The UN’s unique legitimacy flows from a universal perception that it pursues a larger purpose than the interests of one country or a small group of countries.

The UN’s unique legitimacy flows from a universal perception that it pursues a larger purpose than the interests of one country or a small group of countries.

The reality is that international institutions like the UN can only be as effective as its members allow it to be.

We hope the world will act in the spirit of enlightened self-interest.

People who ask us when we will hold talks with Pakistan are perhaps not aware that over the last 55 years, every initiative for a dialogue with Pakistan has invariably come from India.

Global interdependence today means that economic disasters in developing countries could create a backlash on developed countries.

No state should be allowed to profess partnership with the global coalition against terror, while continuing to aid, abet and sponsor terrorism.

We believe that the United States and the rest of the international community can play a useful role by exerting influence on Pakistan to put a permanent and visible end to cross-border terrorism against India.

The Bio-diversity Convention has not yielded any tangible benefits to the world’s poor.

Our nuclear weapons are meant purely as a deterrent against nuclear adventure by an adversary.

There was an implicit conviction that the UN would be stronger than the sum of its constituent member-states.

You can change friends but not neighbours.

Poverty is multidimensional. It extends beyond money incomes to education, health care, political participation and advancement of one’s own culture and social organisation.

In the euphoria after the Cold War, there was a misplaced notion that the UN could solve every problem anywhere.

The overwhelming public sentiment in India was that no meaningful dialogue can be held with Pakistan until it abandons the use of terrorism as an instrument of its foreign policy.