NEW DELHI, April 15: The United States' suggestion that India ``continue to exercise restraint'' on its defence and security postures seems to have made an impact - at least temporarily - with New Delhi agreeing with Washington's vision that ``we do things in moderation.'' United States Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia Karl F Inderfurth confirmed to mediapersons at the Indian Women's Press Corps here today that the visiting US delegation had emphasised to its interlocutors in the Capital the need to exercise restraint in nuclear and missile matters.Inderfurth, who also let slip that President Clinton would visit India probably in November, criticised the firing of the Ghauri ballistic missile by Pakistan, saying it was a ``regrettable action.'' He said the topic had come up in the talks here and that Washington had also conveyed its concern to Islamabad.But he did not share one reporter's view that Pakistan was ``a failed state,'' saying the US ``does not take such a pessimistic view'' ofthis country. He pointed out in fact that Islamabad continued to bear the brunt of Afghanistan's long civil war, with more than three million drug addicts, and that it was trying hard to get the warring Taliban and Northern Alliance factions to come together for peace.Asked how the US would react if India went nuclear, Inderfurth replied: ``We have been reading about that.(but) actions that are taken are the important measure.New governments should be allowed time to take office.''Meanwhile, official sources in the Ministry of External Affairs, commenting on the talks between the Indian government and the US team led by Clinton's personal envoy Bill Richardson, said, ``There was progressively greater recognition on the part of the US that India is moving forward. we're conveying that India is a serious country, we do things in moderation, especially on security issues.''But the sources pointed out that in response to the US team's pressure, New Delhi had determinedly said that ``India, like anyother country, looks after its interests in a sensible manner (taking into account) our geographical parameters and then takes action.that is a fact not a debate and we notice it is being recognised.''The sources added that both sides recognised there were ``strategic commonalities'' to be built upon.Both nations have, however, effectively agreed to disagree on India's claim that it has a legitimate right to be a permanent member of the Security Council. While Richardson said Asia must decide on its representative, New Delhi insisted that it deserved to be there.Interestingly, Inderfurth, at his press conference, accepted that India's security concerns needed to be looked at in a wider framework in the region, and could not be restricted to its western neighbour.``We understand India's compulsions and respect its security concerns. We see India has broader security requirements as a major power, and not only in this region,'' he said, implying that China fell within New Delhi's ambit of securityconcerns.
