The relationship between Europe and India reached a significant level at Marseille during the EU-India summit in September, especially because it was held in the midst of the worst part of the current financial crisis. It was important that Europe and India be able to send out a strong message of commitment to overcome the difficulties. And, it was during this summit that the question of a wider global summit on how to address the crisis was officially agreed upon.

President Sarkozy, as the president of the EU, strongly believed that we should gather not only G-8 countries but G-8 plus emerging economies so that a fair representation of the economic world of today be around the table to address this very difficult situation. It is his strong belief that you cannot address economic, financial or global matters today without the presence of emerging economies around the table. And we were very happy that the reaction of India was positive.

EU-India is about trade but it is about more than trade, trade is important because it creates jobs, it creates wealth and we are presently negotiating an important free trade agreement.

But one of the key messages from President Sarkozy and EU Commission President Barroso to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was that when you consider the values of Europe and the values of India you see the attachment of Europe and India to the rule of law, to multilateralism and to the idea that the world has to be led by principles.

When it comes to fighting climate change, to trade matters, to fighting terrorism, to addressing global diseases, we believe that we have to do it on the basis of shared principles and common agreements; that we have to do it by having everybody around the table agreeing on the measures which have to be taken. We think that the relationship between EU and India is bound to increase politically and economically.

The third element on which progress can be made between us is scientific, educational and cultural cooperation. There has to be more and more interaction among countries and continents in these respects.

When it comes to the India and France relationship, the two countries share a strategic partnership since 1998. We believe India and France can talk about absolutely everything. They can have a concrete relationship by which they address their actual needs in a very forthright manner. The first example of this has been our support to the candidature of India to a permanent seat at the UN Security Council. Then there is our belief that it was necessary to redefine the rules of the game when it comes to India in nuclear civil cooperation with the rest of the world. This strategic partnership was reaffirmed when President Sarkozy came to India on a state visit in January 2008 and by the nuclear agreement signed between France and India when PM Singh was in France. It is a major achievement symbolically and politically because it shows we have found a solution to a specific problem -- the impossibility to cooperate with India, in the nuclear civil field.

It is a win-win agreement in terms of non-proliferation worldwide, energy sustainability for India and worldwide and in terms of combating climate change.

President Sarkozy has been particularly forceful in saying we need to enlarge the G-8 as soon as possible, we cannot continue with a G-8 which is limited to western economies or developed economies. It has to open up to emerging economies very quickly and we are happy to know that the Italians who are going to host the next summit want to make progress on this matter.

The relationship between France and India is based on common values and principles. Politically it is based on mutual trust. Economically, it is progressing but we can go further by convincing French companies to invest more in India and for Indian companies to understand the potential of the French market even if it is not their natural, immediate market

•Shekhar Gupta: What is it that gives France its unique position in the world ? Somehow France is always treated differently?

Historically, if you look at the roots of the relationship between France and India you see that much of it derives from the fact that the fathers of independence in India had their inspiration from the French philosophers, Montesquieu, Rousseau, Voltaire, etc.

Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru, when they talked about their political inspiration, very often France was one of the sources of their thinking on freedom.

Secondly, President De Gaulle who took over in 1958, drew up a new Constitution; he redefined the relationship between France and the rest of the world by asserting the fact that France was an independent state ready to talk with every state on its merit and ready to address all situations with an independent point of view. This does not mean that we are not a western country, we are a western country. We are friends and allies of the United States and we are proud of it. We are building Europe -- it is one of the major achievements of the post World War II situation -- but we consider that each country, each civilization, each culture is to be treated with respect and in an equal manner and this approach is probably what makes us able to enter into a natural dialogue with so many around the world.

•Manu Pubby: Military ties between India and US are now increasing. Given that France has been a traditional supplier of defense equipment to India, will this be a problem for France?

The relationship between France and India is based not merely on business. When it comes to defense purchases, in France we always offer -- while respecting international laws -- the latest technology and when we sell something it is sold and we don’t hold anything back. That is why the Mirage 2000 is still equipping the Indian Air Force and will be modernized in order to continue its excellent services. If you look at the submarines contract, Scorpene, it is very important that the French company is transferring to India the technologies, the skills to build these submarines itself. We are doing that with our submarines and we are already doing that with other technologies. We think that the right to self-defence is the right of every country and, therefore, it is perfectly legitimate for a country which is peaceful and which reveals its commitment to peace, to develop a modern self defense capability.

