Washington prepares for new Indian
'crew' By Seema Sirohi
WASHINGTON - Is the love affair over? The Bush
administration, which enjoyed surprisingly warm
relations with the outgoing Indian government, is
nervously wondering whether the change of guard in New
Delhi means a course correction in India's foreign
policy toward the United States.
As the shock of
the election results wears off - Washington, too,
expected the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party
(BJP)-led coalition to return to power - US officials
are getting down to a hard-nosed assessment of the
implications.
They are worried the new Indian
government might be more vocal against the war in Iraq
and less accommodating on a variety of trade issues. The
fact that the new Congress party-led government needs
the support of India's leftists to survive is giving
double vision to US policymakers. They are fretting
about the price the communist parties will extract from
the new government - from demanding more subsidies for
the poor to a greater distance from Washington. US
companies are equally worried about the new environment
for business. When US companies hear the word "communist
parties", they have a nightmare, one US official
commented.
The center of gravity in Indian
policymaking is expected to shift leftward from the
decidedly pro-market, pro-US stance of the BJP-led
coalition. The prospect of a shift has created a measure
of discomfort in Washington, where a unilateralist,
brook-no-criticism, you-are-with-us-or-against-us group
rules. George W Bush's White House was close to key
aides of the outgoing prime minister, Atal Bihari
Vajpayee, and the two sides consulted each other at a
political level often without the knowledge or help of
the two bureaucracies. The direct links helped push the
bilateral agenda of developing a strategic partnership.
The BJP was clear that India had more to gain by
hitching a ride with Washington than by floundering in
the seas of non-alignment and remaining consigned to the
minor league of international players.
But
Indian leftists oppose such proximity to Uncle Sam,
specially in light of the Iraq war gone horribly wrong.
Since they will play an important role in the new Indian
government, US officials worry about India taking a more
strident stand and returning to knee-jerk
anti-Americanism. They fear the left-wing parties will
force a slowdown of economic reforms and create an
unfriendly business environment. US officials point to
the quick race to the microphone by two leading Indian
Communist Party leaders just hours after the election
results, who declared their party was against
privatization of government industries and for more
subsidies. The Indian stock market immediately turned
jittery and went on a downward spiral. Portfolio
investors pulled nearly US$500 million out of India,
creating more uncertainty.
But the appointment
of Manmohan Singh as premier and Palaniappan Chidambaram
as finance minister has considerably calmed tempers here
because both men are highly regarded and seen as
committed to economic reforms. Singh is the "father" of
the economic transformation process he initiated in 1991
as the finance minister when the Congress party was last
in power and India faced a balance-of-payments crisis.
Chidambaram was then commerce minister and is credited
with taking the reforms further. The new appointments
have removed some anxiety among officials at the US
Trade Representative's office who were particularly
concerned about the future of India's trade policies and
Delhi's stand on starting the Doha round of
international trade negotiations.
While political
appointees in the Bush White House are bound to feel the
absence of Brajesh Mishra, India's former
national-security adviser who was key in crafting the
much-praised "strategic partnership" between India and
the United States, professional US diplomats seem ready
to establish contact with the new government in New
Delhi. State Department officials say they would like to
get the ball rolling to dispel any feelings the Congress
party might have about the "special" relationship
between the Bush administration and the BJP. They
expressed admiration for the smooth transition of power
despite the surprising results. "It is a great testimony
to the Indian system that it withstood the stresses and
strains with nary a sound. Of course we were surprised
by the results, but we deal with the hand we are dealt.
It is not our place to choose and our job is to build
bridges," commented a US diplomat familiar with India.
He pointed out that the "crew" coming in are not
completely unknown and that the strength of Indo-US
relations today is that they crisscross to different
levels and institutions. The strategic partnership - the
cornerstone of the new relationship - will remain the
same, he said. Under the strategic partnership announced
this year by Bush and Vajpayee, the US agreed to extend
cooperation to India in four key areas which had
remained out of bounds in the past - civilian nuclear,
space, missile defense and high-technology. The highly
technical and complex program of cooperation is still in
its infancy and some analysts fear there may be further
delays because of the change in government in New Delhi.
