| |
Indian diaspora gains muscle in
Washington
By Ramtanu Maitra
Not long ago, the Pakistan lobby was accustomed
to steamrolling over the weak Indian lobby in
Washington. Then a favorite of the Cold War warriors of
Foggy Bottom and the Pentagon, the Pakistan lobby had a
grand old time pushing the "pro-Soviet" Indians off the
Hill. Such days belong to the past.
Now, Capitol
Hill has hardly a good word to say about Pakistan. And
some events in India, which would have angered US
congressmen and senators in bygone days, leading them to
issue strong verbal denunciations, if not demand the
imposition of sanctions, nowadays go virtually
unnoticed.
This drastic transformation was
neither automatic nor magical. The 1.8 million-strong
Indian diaspora in the United States, established and
prosperous, played a major role in bringing about the
change. Other factors include the steady deterioration
of Pakistan's internal security situation and the
American realization that both the Taliban and al-Qaeda
- the two much-feared enemies of the Americans - enjoyed
the patronage of many, including the most powerful, in
Pakistan for many years. Not to be underestimated is the
"fear of Islam" drummed into American minds since
September 11, 2001.
Formally established in
September 2002, the US India Political Affairs Committee
(USINPAC) put itself on the political map in May when it
successfully lobbied for an amendment to the House's
US$3 billion aid package for Pakistan that pressures
Pakistan to stop Islamic militants from crossing into
India. Proposed by a powerful member of the 143-member
India Caucus in the US Congress, Gary Ackerman (D-NY),
the amendment called for an end to US assistance until
Pakistan stopped cross-border attacks in the disputed
state of Jammu and Kashmir and gave up weapons of mass
destruction.
Flexing of muscle
Ackerman, a ranking member of the House
International Relations Committee, withdrew the proposed
amendment after he was persuaded by the White House that
it did not serve US interests in fighting terrorism and
promoting peace between India and Pakistan. But what is
important to note is that Ackerman and the USINPAC were
not making empty threats: they had the capability to
push through the amendment, and the White House knew it.
In place of the Ackerman amendment, the India
Caucus, led by Eni Faleomavaega (D-AK), sponsored an
amendment titled "Section 708. Report On Actions Taken
By Pakistan", which was adopted. Accordingly, for the
next two years, the president is required to prepare and
transmit to Congress a report describing the extent to
which the government of Pakistan has closed all known
terrorist training camps operating in Pakistan and
Pakistan-held Kashmir, has established serious and
identifiable measures to prohibit the infiltration of
Islamic extremists across the Line of Control (LoC) into
India, and has ceased the transfer of weapons of mass
destruction, including any associated technologies, to
any third country or terrorist organization.
India caucus
The US India Political
Affairs Committee, which liaises with the India Caucus
in the US Congress, now works closely with the largest
caucus in the House. The objective of the USINPAC is to
see that the India caucus proactively engages with the
Indian American community. Such a call was issued during
the occasion of the first India Caucus Day organized by
USINPAC at Capitol Hill on February 13.
USINPAC
organized India Caucus Day to promote the development of
a concerted plan to address the issues that concern the
Indian American community. These issues include
business, national and international security issues.
Talks were held with the newly appointed co-chairs of
the Caucus, Joe Crowley (D-NY) and Joe Wilson (R-SC), as
well as with Ed Royce (R-CA) and Jim McDermott (D-WA),
the past co-chairs.
For instance, Joe Wilson
told USINPAC recently that he would urge Congress to
build strong defense ties with India, adding that the
past divisions due to the Cold War were long over and
that the time was ripe to enhance strategic and defense
cooperation. Wilson further exhorted the Indian American
community to work more closely with the Republicans as
they control both the Senate and House.
USINPAC's Manish Mathur, an investment banker
from New York, urged lawmakers to level the playing
field for US defense contractors to sell to the growing
Indian defense procurement market, at a time when
Britain, France, Germany and Russia are eager to
strengthen their presence in the Indian market.
