FOREIGN POLICY: India
Published in B&E-08 MArch 2007
Diplomacy in times of war!
India’s needs to assert the independence of its foreign policy options and defy US pressure
They (the US) say, Iran is dubiously developing nuclear weapons; Iran is supporting terrorism in Iraq, and now the chief US military spokesman, Maj. Gen. William Caldwell wants us to believe that the Shi’ite militia leader Muqtada al-Sadr “is not in the country (Iraq) and all indications are, in fact, that he is in Iran.” Doesn’t all this humbug sound so familiar and similar to the perfidy which preceded the Iraq War? But why should India bother about a country (Iran) topping the “axis of evil charts” – rolled out by Bush. Such myopic arguments are often offered by Indian strategists, who see US as the center around which the entire universe revolves. However, in the dynamic world of international politics, a sovereign country like India just cannot afford to lay all its eggs in one basket. Perhaps, with this thought in the background – much to the chagrin of Bush administration – the Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee went on a two-day visit to Tehran. The principal outcome of the visit was that an agreement was reached on the issue of proposed 2,700 km-long Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline (on the import of Iranian natural gas not much headway was made). Deciphering the Indo-Iranian relations in tumultuous times, Professor S. D. Muni, the former Ambassador and currently, Executive Director-International with the Observer Research Foundation, speaking exclusively to B&E pointed out the three dimensions to Indo-Iranian equation – bilateral; Iran’s nuclear ambition and the US pressure (both on India and Iran). When asked to comment as to which dimension predominates the Indian policy formation vis-à-vis Iran, professor Muni, categorically replied, “The bi-lateral dimension should govern the thought process because Iran provides us with an access to the resource rich region of Central-Asia.”
On the face of it, India should not be much bothered about Iranian nuclear ambitions, because if we have learnt to live with the Chinese and Pakistani nukes then why should India fear an Iranian bomb? Logically, there is not much to worry for India, because Iran is still a signatory to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT) and India (not a party in the NPT) should have no reasons to pass moral sermons to the Iranian leadership. But as a friend and a close regional actor, India’s national interests demand that it must provide Iran with a picture of reality, and appraise it of the ill effects of aimless bombing by Bush, because any attack on Iran is bound to send the global oil prices to skyrocket – a condition surely detrimental to India’s economy & therefore, its national interests. But can India do anything to prevent escalation of Iran conflict? V. Krishnappa, a noted strategic analyst with IDSA, argues, “Let’s face the fact that India, (not a member of the United Nations Security Council) has limited leverage to influence either Iran or the US to see reason in dissolving the conflict amicably. All India can do is, hope that the probable war is averted.” Now coming to the third dimension, the US pressure on India, to go slow on trading with Iran, is surely apparent. Talking about Mukherjee’s visit, the US Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia, Richard, referred to a provision in the Henry J. Hyde US-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act (which mentions that the US government will seek India’s cooperation in isolating and sanctioning Iran). Beyond doubt, India seeks Iran for its energy security, Iran too intends to benefit from India’s rising economic might. But the US doesn’t want the geo-economics to dominate in the bilateral ties between the two Asian nations. The US wants that all relationships should be determined by the imperatives of American foreign policy. India needs to realise that the neo-cons’ dominance of the US administration is fast drawing towards a close, so there is no point in bending over backwards to appease the setting sun. Now is the time for India to show that it too has the stomach to assert its interests and determine the direction of its external policy.
They (the US) say, Iran is dubiously developing nuclear weapons; Iran is supporting terrorism in Iraq, and now the chief US military spokesman, Maj. Gen. William Caldwell wants us to believe that the Shi’ite militia leader Muqtada al-Sadr “is not in the country (Iraq) and all indications are, in fact, that he is in Iran.” Doesn’t all this humbug sound so familiar and similar to the perfidy which preceded the Iraq War? But why should India bother about a country (Iran) topping the “axis of evil charts” – rolled out by Bush. Such myopic arguments are often offered by Indian strategists, who see US as the center around which the entire universe revolves. However, in the dynamic world of international politics, a sovereign country like India just cannot afford to lay all its eggs in one basket. Perhaps, with this thought in the background – much to the chagrin of Bush administration – the Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee went on a two-day visit to Tehran. The principal outcome of the visit was that an agreement was reached on the issue of proposed 2,700 km-long Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline (on the import of Iranian natural gas not much headway was made). Deciphering the Indo-Iranian relations in tumultuous times, Professor S. D. Muni, the former Ambassador and currently, Executive Director-International with the Observer Research Foundation, speaking exclusively to B&E pointed out the three dimensions to Indo-Iranian equation – bilateral; Iran’s nuclear ambition and the US pressure (both on India and Iran). When asked to comment as to which dimension predominates the Indian policy formation vis-à-vis Iran, professor Muni, categorically replied, “The bi-lateral dimension should govern the thought process because Iran provides us with an access to the resource rich region of Central-Asia.”
On the face of it, India should not be much bothered about Iranian nuclear ambitions, because if we have learnt to live with the Chinese and Pakistani nukes then why should India fear an Iranian bomb? Logically, there is not much to worry for India, because Iran is still a signatory to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT) and India (not a party in the NPT) should have no reasons to pass moral sermons to the Iranian leadership. But as a friend and a close regional actor, India’s national interests demand that it must provide Iran with a picture of reality, and appraise it of the ill effects of aimless bombing by Bush, because any attack on Iran is bound to send the global oil prices to skyrocket – a condition surely detrimental to India’s economy & therefore, its national interests. But can India do anything to prevent escalation of Iran conflict? V. Krishnappa, a noted strategic analyst with IDSA, argues, “Let’s face the fact that India, (not a member of the United Nations Security Council) has limited leverage to influence either Iran or the US to see reason in dissolving the conflict amicably. All India can do is, hope that the probable war is averted.” Now coming to the third dimension, the US pressure on India, to go slow on trading with Iran, is surely apparent. Talking about Mukherjee’s visit, the US Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia, Richard, referred to a provision in the Henry J. Hyde US-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act (which mentions that the US government will seek India’s cooperation in isolating and sanctioning Iran). Beyond doubt, India seeks Iran for its energy security, Iran too intends to benefit from India’s rising economic might. But the US doesn’t want the geo-economics to dominate in the bilateral ties between the two Asian nations. The US wants that all relationships should be determined by the imperatives of American foreign policy. India needs to realise that the neo-cons’ dominance of the US administration is fast drawing towards a close, so there is no point in bending over backwards to appease the setting sun. Now is the time for India to show that it too has the stomach to assert its interests and determine the direction of its external policy.
No comments:
Post a Comment