What we are making sure of is to provide the best state of the art technology and technology which are proven by the use in the French Army. For instance, the Rafale is presently used in Afghanistan, so what we’re offering is a very modern aircraft , reliable in a military operation.

•Maneesh Chhibber. When will the expansion of G-8 take place, who are the likely candidates and how strong is India’s case?

Our President has talked about a G-13 or G-14. There are India and China but also some countries from Latin America, Africa and the Arab world. When is it likely to happen? For us the answer is as soon as possible, please, and we are working to convince our partners that the sooner the better. The economic summit on November 15 will be a G-20 like summit which already exists at the International Monetary Fund (IMF) at the ministerial or technical level but never before at the heads of state and government level.

If we don’t enlarge the G-8, we will have a body which will be less and less able to cope with global challenges. Look at climate change: China produces about 10 percent of the world emissions -- how can you pretend to address climate change without China? India’s share is growing rapidly and India is bound to become one of the major economies and emitters in the world. Can you pretend to have a deal on climate change without India?

Take the financial crisis. We have made sure that we address in Europe the question of liquidity, the question of the safety of the deposits and the question of the capability of banks to return, as soon as possible, to normal business. Now, we all see that there is also a global picture to be addressed. When you talk about financial globalization, you talk about the need for transparency, about the coordination of rules of regulation, the need for better more effective regulation of some credit institutions. How can you do that in an efficient manner, if you don’t have everybody around the table?

•Pranabh Dal Samanta: There is talk of a second Bretton Woods conference led by the IMF? What do you think?

After the financial crisis of 1998, steps were taken to address the question of transparency of the accounts of states. On the other hand, we have seen a couple of credit institutions, private credit institutions that because they were unregulated were able to develop their activities to a level of risk which has proved to be extremely damaging to the system. What President Sarkozy says is that you have to come back to the spirit and the goals of a market economy, that is to create wealth for the people, to create jobs and widespread prosperity. The goal of money is to finance the creation of wealth. So when the financial system is not aimed at creating wealth but is moving in an extremely speculative manner, then you have to correct it, you have to put stronger regulations in order to put the system back in a sound and sustainable way. We believe that the summit of November 15 is not going to be the end of the game; it will be the beginning of a process by which all the financial institutions which are accountable and responsible, starting with IMF, will have to develop appropriate answers to the situation.

•Coomi Kapoor: As far as India is concerned, Britain has always enjoyed an advantage over France. Please comment

Obviously, there are so many things that are reminders of the British past in India and these things are perfectly natural. For us, we have to find the way to be present in India and make India more present in France. We can do that by saying look, the world is wide, diverse and France can offer you access to a couple of things other countries will not offer. We are quite open to technology transfers and more open than many countries in the west to political dialogue, cultural exchanges, scientific cooperation. If you look at the history of nuclear energy in India or of space adventure you will find a very strong link between Dr Bhabha and Dr Sarabhai and France. Those links were so deep that even today the nuclear scientific community of France and India know each other very well and respect each other a lot. It is the same with the space community. When Dr Singh was in Paris we signed three agreements between France and India in space cooperation on questions which are key to the future of humanity. `Megha Tropiques’, the joint construction of a satellite between France and India in order to observe the evolution of the planet in tropical areas, is absolutely vital to understanding climate change and for forecasting the future of agricultures in this part of the world. This is the sort of things we are doing together, the sort of things you are not doing with somebody else.

•Coomi Kapoor: How did you lose the battle of the languages to English?

France has not lost the battle of languages! In today’s world, the key question is of diversity. If globalization means that the world is going to be uniform then it will not work. So you have to find a formula by which greater globalisation will mean more respect for diversity. You have to have common rules of the game but then if you don’t address the question of identities and the respect for identities then you are at risk. It is a dialectic that India knows particularly well because your constitution is based on this dialectic. It is also a dialectic that the European Union is learning: 27 countries with 27 histories, 27 languages to be put together and progressively made to work together more and more in more and more important sectors is not an easy achievement.

