India and the interim mess in
Iraq By Sultan Shahin
NEW
DELHI - India's new left-leaning coalition government is
faced with a major foreign-policy challenge even before
it has been able to firm up its ideas after its surprise
victory in the recent general elections. This challenge
is serious enough even to destabilize the Congress
party-led and left-supported United Progressive Alliance
(UPA).
The United States has launched a major
lobbying campaign asking Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's
government first to issue a note welcoming the latest
governmental arrangements being made in Iraq, hail it as
a genuine transfer of sovereignty, and then accede to
long-standing demands for sending at least 20,000 troops
to Iraq. The Communist Party of India (Marxist) or
CPIM-led Left Front has threatened countrywide protest
demonstrations if these demands are accepted. The UPA
government depends on the Left Front for its majority in
the lower house of parliament.
India's Ministry
of External Affairs (MEA) has reportedly told US
interlocutors that India cannot give any assurances to
Washington at this stage, and will wait for a United
Nations Security Council resolution recognizing the new
"government" of Iraq as a truly sovereign entity,
followed by the withdrawal of US troops. The US position
is that its troops will remain in Iraq on the request of
the new government. In fact prime minister-designate
Iyad Allawi, in what Washington has described as his
first "national address", has urged US troops to remain
positioned in Iraq, insisting that withdrawal will spell
"disaster".
The Left Front has made it clear
that it is keeping a close watch on developments
concerning Iraq. It has reportedly told External Affairs
Minister Natwar Singh that any compromise on this issue
will not be tolerated. When asked whether the US request
was being considered, Communist Party of India leader A
B Bardhan said: "No, of course not. If there is any such
move there will be a major movement of protest in the
country." He questioned the supposed "sovereignty" of
the new dispensation being given shape by the Americans,
pointing out that this was set to function under the US
and its 130,000-strong contingent of troops in Iraq.
Similarly, prominent CPIM leader Prakash Karat
said: "One of the lessons of these elections is that
people have not relished the [former ruling Hindu
fundamentalist Bharatiya Janata Party] BJP's craven
attitude to the US. The left campaigned vigorously
against [former prime minister] Atal Bihari Vajpayee's
stand on what is happening in Iraq, Palestine etc. There
should be a correction of the pro-US stand in the
foreign policy. The CMP [Common Minimum Program] has a
formulation which stresses that India will pursue an
independent foreign policy by having close and good
relations with Russia, Europe and China."
The
relevant portion in the CMP that Karat was referring to
reads: "The UPA government will pursue an independent
foreign policy, keeping in mind its past traditions.
This policy will seek to promote multipolarity in world
relations and oppose all attempts at unilateralism.
Traditional ties with West Asia will be given a fresh
thrust. The UPA government reiterates India's
decades-old commitment to the cause of the Palestinian
people for a homeland of their own. Steps will be taken
to withdraw Indian mercenaries from Iraq, while further
recruitment for this purpose will be banned. Even as it
pursues closer engagements and relations with the USA,
the UPA government will maintain the independence of
India's foreign-policy position on all regional and
global issues."
The Left Front leaders are quite
clear that the "sovereignty" being talked of is a "US
ruse to get international support without really
changing the situation on the ground". It is pointed out
that the new Iraqi prime minister, Allawi, was an Iraqi
in exile with known close links to the Central
Intelligence Agency and the US State Department. The
redoubtable Iraqi Shi'ite leader Muqtada al-Sadr has
totally opposed the proposed new government, saying, "I
do not want to do anything with this government."
In the first indication of New Delhi's likely
course of action, the Congress-led state government of
Kerala has turned down a United Nations request to train
Iraqi police personnel at its prestigious Police Academy
in Thrissur. "Since Iraq is under an occupational army,
we don't want to associate with the present dispensation
in Iraq," Chief Minister A K Antony said on Saturday. He
added that taking up such an offer would "go against the
very policies and principles of the country". The
proposal to train about 600 cops had come through the
Union Home Ministry run by former deputy prime minister
Lal Krishan Advani about two months back. The UN request
had also been forwarded to 16 other states.