This will create jobs in the US and strengthen
bilateral US-India relations, Mathur says. USINPAC's
incorporation of business and commerce in the drive to
improve Indo-US ties is one of the reasons for its
success. By contrast, the Pakistan lobby's emphasis has
always been negative, preoccupied more with blocking all
attempts to improve US-India relations, rather than
strengthening Pakistan-US ties.
Multiple
objectives
It is evident that one of the major
objectives of the USINPAC is to weaken Capitol Hill's
support lent to Pakistan. When the House took up the $3
billion aid package to Pakistan, USINPAC delegates urged
lawmakers to link US aid to Pakistan with that country's
pledge to permanently end infiltration of armed
terrorists to India. USINPAC delegates pressed home the
point that ending infiltration was in the best interests
of the people of India, Pakistan and the US. Joe Crowley
and Joe Wilson were united on the issue of ending
infiltration permanently, and said that Pakistan's
actions will need to be watched carefully.
That
the USINPAC is not anti-Pakistan and the AIPAC's support
is merely coincidental is not accepted by the Pakistan
lobby. Faiz Rehman, the president of the 3,500-member
National Council of Pakistani America who looks after
Pakistan's interests on the Hill, claims "the alliance
is specifically aimed at Pakistan, aimed at harming
Pakistan's interests in this country". But, according to
USINPAC executive director Sanjay Puri, his group is not
anti-Pakistan, but in the Kashmir and other
sub-continental issues, the group looks after the Indian
interests. Referring to the AIPAC's support lent to the
amendment proposed by Ackerman, Puri says that the
Jewish groups campaigned on behalf along with USINPAC
not because they have any interest in Kashmir, but
because they support India's concern about cross-border
terrorism.
In the US Senate, Sam Brownback
(R-KS) has taken an active role in developing US foreign
policy concerning India, Pakistan, Central Asia and
Iraq. Brownback routinely seeks input from USINPAC about
ways to jump-start free trade negotiations with India.
Additionally, as a friend of the Indian American
community, Brownback emphasizes the need to dispel the
perception that India is a difficult country in which to
do business.
USINPAC urged Brownback to support
the formation of a "Friends of India" group in the
Senate, much like the India Caucus in the House. The
Senator has assured USINPAC that he will take action in
this matter. The Senator was urged to back India's bid
for permanent membership of the UN Security Council. It
was pointed out that the US is the only Western country
among the UN Permanent Five that has not supported
India's bid.
Recently, USINPAC urged Brownback
to prevent any attempts at the federal level to ban
outsourcing of IT services overseas, much as the state
of New Jersey has done. US consumers have saved billions
of dollars through outsourced services, and such laws go
against the principles of free trade. The acute shortage
of qualified personnel in the US healthcare industry is
also an interest area of the USINPAC: the committee
recommends that medical technologists and nurses should
be allowed to immigrate on special category visas, such
as the J-1, to cater to the needs of an aging
population.
Nobody can deny that the India
Caucus, and USINPAC, have made their presence felt in
Washington. Reports indicate that immediately after
Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage returned from
a visit to India to brief New Delhi on the president's
proposed national missile defense system, he briefed the
caucus.
The just-resigned US ambassador to India
and an important individual in George Bush Sr's think
tank, Robert Blackwill, met caucus members before he
left for New Delhi to discuss his agenda and had pledged
to further improve the US-India relationship.
At
the same time, the India Caucus has its own critics. The
influential pro-India Congressman Jim McDermott, in a
recent interview, alleged that although the caucus is
one of the largest of its kind, only a fraction of its
members are committed to helping the community or making
a tangible contribution to improving Indo-US relations.
The majority only pay lip service to caucus goals.