There are also questions in Washington about how
Natwar Singh, India's new foreign minister, will look at
Indo-US relations. He earned his spurs during the heyday
of the Non-Aligned Movement, and many US officials fear
he may be less enthusiastic about a close relationship.
In a party document released before the elections titled
"Security Agenda: Issues before the Nation", the
Congress blamed the BJP for reducing India to a
subordinate relationship with the US and failing to
counter Pakistan-sponsored terrorism in Kashmir. The
leftists will likely cite the document to force the
Congress to stick to its positions. Prakash Karat, a
heavyweight Politburo member of the Communist Party of
India (Marxist), has already demanded a "course
correction" to return India to an independent foreign
policy. He said India should not be seen as the "chief
agent" of the US in South Asia. Left-wing parties also
want a change in India's Middle East policy.
Under the BJP government, India developed closer
relations with Israel and moved away from strident
condemnation of its policies in the occupied
territories. Israel also has became India's
second-largest arms supplier. But the ice with Israel
was first broken by a previous Congress government,
establishing a foundation on which the BJP built. US
officials and Jewish groups in Washington are deeply
concerned about a rupture in India-Israel relations.
Reflecting those fears, the Washington Post said in an
editorial a day after the results: "The sharpest
discontinuity is likely to come in relations with the
United States and possibly with US allies such as
Israel." Apart from the pressure the left-wing parties
will surely exert, diplomats from Arab countries are
expected to work their charm to get India back into
their camp.
But Indian diplomats counter that
the pragmatic strain in Indian foreign policy today is
too strong to be removed under pressure from any one
group, specially a group like the Indian communists, who
remain sheltered in their little fortresses and have
little or no experience in national governance. India is
unlikely to abandon the path of pragmatism and
self-interest to take up causes once again that have
delivered little or nothing in concrete terms except for
debating points against Washington.
From early
statements by Natwar Singh, the new foreign minister, it
appears he assigns great importance to friendship with
the United States. While no radical departures are
expected in foreign policy, the rhetorical flavor may
change. On Monday, he said Indo-US relations should
follow a steady course and not be episodic. "We are two
great democracies. It is in our interest, in their
interest, in the interest of the world, that relations
between India and the US should be on a steady course
and not episodic," Singh told reporters after taking
charge of the ministry. He promised to "strengthen,
widen and deepen" the relationship despite
differences.
But at the same time, he was more
vocal about India's differences with the US than the
BJP, which had decided not to criticize US policies
publicly unless they directly harmed Indian interests.
"We have differences. We have differences on Iraq. We
are not in favor of troops going there. There is not
going to be any change on that," the new foreign
minister said categorically. When the US declared war on
Iraq, Singh's party was in the opposition and was
instrumental in pushing a parliamentary resolution
condemning the effort. Singh also repeated his
opposition to "unilateralism" - a doctrine honed into
sharper focus by the Bush administration. Another area
of difference might be the United Nations - an
institution revered by many Indians. Singh said his
party is in favor of strengthening the UN, not weakening
it as the actions of the Bush administration have
repeatedly done.
But in one foreign-policy area
the Bush administration has no cause to worry: Pakistan.
The new Indian prime minister has already given a
ringing endorsement to continuing the peace process with
Pakistan, and in this venture, the left will be
enthusiastically supportive. Washington's relief was
articulated by Richard Armitage, deputy secretary of
state, who said he had no reason to believe there would
be a "hiatus" in Indo-Pakistan talks. "In fact there's
every reason to be able to move forward, and we are
looking forward to that, and we are talking to both
sides about it," he added. The Congress Party
foreign-policy document talks of "credible, transparent
and verifiable CBMs [confidence-building measures] in
treaty form to minimize the risk of nuclear and missile
conflict with Pakistan or China".
Since the
election was won mostly on local issues and the
inability of the economic reforms to reach rural India,
there is little pressure from the voters to change
India's foreign policy.
Seema Sirohi
is a Washington-based correspondent.
(Copyright 2004 Asia Times Online Ltd. All
rights reserved. Please contact content@atimes.com for
information on our sales and syndication
policies.)