Sensing the discomfiture of the Congress-led
government, the main opposition BJP is now getting set
to make the case for acceding to the US request. The
former ruling party had itself not been able to send
troops to Iraq because of widespread protests in the
country, despite Advani [now leader of opposition]
virtually promising to do so during a visit to
Washington. BJP ideologues are now calming to see "a
glimmer of light at the end of Iraq's long tunnel of
despair and discord". They are claiming that "a new
chapter has begun in the country's troubled affairs"
with the formation of a 36-member interim government
"which is meant to be a critical step forward along
Iraq's path towards restoration of full sovereignty and
democracy".
The point BJP leaders are going to
make is that, if Iraq's most influential Shi'ite cleric
Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani can accord a qualified
approval to the new government, why should India have
any difficulty welcoming the development? While making
it clear that it lacked "the legitimacy of elections"
and did not represent "in an acceptable manner all
segments of Iraqi society and political forces", Sistani
has said: "Nevertheless it is hoped that this government
will prove its efficiency and integrity and show resolve
to carry out the enormous tasks that rest on its
shoulders."
The problem with the government is
that while there is no harm in welcoming the new
development, this would make the denial of troops to
Iraq, when formally requested by the new "sovereign"
government of Iraq, that much more difficult. In view of
the general hostility in the country to the idea of
sending troops to Iraq, it is not yet clear if the
BJP-led opposition alliance would publicly demand that
India accede to the US request.
The US is
seeking troops not only from India but also from other
South Asian countries such as Bangladesh and Pakistan.
But the key to its success lies in New Delhi. Unless the
Indian government accedes to its request, other South
Asian capitals will not be able to do so either. US
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was in Dhaka on
Saturday for the same purpose amid huge protests
throughout the Bangladeshi capital. Rumsfeld left
Bangladesh early on Sunday after discussions on the
situation in Iraq; however, he did not ask for a
deployment of Bangladeshi troops there.
Bangladeshi Foreign Minister Morshed Khan ruled
out the possibility of sending troops to Iraq a day
before his visit, saying that Dhaka will not send troops
to any country "on behalf of or against anyone".
The key question for New Delhi, of course, as
the US too is beginning to realize, is the attitude of
the left. Left-wing leaders are not entirely opposed to
the idea of sending troops to Iraq in all circumstances,
but they have made it clear repeatedly that the
realities on the ground will have to be assessed after
the supposed transfer of power before India can make any
kind of commitment. The consensus in the Left Front
parties that had vociferously opposed the invasion of
Iraq is that: "A UN resolution is not enough. It will
have to be seen if the US is actually moving out of
Iraq, how free and 'sovereign' the new government
actually is, and what is the response of the people
there."
Another awkward issue for the
Congress-led government is the formulation of its
response to the US government's offer for India to join
the proposed National Missile Defense program, which was
openly favored by the previous regime. US Under
Secretary of Defense Douglas Feith said on Tuesday that
his country is still awaiting the UPA government's
response, though he added that it would be premature on
the part of the United States to expect an immediate
response from the new government in Delhi, as it had
assumed office only a few days back. However, the US
hopes the interaction on strategic issues including the
National Missile Defense program will continue, he said.
Feith was in Delhi last week to hold the sixth
round of Indo-US Defense Policy Group (DPG) meetings
with Indian Defense Secretary Ajay Prasad. He told
reporters after the first day of parleys on Tuesday that
India had to take its own decision to join the missile
defense program. The US would be happy to talk on this
issue and help, he added. The US official pointed out
that both countries had discussed in the past the threat
posed by missiles and the perception was appreciated by
the United States. However, India would have to lay down
the priorities in this regard, he said. The US
delegation also met with Defense Minister Pranab
Mukherjee and National Security Adviser J N Dixit.
Responding to a question, Feith said the issue
of India sending troops to Iraq did not come up in the
DPG, adding that US Secretary of State Colin Powell had
clarified some days before that it would be up to the
Iraqis to seek troops and help after sovereignty was
restored in the next few weeks. Dispelling the
perception that the Indo-US defense relations were
merely cosmetic and the US was unwilling to part with
high-tech items, he said President George W Bush and
Vajpayee had in January mapped out a historic strategic
agreement.
This was a step forward in the
direction of sharing high-tech knowledge and important
initiatives had already taken place, he added. Touching
upon the Indo-US strategic relations, Feith said both
countries had developed a multi-faceted relationship in
the past few years. However, there were some legal and
technical complexities involved and it would be up to
the new government here to assess the progress made so
far, he said.
