Rajshri Rai (RR) Welcome to the ILRF platform. Can you tell us more about the mission for which you are in India currently?
Bart S Fisher (BSF) Thank you. It is my pleasure to be here, in the world’s largest and the oldest democracy. I am here on a significant mission which deals with establishing a bone marrow transplant registry for India. Bone marrow transplant is essential in cases of blood cancer. I understood its importance, and 41 years ago in the United States, I set up the bone marrow transplant registry. It is called National Organ Transplant and is located in Washington DC. I am a lawyer and a lobbyist by profession. So far we have done over a 1,00,000 matches off the registry.
Right now, India depends on the United States for its bone marrows and through this project India can have its own registry and be independent. To achieve this, we will launch a campaign called: “Swab For Life”.
RR: You are on a mission to set up a bone marrow registry in India. Cancer treatment is related to drugs and the international pharmaceutical industry is quite aggressive when it comes to protection of its IPR. India needs affordable medicines, but the pharma companies are unwilling to relent on IPR issues. It is a standoff point between the US and India. Can we expect a common ground to meet and resolve the issue of affordable life saving drugs?
BSF: In the United States, our system of intellectual property rights is just fundamental. Why? Because, we want to give incentives to brilliant scientists or the little 12th graders to invent things, invent new things. If you invent a new thing in America, then, under our patent law, we give you a monopoly, a 21-year monopoly. You get a patent, no one else can use it. So, the pharma companies’ argument is that they spend big money on R&D to develop new drugs.
The problem is the conflict between our IPR laws and the needs of developing countries in emerging markets. This is a huge issue for India, which is the largest producer of generic drugs in the world. The answer is what we call licensing. And if you have the patent in the US, you license it, but you cut a deal, the terms and conditions of each license. So, the big pharma companies in the US have to cut good deals, favourable deals, and in return, they get access to the Indian market. So, there is a deal to be made here.
The pharma companies are entitled to their patents because they spend billions of dollars to develop these drugs. But at the same time, the US government has to be cognizant of the difficulties of emerging markets. I think there has to be intellectual interchange between the two countries on IPR. But the answer is licensing.
RR: Trade disputes are threatening to disrupt ties between nations. For over seven decades, multilateral trading system has helped ensure stability and order in the global economy. How relevant is the World Trade Organization today?
BSF: We need a new trade organization that addresses the real problems of trade going forward, including telecom, digital, internet and e-commerce. You are in a different world now from 1947 when you had the Bretton Woods institutions established. Therefore, we also need to work with India more in the United Nations. I noticed that the UNDP has 4,000 workers here. I mean, there are a lot of areas where we can cooperate with India.
That is what I do. I do trade cases in Washington. It is an agency. We have an alphabet soup of agencies in Washington, 20 agencies that deal with trade: export-import bank, OPIC, DFC. I worked at the US International Trade Commission. My legal cases are there. There are dumping cases. If you think somebody has been dumping or countervailing duty, if you think someone has been subsidizing or infringing intellectual property rights, patents, copyrights, trademarks; all those cases are all at the International Trade Commission. And that is really where my practice is for my day job. And that is a very interesting legal practice because only lawyers are allowed to cross-question. I have a PhD in international trade. So, I am well-trained to do what I do, and I have always enjoyed doing it.
I also represent countries. I tell people I am just a country lawyer, I represent countries. I have represented nine countries since 2000 in Washington DC, including China, Israel, Dominican Republic, Suriname, Guyana and Panama.
RR: The US presidential election is scheduled for November 5, 2024. All eyes are on the big fight and its probable outcome. How do you see the things shaping up?
BSF: I know everybody here is interested to know what is happening in the United States’ elections. I believe the election outcome is going to determine the course of events between the two countries. The election in the United States will be a very closely fought affair. The outcome will essentially be decided by three swing states—Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Whoever wins Pennsylvania will win the election. If there is a tie, then the Republicans may come close to winning.
Another possibility is that Donald Trump loses popular votes, but wins in the Electoral College. The Electoral College is skewed towards small states and it is going to be Red States versus Blue States. So, it is entirely possible that we can have a scenario where Trump loses the popular votes, but wins in the Electoral College and that would not be a good outcome because it would promote discontent and litigation.
