| |
The sense behind Delhi's
silence
By Sudha Ramachandran
BANGALORE - India's reluctance to condemn the
United States for its invasion of Iraq - though
condemned by several within this country for being an
unprincipled position - is expected to bring in some
rewards. While Indian businessmen are eyeing the
post-Saddam Hussein spoils, the government seems to be
aiming higher. It is hoping to a play a more significant
role in a restructured world order.
An official
in the Indian Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) told
Asia Times Online that while India is uncomfortable with
US unilateralism and the manner in which the United
Nations has been "all but destroyed", Delhi has crafted
its approach towards the crisis pragmatically rather
than emotionally. "We are keeping in mind the long-term
interests of the country. The government’s approach of
not condemning the US is to protect Indian business
interests in the region as well as to enhance its role
in the emerging international order," he pointed out.
According to the official, with India "making
adjustments in its approach to the ground reality",
Indian ministers and officials who have been interacting
with the Bush administration have been seeking "to
sensitize the US to Delhi’s concerns".
Topmost
on India’s agenda are the contracts it has won in Iraq’s
oil sector. Among them are the agreements signed by
India's Oil and Natural Gas Commission Videsh for
exploration of oil in southern Iraq and to develop the
Tuba oil field. This deal was signed last year. Now,
with a change of regime looming large, Delhi does not
want to be caught in a situation in which its interests
are harmed.
India is keen to play a role in the
reconstruction of post-war Iraq. There has been
considerable speculation in the Indian media over
whether the US has already promised India a share in the
post-Saddam spoils.
Based on an interview with
US ambassador to India Robert Blackwill, the Times of
India reported that the US is holding out to India the
carrot of a "major role" in the post-war reconstruction
of Iraq. Both, the MEA and the US embassy in Delhi
quickly denied the report.
Sources in the
Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry
(FICCI) say that Indian businessmen in India as well as
in the Gulf are hoping for a share in the lucrative
post-war reconstruction work in Iraq. Anil Agarwal of
the Indo-Iraq joint business council of the FICCI says
that while the big reconstruction work is sure to go to
US companies, "the subcontracting would come to India".
Indians in Kuwait believe that while American
companies will take the bigger contracts, the Indians
stood a good chance with the smaller contracts as they
(the Indians) would be able to provide cheap labor and
had knowledge of the local business culture. It is
estimated that even these "smaller contracts" would run
into hundreds of millions of dollars.
Unlike in
Afghanistan where India's ties with the Northern
Alliance came in useful when it came to playing a role
in the reconstruction, India cannot count on a similar
advantage in post-war Iraq. Not only have its ties with
the Saddam regime been good, but also it has not
interacted closely with any of the opposition groups
that could constitute the post-Saddam political
dispensation in Iraq. And with the US likely to be
determining who gets what in post-war Iraq, India is
hoping that its ties with Washington will bring in the
business contracts.
More important and less
talked about is the opportunity that India sees for
itself in a re-structured world order. Writing in the
weekly news magazine India Today, Indrani Bagchi points
out that "India is not unhappy with the international
rule book being rewritten because the previous system of
an impenetrable Western alliance had given it only a
marginal voice – in the nuclear order, in the UN, even
on terrorism. The cracking of the Western alliance may
impel a restructured UN with greater Indian clout, just
as a weakened NATO may increase its leverage."
Admitting that India did see a bigger global
role for itself in a restructured world order, the MEA
official pointed out that it would "certainly help India
to be on the winning side". "We are trying to get what
we can from what is, rather than keep lamenting over
what was or should be," he added.
There are
several concerns that cloud this rather optimistic
outlook. One is the impact of the war on the price of
oil and the fallout of that for the growth rate of the
economy. Much will depend on the period over which the
war extends. Another is the drying up of foreign
exchange remittances should the large number of Indians
working in the Gulf return home.
Then, Indian
traders who have been exporting to Iraq since 1996 under
the UN oil-for-food program face uncertainty over
payments that are due to them for goods already shipped.
There is a question mark, too, over outstanding orders.
With the withdrawal of the UN from Iraq due to war, the
oil-or-food program has been suspended.
Indian
traders who have been exporting wheat to Iraq fear that
post-war their old export contracts will be considered
expired and under new contracts that will be signed up,
American and Australian wheat exporters, who have been
eyeing the Iraqi market, will replace them.
There is also concern that the US invasion of
Iraq and the resentment it has prompted among Islamic
populations will fuel jihadi activity and that India
might suffer on this account. J N Dixit (a former Indian
foreign secretary) points out that this is bound to
increase terrorist activity in the Indian state of Jammu
and Kashmir. In an op-ed piece in the English daily,
Indian Express, B Raman (retired additional secretary in
the Cabinet Secretariat) draws attention to the
possibility of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction
falling into the hands of anti-India terrorist groups.
Indian officials believe that the "cautious
approach" the government has adopted towards the crisis
should help it weather the storm ahead. It is, after
all, wiser to hold the hand of the one steering the ship
rather than hanging on to the one who is drowning.
(©2003 Asia Times Online Co, Ltd. All rights
reserved. Please contact content@atimes.com
for information on our sales and syndication
policies.)
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
