« India on my mind... | Main | Blog Mela winner »

http://hindustantimes.com/news/181_1050098,00300006.htm
HINDUSTAN TIMES, OCTOBER 11, 2004

Us and the US Elections
Guest Column | Lalit Mansingh
October 10

Elections 2004 will put the next President of the US in the White House in January 2005. What are India’s expectations regarding the policies of the next President and what is the track record of the two candidates’ approach to India?

As a Presidential candidate in 2000, George Bush had difficulty in naming the Heads of Government of India and Pakistan. Yet, as President, he took Indo-US bilateral relations to the highest level in five decades. He was the first US President to proclaim India as a strategic partner. We have seen an eagerness to promote closer links in all the major areas of cooperation — political, economic and military. Today, the US perceives India as a global player with which it shares important concerns.

In the past four years, the US administration under George Bush has avoided sanctimonious criticism of India’s nuclear programme or human rights record or its policy towards Pakistan. Instead, there has been a quiet, friendly dialogue on all issues, with a focus on a truly bilateral agenda. A key element of the dialogue has been the inclusion of issues which till now were taboo: cooperation in space, nuclear energy, high technology and missile defence.

The last four years have not been consistently smooth. There have been major differences with the Bush administration, notably on their Iraq policy and the way the war against terrorism has been conducted. India disagreed with America’s unilateral military action in Iraq and turned down the US request for sending a Division of Indian soldiers to help stabilise Iraq.

India has also been baffled by the US refusal to concede that the terrorism faced by India is a part of the global terrorist network that America seeks to conquer. Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh articulated this when he spoke at the UN about “selective approaches and political expediency” in combating terrorism. The declaration of Pakistan as a major non-NATO ally immediately after talks with India was regarded by us as a breach of trust.

Let us now scrutinise John Kerry’s record on India. As a Senator for two decades and as an active member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he has known India longer than George Bush. He has also visited India. Yet, there is surprising little on record to indicate his views on India and its place in global affairs. Kerry’s remarks during the election campaign on two issues which concern India — nuclear non-proliferation and free trade — have heightened anxiety about India’s interests under a Kerry presidency.

When asked about whether he would support India for permanent membership of the UN Security Council, Kerry said that India would first have to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). This reflects a nuclear fundamentalism which is at variance with the Democratic party line laid down in Clinton’s time. In the Presidential Debate on 30 September, Kerry made it clear that nuclear proliferation was the single most serious issue facing the US.

Outsourcing has been the second issue that has seen sharp differences between the candidates. A Liberal Democrat who supported free trade throughout his political career, Kerry surprised (and disappointed) many of his sympathisers by the vehemence of his attacks on US companies which outsourced to countries like India. He has publicly vowed to punish these companies, through denial of tax and other benefits. If indeed this happens, it will be a serious setback for India’s software industry whose major market is the US.

Is Kerry’s attention-deficit on India shared by his Democratic Party? The answer, unfortunately, is yes. This is borne out by comparing the Platforms or Policy Statements of the two parties during their recent conventions in Boston and New York.

The Republicans were fulsome in their references to India as the world’s largest democracy, with which the US shared strategic interests, especially in the Indian Ocean region. They called for enhanced cooperation in space, nuclear energy and high technology. In contrast, the Democratic Platform’s only mention of India was advice to India and Pakistan to resolve their differences.

It is significant that when the prestigious Foreign Affairs magazine invited the leading thinkers in both parties to give their perspectives on the Foreign Policy priorities for the next President, the approaches to India was a study in contrast.

Senator Chuck Hagel, writing for the Republicans in the section on “Strategic Relationships”, advocated careful attention to four “vital relationships” — the EU, Russia, India and China. In a 15-page article written for the Democrats, Samuel Berger, National Security Advisor in the Clinton Administration restricted himself to a two-line observation that India was “emerging from generations of insularity and self-absorption”.

What then should be India’s expectations from the next US President?

If George Bush wins, we expect that the enormous progress achieved in bilateral relations will be pushed to yet higher levels. We expect the concept of the strategic partnership to be fleshed out and the next phases of the agreement implemented quickly.

The people of India have voiced apprehensions about the US doctrine of pre-emptive attacks, the unilateral military action in Iraq and the weakening of the institution of the United Nations. We would like the war against terrorism to be conducted with greater clarity and transparency. We would like to see rapid expansion of economic relations and hope that American investments are encouraged in our growing economy. And finally, we expect strong and open support from the US for India’s bid to become a permanent member of an expanded Security Council.

Our expectations from John Kerry would be, foremost, that he brings himself up to date on developments in India and the progress achieved in forging closer bilateral links. We expect the US to recognise the reality of India’s nuclear status and think beyond the punitive policies that damaged our relations in the past. We expect Kerry, as the leader of the largest trading nation, to proclaim his support for the principles of free trade and remove doubts about his being a closet-protectionist. The US President should see India as a partner in prosperity and not as an economic adversary.

Most Indians welcome Kerry’s stand that US military action in Iraq was a “profound diversion” from the war against terrorism. And that he will call upon the UN and the international community to join in restoring peace and stability in Iraq.

If elected, it is our hope that he carries forward the strong partnership between India and the US, which was initiated by fellow Democrat, Bill Clinton. May the best man win!

(The writer is former foreign secretary and ambassador to the United States)