While allowing the new government
to form an opinion on the US offer to include India in
its National Missile Defense program, Washington gave a
presentation on the issue at the meeting of the DPG that
concluded in Shimla on Thursday. The Ministry of Defense
said presentations and briefings on the National Missile
Defense program were made during the three-day meeting
of the policy group, which guides the Indo-US military
relations. A statement said that presentations by the US
were also made on other issues such as the Proliferation
Security Initiative, the Global Peace Operations
Initiative and the Global Posture Review. The US
officials also gave updates on the situation in Iraq and
Afghanistan.
On its part, the Indian side made a
presentation on the current Indian involvement in the
peacekeeping operations in the United Nations and
reconstruction work being carried out in Afghanistan.
The US officials were also briefed on the current status
of Indo-Pakistani relations. The Defense Policy Group
meeting was the first contact between New Delhi and
Washington after the formation of the Manmohan Singh
government. The two sides noted that there was
convergence of views on such fundamental issues as
terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction,
and security of sea lanes.
Meanwhile, the DPG
meeting would discuss strategic issues and review the
counter-terrorism requirements of India and
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The DPG
meet was also scheduled to discuss the entire gamut of
defense relations between the two countries, including
strategic issues, joint exercises, training and
acquisition besides security of sea lanes in the Indian
Ocean and peace and stability in Asia, a Defense
Ministry spokesman said.
This DPG was the first
one to be held after the Congress-led government came to
power at center. The DPG has met five times starting in
December 2001 and military-to-military relations between
the two nations have seen dramatic improvement in the
past few years. Owing to the improvement in ties, the
two countries have carried out joint training and
participation in US-sponsored multilateral events and
disaster-management and humanitarian activities, the
spokesman said. A general agreement on security measures
for the protection of classified military information
was also signed in January 2002 and a master information
exchange to facilitate exchange of defense research and
development as well as information was signed this
February.
In what observers have called "more
than a coincidence", the MEA issued one of its rare
statements on Iraq, on the eve of Feith's visit, saying
that New Delhi "notes with concern the deterioration in
the security situation which has caused the violation of
the sanctity of places of religious worship and
monuments of great cultural significance. We would
emphasize the imperative need to respect the religious
sentiments and cultural sensitivities of the people."
The statement referred to the damage to the holy Shi'ite
shrine in Najaf by US soldiers and that it had come as a
result of "pressure" by several members of parliament
belonging to the ruling coalition. According to
diplomatic observers, the fact that Feith, a top
official at the Pentagon and a close confidant of
Rumsfeld, as well as a star neo-conservative ideologue
in his own right, was not given an audience with Natwar
Singh conveys the strength of India's displeasure on the
mess in Iraq.
Meanwhile, the Indian Army is
preparing to send 1,500 troops for a new UN peacekeeping
mission in Sudan, but a senior officer made it clear on
Thursday that no such move was contemplated for Iraq. If
the Indian government did ask the army to move to Iraq,
it would be done, the officer said, but noted that the
new government was not enthusiastic about sending troops
to that country. "Nothing has come to us as yet" about
sending troops to Iraq, said Major-General R P S Malhan,
additional director general for staff duties in the army
headquarters here.
If the Indian government
cleared such a move, the "army will not be found
wanting", he said. But Malhan noted that Natwar Singh
had ruled out the dispatch of troops to Iraq under the
current circumstances prevailing in that country. The
minister has indicated that it would be difficult for
India to contribute troops for Iraq if they had to serve
under any flag other than the UN's.
Malhan said
the Indian Army would send about 1,500 troops, including
engineers, mechanized infantry and medical personnel, to
Sudan by December-January for a new 6,000-strong UN
peacekeeping force to be set up in the African country.
"A major chunk of the troops in this force will be
Indian," he said, noting that India is currently the
fourth-largest contributor of forces for UN peacekeeping
missions worldwide.
The Indian Army has
earmarked a brigade-size force, or about 3,000 troops,
for deployment in UN missions in case of any
contingency. Malhan indicated these forces would be
among those sent for any peacekeeping mission in Iraq.
"A three-month warning would be needed, and then we
would need to look at policy directives and the
objectives of the mission," he said. India, which has
sent 69,000 troops to 39 peacekeeping missions since
1950, currently has its forces deployed with UN missions
in Lebanon, Ethiopia-Eritrea and Congo.
(Copyright 2004 Asia Times Online Ltd. All
rights reserved. Please contact content@atimes.com for
information on our sales and syndication
policies.)
