Manmohan shuffles the
deck By Siddharth Srivastava
NEW DELHI - A cabinet shuffle within
Manmohan Singh's Congress-led government over the
weekend indicates the changing thinking of New
Delhi, especially to do with India-US relations.
In a significant yet unexpected change,
the high-profile petroleum minister, Mani Shanker
Aiyer, has been stripped of his important
portfolio, to be replaced by
another Congress loyalist, Murli Deora. Aiyar has
been given the Youth and Sports Affairs Ministry.
In another subtle yet important move,
Manmohan has chosen to retain the Foreign Ministry
and has not found a replacement for Natwar Singh,
who was forced to resign after the Volcker report
on the United Nations oil-for-food program scam
that saw him accused of corruption in dealings
with the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq.
Aiyer's exit indicates New Delhi is not
happy with his aggressive pushing of the
Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) gas pipeline that
Washington has been opposing because of the
benefits that can accrue to Tehran. According to
officials, the strategy of New Delhi is to
soft-pedal the IPI for now until a pending nuclear
deal with the US is complete.
Aiyer was
seen to be overzealous in trying to make his mark
through the IPI without consideration of the
macro-picture, wherein Washington has linked
anything to do with Iran with the nuclear deal.
This was amply clear in recent comments by David
Mulford, US ambassador to India, who said India's
stand on Tehran at this Thursday's International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) meeting would be
critical to the success of the nuclear deal
between the two countries.
The IAEA will
meet to discuss the possibility of referring Iran
to the UN Security Council over its nuclear
position.
Though Washington has tried to
distance itself from Mulford's blunt talk, the
writing is on the wall. There has also been
considerable reaction from political parties to a
report in a national newspaper that the US has
objected to New Delhi's decision to acquire an
oilfield in Syria in partnership with China.
Washington has accused Syria of "fostering
terrorism". If true, the report is being seen as
further arm-twisting of India by the US.
It has been said Manmohan is very keen to
push the India-US nuclear deal as he believes the
pact can catapult relations between the two
nations to a greater level. It can provide the
rapidly growing Indian economy access to an
alternate source of energy thus reducing
dependence on fossil fuels. It is felt that once
the go-ahead is procured from the US, other
countries such as France, Canada and Russia will
have no problem supplying nuclear fuel to India.
By retaining the post of foreign minister,
it is apparent Manmohan is keen to oversee the
nuclear agreement, which still could be held up by
the US Congress. He also wants to ensure that
whoever he appoints to the post will enjoy his
confidence as well as vision on Indo-US relations.
There are reports Manmohan wants Finance
Minister P Chidambaram to be in charge of foreign
affairs, while Chidambaram would likely to be
replaced by a well-known economist with whom
Manmohan has good rapport. These changes are
likely to be implemented next month after the
annual budget presentation and the visit of
President George W Bush to India.
Observers say Manmohan strongly believes
that should nuclear resources be opened to India,
it will mark the greatest achievement of his
tenure as prime minister, which will be remembered
by history. Though he maintains a public demeanor
of modesty, Manmohan, a professional economist, is
known to take a strong stand on issues he believes
in, despite talk about Congress president Sonia
Gandhi being the real power. She remains very
powerful and has been instrumental in the exit of
Natwar as well as the recent resignation of the
governor of Bihar, Buta Singh.
But her
interjections have been more in spheres that have
a direct connection with domestic political
matters and opinion. She has been instrumental in
a massive rural employment-generation exercise
being undertaken by the government as well as the
implementation of a comprehensive law against
corruption. This is in keeping with the Congress
ethos of being a party of the poor.
However, there is an equally large and
powerful section in the country that will judge
the government on other performance parameters.
Economic policy and strategic affairs, have thus
far been in essence Manmohan's domain, with Sonia
Gandhi involved more in handling the domestic
political fallout such as managing coalition
partners, primarily the left parties, whose
support is crucial for the survival of the federal
government.
The left prides itself on its
anti-US stand, which constantly irritates the
government, and has also managed to block several
economic reform measures, describing them as
anti-poor, which hits at the proponents of free
competition.
But Manmohan is known to have
a mind of his own and backs his beliefs. In 1992,
as finance minister, he pushed for economic
reforms and liberalization, and had threatened to
resign if not allowed his way. More recently,
angered by the protests against Indo-US air
exercises in West Bengal, a left-parties bastion,
he was reported to have threatened to dismiss the
state government if it did not ensure peace.
Despite saber-rattling by the left, New
Delhi has partially opened the retail sector to
foreign direct investment and there are reports
that the privatization of airports should be
implemented soon.
Ideally, Manmohan would
have wanted the Bush visit (in the first week of
March) to mark the culmination of a process that
began in July when the two signed a far-reaching
agreement to step up strategic relations,
including supply of nuclear know-how. Many
ticklish issues since have impinged on Indo-US
relations, and the ironing-out process, it seems,
will take much more time. Sorting out the nuclear
deal under which India is obliged to open its
civilian nuclear facilities to international
safeguards is a difficult matter.
This
month, US Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns
and Indian Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran remained
closeted for two days to thrash out the difficult
questions surrounding the nuclear pact. In the end
the meeting remained inconclusive, with the two
sides failing to arrive at any breakthrough.
There are also issues beyond the difficult
nuclear suppliers group and the non-proliferation
lobby in the US that is keeping a hawk eye on
India being recognized as a nuclear exception.
Apart from domestic politics and debates over
technical aspects of safeguards and separation,
delays have also been caused by the pact's being
dragged into Washington's expectations from New
Delhi regarding Iran.
The United States
and the European Union are seeking New Delhi's
support for a possible referral of Iran to the
Security Council, a move that again faces stiff
opposition from the left parties.
So far
New Delhi has been trying to broker on behalf of
Iran and was instrumental in buying more time for
Tehran at the IAEA meet in September despite the
anti-Iran vote, which the left severely
criticized. The November meeting of the IAEA
postponed action because of behind-the-scenes
lobbying by Indian officials. Matters had been
relatively quiet on this front, until this month
when Tehran removed UN seals from three nuclear
facilities, ending a two-year suspension of
uranium-enrichment-related activities.
Many observers say India should balance
its interests with Iran for fulfilling its energy
needs with the fast-improving relations with US,
without compromising on either. While Tehran needs
India for the vast market it provides for oil and
gas, a Reuters report recently said US companies
are mounting a multimillion-dollar campaign to
sell to Congress on the nuclear deal with India,
which promises a "bounty of opportunity" for US
business and strategic interests.
The
recent shuffle of ministers makes it apparent the
nuclear deal is top priority for Manmohan Singh.
Siddharth Srivastava is a New
Delhi-based journalist.
(Copyright
2006 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved.
Please contact us for information on sales, syndication and republishing
.)