McDermott, the former co-chair of the
Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans, says
the community is being taken for granted by many
lawmakers, particularly those who claim to be members of
the caucus. A case in point, McDermott says, is the
number of times he and another founder-member, Robert
Menendez, had tried to win congressional appropriation
of $120 million for earthquake relief in Gujarat in
2001. He pointed out that even an amendment seeking $20
million could not win the required support. Influential
Republicans like Benjamin Gilman of New York and Ed
Royce of California - both prominent members of the
India Caucus - refused to co-sponsor it, since the
administration convinced them that seeking such an
appropriation would complicate President George W Bush's
tax bill.
The role model
During May's
intervention on Capitol Hill, USINPAC members sported
lapel pins sandwiched between flags of India and Israel.
As one reporter described it, "Women in saris mingled
among men in yarmulkes, a cacophony of accents united in
a desire for access. Despite their obvious differences,
the alliance has the potential to magnify the voices of
two communities that are small in number - about 5.2
million Jews and 1.8 million Indians - but highly
educated, affluent and attached to democratic homelands
facing what they increasingly view as a common enemy."
Rich and powerful Indians in the US have for
years admired the special relationship the American
Jewish community enjoys with top-level American
politicians. They have observed with envy that a
disproportionately large number of American Jews
routinely occupy very high positions under both the
Republican and Democratic presidents. And they have
noted their ability to get elected in significant
numbers in the House as well as in the Senate.
Like Jewish Americans, Indian Americans are a
small minority of the American scene who are not only
highly qualified academically, but also put the highest
premium on education and family values. Both groups
possess significant wealth and excel in their
professions. Until recently, however, most members of
the Indian diaspora considered political activities for
immigrants taboo.
The realization that political
intervention in the American political scene is a
powerful tool for success came gradually, as the
community gained in strength and awareness. The role of
the Jewish American community in this has been critical.
"I think Indian Americans see the American Jewish
community as a yardstick against which to compare
themselves. It's seen as the gold standard in terms of
political activism," is how Kumar P Barve, majority
leader in the Maryland House of Delegates and the
highest elected Indian American official in the country,
puts it.
The Jewish community across the country
donates generously to political activities, both
individually and through more than 120 political action
committees or PACs as they are commonly known. The PAC
members rise up as a solid flank whenever any American
president dares tell Israel to curb settlements or show
restraint. They ensure that the annual $4 billion-aid
package to Israel remains untouched, regardless of
budgetary constraints or how Tel Aviv deals with the
Palestinians.
The pro-Israeli PACs are linked to
a single lobbying group, the American-Israel Public
Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, which guides them on policy
issues, alerting them of any plan organized by House
members on any issue that may affect Israel's interest.
Campaign donations from the Jewish community to any
candidate depend to a large extent on where the
candidate stands vis-a-vis Israel.
The Indian
Diaspora, impressed that AIPAC makes this work in a
democracy as complex and powerful as the US, actively
sought to replicate the feat. In the past year the
American Jewish Committee has held two training sessions
in New York, showing the ropes of grass-roots lobbying
to about 80 Indian Americans from around the country.
Many are blunt about their desire to emulate American
Jewish groups.
Watching how the AIPAC functions,
and learning by joining hands with the group, USINPAC,
Indian Americans' first clearing house for political
contributions, has begun to move forward. The money
supported seven politicians this past election on the
basis of their stand on immigration policy, relations
with India and policies affecting Indian Americans in a
post-September 11 scenario. USINPAC gave more than
$50,000 in campaign donations to the selected
politicians, and six of them won.
But it's just
the beginning. USINPAC's efforts to secure American
approval for the sale to India of the Arrow
missile-defense system jointly developed by the US and
Israel have yet to succeed. Hopes that during the
September 9-10 visit of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon to India that the deal would be announced were
dashed. It is evident that the Bush administration
considers Pakistan is not only a strong ally in its "war
on terrorism", but also a necessary partner to help
resolve the Afghanistan imbroglio, and cannot afford,
under the circumstances, to appear to be rewarding India
at the expense of jeopardizing the security of Pakistan.
(Copyright 2003 Asia Times Online Co, Ltd. All
rights reserved. Please contact content@atimes.com for
information on our sales and syndication
policies.)
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