RR: The US presidential election will in many ways impact the India-US relations, affecting economic relations, strategic cooperation, etc. What are your views on the ties between two nations in the coming time?
BSF: Modi had a bromance with Trump. Modi had a bromance with Biden. When he came to Washington, he was treated like a rock star. Modi got a very positive welcome in the United States because it is a bipartisan thing. Both parties know they need India. We need India as a friend. We need India as a bulwark against China. Nations do not have permanent friends or permanent interests or permanent enemies. And it is in our interest that the United States and India work together. We have a relationship that is based on logic and should work well for both sides, regardless of who wins the presidential election in the US.
But the problem with Trump is his agenda has been America First and it is promoting isolationism; Biden has been more pro-alliances. I like the alliance route better. When you need them, you have friends,
and that is the importance of alliances. But we are working very positively with India on QUAD in terms of security. And I see more defence cooperation between the two countries.
RR: With more and more conflict situations in the world, how is the United States negotiating the problem areas?
BSF: The problem from the standpoint of the United States is that no matter how hard we try to leave the Middle East, we get sucked back in. Now you have a conflict in Gaza and that is a nightmare of the Middle East situation. You have a conflict in Ukraine, that is another nightmare. And the US is getting sucked back in, where we are giving enough weapons to Ukraine, not to lose, but yet not enough to win. So, it is a dilemma the US president has. The real action, though, is here in Asia. This has got to be the Asian century and this is the Modi moment. As for China, it has not acted as a responsible stakeholder in the international system.
RR: Recently, there has been increased tension between India and Canada. How is that going to impact relations between USA and India, considering that USA has close ties with both the countries?
BSF: The issue affects not only Canada, but the United States as well. Because attacks in foreign countries raises international legal issues of extradition, evidence gathering and fact finding. The government of Canada has not been very good about disclosing its facts or its basis for doing what it did, and that raises other questions. The government of Canada alleges that the government of India has not been very open about its intelligence practices, and I understand that, too. So, as far as the US is concerned, it is a matter of concern.
However, we just need to find out more facts and be guided by the facts and the evidence. But to find out the evidence, you have to be open about your sources of intelligence. And countries are very sensitive about that. So, this issue is not going to be resolved tomorrow because both the countries are sensitive about disclosing their sources and uses of intelligence. So, I need to say, as the lawyers would say, the jury is out on that one.
RR: You have talked about bone marrow and other things which are closely related not only with the quality of human life, but also human rights as well. How sensitive is the US towards infringement of human rights, especially when we are seeing bloodshed in the Middle East?
BSF: Human rights was actually brought to the fore in the US foreign policy by Jimmy Carter. He was the first president who made human rights an essential aspect of our foreign policy and made sure that human rights were upheld around the world.
Human rights can mean many things. It can also mean civil rights. In America, we fought for it. We still have not completed the civil rights revolution. African-Americans are still at the back of the bus in the US. Indians are also discriminated against in the US. So, civil rights is a huge issue. Even in the US, we are not there. This is still an imperfect union. And in India, you have the Dalits, you have untouchables, you have the class system, you have your own issues with human rights. And different countries have different human rights issues.
What bothers me is that now around the world, particularly in Europe and the US, you have immigration issues. And when you have these immigration issues and you have Mexicans, Central Americans, Nicaraguans, Costa Ricans and people from Panama and Salvador flooding the US, it causes great resentment. So, when you have families coming in who are separated at the border, it is traumatic. That’s what Trump did; he separated the families and a lot of those kids still have not found their parents.
RR: On a parting note, what would be your message for the budding lawyers or practicing lawyers in India?
BSF: I think my message to the budding lawyers will be—keep doing better what you are doing. We are all one human family at the end of the day. My message is that lawyers have a big role to play in bringing peace. Even if you don’t practice, it is a great training for whatever you do in the business world or elsewhere, because legal training teaches you how to think. It is a way of thinking. It is a thought process. At the end of the day, whether you are in business, law, medicine or research, it is a thought-process and you learn the facts, you apply the law, and you argue your case. You do that throughout life. So, I think it is a great discipline.
I am a fan of what I call joint degrees, where you learn to be good at different things. Like at Georgetown University, we have the JDMSFs master of science in foreign service and a law degree. So, you should specialize. Don’t just be satisfied with your law degree. Go on and study more.