks as if proliferation has happened from Pakistan to other countries. We are not interested.

Britain has contributed in providing a veneer of respectability and legitimacy to the US fight against terror, especially its attack against Saddam Hussain’s Iraq. A similar charade is being played out against Iran now. What are your views?