•Seema Chishti: What is your opinion of the different way in which France and India describe their experience of multiple identities and their secularism?

Both India and France believe in secularism. We believe that you cannot have an attachment to freedom, to democracy, to freedom of speech, within the rule of law if you don’t have respect for secular values. When it comes to the definition of secularism and how you implement it, each country has its own historical references. What we believe is that when it comes to defining your political identity as a citizen, one should not make any reference to religion, community of origin -- as a citizen you are a person per se as such and you are completely free, defined only by the relationship to the republic.

•Seema Chishti: What about religious symbols are they not part of this freedom to express your faith?

In France you are 100 per cent free to choose and practice the religion of your choice. Nowadays, the second largest religion in France is Islam after Catholicism. You also have Protestants, Jews, Buddhists -- all religions are 100 percent respected. In some instances, some people have tried to impose on secular institutions a religious bias and it has led to conflicts in schools, in particular. So what we have said is that in the French state-run schools, within the premises of public school, no distinctive religious signs should be worn by the children, simply because school is not a place where you debate each others religion but a place where you learn basic skills in order to fulfill your life as an individual. So we say during school, don’t wear any distinctive religious. After school, you can do what you want to do.

•Amitabha Sinha: Is ISRO a threat to Europe’s Ariane space programme?

We find it perfectly natural that with the improvement of Indian capacities, our companies would look the Indian option among other options. It’s up to Ariane to improve its own performance. But we don’t think there is anything like a monopoly anywhere.

•Manu Pubby: Has the Indian Government approached you for help on the Somalia piracy crisis?

We have an ongoing dialogue with India on the Indian Ocean. The international community is seeking ways to ensure that ships traveling in the Indian Ocean and especially around Somalia are safe and we are trying to work out how best we can ensure the safety and the security of those ships

But you have to make sure that your system, legally, is in place to fight piracy because you have to put together the basic principles of the freedom of the seas, respect of the sovereignty of Somalia and the need to be efficient when it comes to answering the threat of pirates. That is what we are doing and so is India.

•Subhomoy Bhattacharjee: Don’t you think that instead of heads of governments, heads of central banks should have come together to handle this crisis without political interference?

You and I belong to countries with democratic constitutions so do the Americans, so do most of the countries that will be around the table. When you have a serious problem, politically or financially, you need political leaders around the table. When we talk about strengthening the capability of IMF to answer the liquidity need of states, of regulation and supervision of regulation, can central banks do that? No, because IMF is based on an international treaty, IMF expresses the commitment of states toward financial stability worldwide. It is a political responsibility. That does not mean central bankers do not have to do something but that the responsibility is political because political power is the incarnation of the state, it is the embodiment of the people’s will. Central bankers act within their mandate but they cannot be asked to take a responsibility which is by essence broader and of a political nature.

•Seems Chishti: How do you see the world under a President Obama?

We are friends and allies with the US and we will work with him in the spirit of friendship which characterizes our relationship, while always keeping our freedom of expression and decision-making.

We are talking about a situation where the meeting of the G-20 is only the first step to tackling the crisis and strengthening the global system, We have a couple of other important questions. Concerning climate change, we need to find a post Kyoto system by which all the major countries will be committed to. Europe has said it will reduce CO2 emission by 20 percent by 2020 and by 30 percent if there is an international agreement. We expect other countries to show the same spirit of responsibility.

You have the question of peace and security. We will continue to tackle the question of Afghanistan -- we need to win against terrorism and we need to help the Afghan people to build peace, democracy, national reconciliation, human development.

It is clear that terrorism is continuing to be a global threat and we are going to continue to work with all partners, India and also many other countries, to strengthen our efficiency against it.

Overall, the agenda is very wide and we hope to evolve to what President Sarkozy called `mature multilateralism’. It means every country understands that we are inter-dependent, that our actions affect others and that we should act in the spirit of respect of the rule of law. That is one thing Europe is doing by creating the European Union and that is also one thing President Sarkozy is trying to do at the global level.

Transcribed by Solenn Poullennec