The Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans is one of the most effective and articulate caucuses on Capitol Hill. Founded in 1993 by Frank Pallone and Bill McCollum, the caucus with 120 members, is today what analysts say "a full player in the dramatically improving relationship between the United States and India."

So when representative Jim McDermott of Washington succeeded Gary Ackerman as the Democrat co-chairman of the caucus in December last year, many saw him as the right man who would push for an aggressive Indo-US relationship and put the Indian-American community's agenda on top.

One of the most experienced and knowledgeable lawmakers of South Asian affairs, McDermott is not a stranger in India either. A trained physician, he has visited India more than 15 times since the late 1980s. Often his interest in the burgeoning incidence of AIDS in Asia has taken him to the red light areas of Mumbai and Kolkata, where he fears the dreaded disease is striking with a vengeance.

In an exclusive interview to Senior Associate Editor George Iype, McDermott says he wants to take the Indo-US relationship in a different direction and wishes to do a lot more on domestic issues -- immigration, healthcare, philanthropy and H1B visas.

With President George Bush at the helm, where do you see the Indo-US relationship heading?

I think that the relationship between India and the United States will continue to get stronger. American businesses are excited about the opportunities in India, especially with the new wave of economic reforms that Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee's government and others have proposed. Indian-Americans comprise a vibrant and energetic community at the forefront of science and technology, culture and entertainment in this country.

Furthermore, India has demonstrated that it is a good fit for the United States on a geo-political level. We have much in common, such as the rule of law and commitment to democracy. Therefore, it will be hard not to look at India as a close ally in the coming years. The connections between our countries are driven by more than the relationship between the man in the White House and the man at Race Course Road. There are many intriguing and exciting issues in which India and the United States have engaged each other.

Do you think the Bush administration is working towards keeping up the momentum created by former President Bill Clinton's visit to India and Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee's trip to the US last year?

From what I have seen, I think that the Bush administration is interested in expanding the friendship between India and the United States. Both the secretary of state and President Bush have expressed their interest in this. I have the highest regard for the job that Secretary Karl Inderfurth and Ambassador Richard Celeste have done, and I hope that their successors will continue their outstanding work.

Some experts felt that pro-Kashmiri and pro-Pakistani sentiments will get a boost in the current Bush regime?

I do not necessarily think that a boost in pro-Kashmiri or pro-Pakistani feelings will emerge. If there is a warming of the US-Pakistan relationship, I do not think that Indo-US ties will be harmed. I think that we will continue to engage and develop our friendship with India separately of Pakistan. Pakistan is not the only issue of importance to India; we have many issues of mutual concern.

Do you think the year 2000 was the high point of Indo-US relations? Now, what is the next stage -- what according to you, needs to be done next to further strengthen this relationship?

I think one of the most productive things that can be done now for Indo-US relationship is to continue the ongoing process of educating members of Congress, administration officials, and the American public about the complexities of India and the great potential for a mutually beneficial relationship between our two nations. The ties between our countries should be highlighted and enhanced by a presidential visit to India. I hope President Bush will decide to visit India very soon.

Do you foresee any major shift in the Bush administration's policy towards India?

The only policy shift that I expect the Bush administration to make with regard to India is a disassociation between sanctions and India's nuclear policy. I anticipate that the Bush administration will move fairly quickly to remove the US sanctions on India. This is one of the few areas on which I agree with the president. (Mcdermott and Ed Royce, the Republican co-chairman of the Caucus, introduced a bill in the Congress for the removal of sanctions on April 8).

How does the US view the ongoing détente, the cease-fire initiative by the Indian government in Kashmir? Is the US prodding Pakistan to respond to India's overtures?

When I was in Delhi on my last trip to India, I told Prime Minister Vajpayee that it takes a very courageous man to extend his hand in peace, and keep his hand extended. It is not possible to start discussions if neither party is willing to make the first step. I am very excited about the prime minister's actions, and I think that many people in the US recognize how encouraging they are. I do not know specifically if the US has "prodded" Pakistan, but I do know that I talked extensively about this subject with Pakistan's leadership when I visited Islamabad.

How do you think India and Pakistan should solve the vexed Kashmir problem?

This is one of the most complicated situations in the world. I certainly do not know all the answers, and I doubt anyone does. However, I think that both sides must be willing to sit down and talk. If there is no free exchange between the two nations, how can they ever hope to solve their disputes? I believe that interaction between India and Pakistan on all levels, not just political will begin to create a foundation of understanding. I believe that significant progress is possible when both sides experience more inter-personal interaction, more trade, and more press interactions. This is just a suggestion.

Do you think the South Asian subcontinent is the most dangerous spot in the world because India and Pakistan are proclaimed nuclear powers and are fighting each other without any end in sight?

No. I think South Asia is one of the most dangerous places in the world because of the potential destabilizing influences coming at the the subcontinent from every direction. 'Greater India' is a critical geographical point in the world. Not only is China to the north and militant Islamic fundamentalism to the west, it also faces a substantial challenge of drugs from Afghanistan, political instability from Central Asia, ethnic warfare from every direction, and population pressures second to none. Nuclear weapons are but one of the threats to peace in the region.

What does the Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans intend to do in the coming year? Ever since you took charge as the co-chairman of the Caucus in December last year, what are the major initiatives taken by you?

Since the beginning of the year, the India Caucus has accomplished a fair amount. We did not foresee the terrible earthquake in Gujarat, but we were able to rally support in the House and pass a bill expressing the sympathy and support of the Congress for India. This was one of the very first bills passed this year.

Immediately thereafter, Ed Royce and I traveled to India to personally view the destruction in Gujarat. Soon, the Caucus will be leading the fight to secure funds for India to help rebuild Gujarat. We also will consider introducing in the House a trade agreement between India and the US to help strengthen the Indo-US economic relationship.

You have said that you will continue working on the situation in Kashmir, AIDS, and "a variety of things people should know about India." "I start with the theory that people are ignorant about India, not against it." Can you elaborate on these comments?

India, as you know is a very, very long way away from the United States. Because of this, people in Washington do not know as much about India as they do about Europe or other areas of the world that are closer to us. Compounding this fact is India's history of non-aligned status. Consequently during the Cold War, the United States did not invest the same resources to gain an institutional knowledge of India.

I hope to do my small part to change this and to make the understanding of India a high priority of the Caucus. Only then can we truly forge a solid friendship. We are on our way, we just need to continue with what we have been doing.

What or how would you describe a successful Indo-US relationship?

I think a successful relationship means continuing the interactions among Indian and American leaders, business people and citizens that has led us to this point. If we stop communicating with each other on any level, our relationship will start to weaken. From all I have seen, we are in no danger of this happening.

As co-chairman of the Congressional Caucus, will you be putting India on the map for US trade and investment?

Yes, I hope to do my part. What route that takes is yet to be seen. The first item to be addressed is the revocation of sanctions. I also hope that we will be able to formulate a bilateral trade agreement that gives significant additional momentum to American investment in and trade with India.

President Bush has said that he is not going to push for ratifying the CTBT. How will this affect the disarmament movement?

Honestly, I do not know. To be truly effective, the disarmament movement must be a domestic undertaking. The people of India must want tighter nuclear controls, and the people of India must want India to ratify the CTBT. The United States cannot make those decisions for India. However, I am personally saddened and dismayed that President Bush refuses to consider CTBT for the United States.