More assertive foreign policy required

By Anita Kaul

Relations between individuals and countries are not built upon the oft-stated rhetoric of mutual admiration, friendship and political similarities. They are built upon hard-core assessment of concerns and interests by individual countries who, then, go ahead to encourage, develop and sustain multi-purpose alliances with other countries sharing similar interests and concerns, irrespective of their political system, regimes and social structures.

Territorial interests have given way, during current times, to far more crucial ambitions, to control markets and economic resources, especially energy resources, as the guiding parameters of developing strategic alliances.

India, today, finds itself at a crucial juncture in a rapidly changing geo-political scenario. Old systems, power structures and blocs have broken down to pave the way for a new world order. This unipolar world scenario has the new proponents of Pax-Americana waving their military colours across the globe.

In the process, international institutions like the UN are being weakend and ignored and unilateral action is fuelling old conflicts and creating new ones. Globalisation has also helped in promoting ethnic re-assertion, fanned by the yearning by various groups for sharing economic and political power at both inter-State and Intra-State level.

This situation has spawned a variety of conflicts, which rage across Africa and Asia. Emerging from this volatile mix is the new breed of mercenaries banding together in their terrorists actions across the globe. To some, this appears as a shadow war between the Islamic beliefs and Muslim frustration (have nots) and Western values and interests (haves).

The contemporary international situation provides India little space to take either an idealistic or a moralistic approach in its foreign policy. The days of sitting on the fence are over. Neither can India look for a "trusting" hand of friendship, which could lead it up the right path.

If India's desired goal, becoming a major player in global politics, is to be achieved, it has to resort to a carefully structured, pro-active and assertive diplomacy. Innovative approaches and calculated risks have far more potential for success than rigid approaches and complacent attitudes.

India's (NDA's) foreign policy agenda, as spelt out in External Affairs Minister Yashwant Sinha's March 12, 2004 address, is to make efforts to spread its values and goals in the world. This includes: promoting democracy with in and amongst countries; promote India as a pro-active agent of peace; continue to strive for international equity and justice; champion of free movement of goods, services and persons across national frontiers; and set an example for rest of the world by combining democracy with economic growth and successfully managing its pluralistic society through an open, transparent and participative process.

However, what India needs to truly focus upon as its foreign policy objectives are: (1) Exploit its capabilities as a foremost global IT enabled services provider. (2) Convince nations that its stable political system and a vibrant growing economy has the right credentials to attract foreign investments:

(3) Build-up strategic alliances with countries in Asia and Africa to develop markets and secure energy resources. (4) Strengthen global alliances amongst developing nations to resist pressures and rulings of developed nations on crucial issues of agriculture and environment. (5) Develop regional alliances to counter threats to economic, food and territorial security from unilateral or multiple threats to sovereignty and security of alliances partners.

In the newfound bonhomie with the US in the post 9/11 scenarios, Prime Minister Vajpayee had termed India and the US as "natural allies". Though we share the same democratic and secular values, our concerns over the issue of terrorism have not been given due consideration and weight age, despite the fact that latest US Report on Global Terrorism points out that India has suffered more at the hands of terrorism than any other country in the world.

One should also not forget the not so subtle strategy for the US to contain India. It gave Pakistan the MFN status outside of NATO in military matters. While raising the issue of proliferation of nuclear weapons, it chose to downplay the clandestine role of Pakistan in transferring nuclear technology to Libya, Iran and North Korea.

Sops and soft words emanating from the US are mainly to secure the Indian markets and secular safety for Pakistan. In Bill Clinton's words, India can only be allowed to "be the right kind of giant." Colin Powell has further elaborated that Indo-American support hangs on India's support to trade liberalisation in the World Trade Organisation and opening of its markets to US exports. It is, therefore, essential that India take a wider and more balanced approach in developing international associations.

In view of the under current of developing economic trade and strategic rivalry and dissension between the US and the EU, especially France and Germany, India must reinforce and develop strong economic relations with EU. More so, when countries like France are supportive of India's quest for a permanent seat in the Security council.

India should focus on developing and strengthening multi-lateral systems, which reflect a better balance of power in the emerging world scenario. On the issue of energy security, India has already taken some positive steps by sidestepping obstacles in Pakistan and Bangladesh. India's tie-ups in Iran, Afghanistan and the Central Asian Republic have assured an alternative source of oil supply to the existing ones.

Attention has to be paid to augment these energy sources (supplies) by further strengthening our ties with countries in the African continent. This area has proven oil reserves of 90 billion barrels. India's past association with African countries, nurtured further by giving extended credit lines, would ensure a better economic deal for us in the long-term-both in oil as well as markets for Indian goods.

After years of conflict and suspicion, break through have been achieved by India in improving its relations with Pakistan and China. India should retain confidence in its military capabilities and nuclear deterrent capabilities to brush aside the fears and threat perceptions.

There is no harm in engaging ones neighbours in positive interaction. Already the relations with China have improved dramatically. Given time, even the regime in Pakistan can be coaxed to understand the ground realities and the benefits that will accrue to its people by ushering in peace and economic cooperation in the region.

India should take a similar approach in removing the apprehensions of its other neighbours, i.e., Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bhutan and Bangladesh. Bhutan has taken the courageous step of militarily stamping out anti-India insurgent groups operations from its territory. Bangladesh must take a cue from this development.

India must go all out to convince its smaller neighbours that there prosperity and internal political stability is invariably linked with developing and good socio-economic and political relations with its. India can unilaterally offer to help finance and develop key infrastructural areas.

The future lies in the east. India has already achieved several diplomatic breakthroughs in the ASEAN region by signing of several trade and security related agreements with Thailand and Singapore. The BIMS TEC initiative, if given the appropriate thrust and support, provides ample opportunity to weave together the capabilities and potential of countries like India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Nepal, Myanmar and Thailand. This forum can also act as a bridge for economic cooperation between SAARC and ASEAN.

The most crucial challenge for Indian diplomacy comes from west Asia. Our developing ties with Israel must continue to be strengthened. India can play a more pro-active role through its understanding of the concerns of Israel and the Arab world, and bear influence on both parties to resolve the Palestinian issue at an early date. India should be cautious in its dealing with the current situation in Iraq.

India should only go in, under the UN mandate. India can also win over the hearts and minds of Iraqi factions by unilaterally setting up medical centres and clinics, and provide the much-needed 'healing touch" to the people. India can also explore avenues to assist in non-military sectors, i.e., re-building of infrastructure, setting up Educational and Vocational institutions and training Iraqis in health and administrative sectors.

If our global foreign policy objectives are to be achieved, India has to come across as a capable, confident and unbiased player in international politics. It has to lead by example and should have the courage to take along others with it on the path of judicious global well-being. - CNF

US barbarism in Iraqi prison

By Allabaksh

The publication of pictures showing the brutal and inhuman manner in which US soldiers at Abu Gharib prison near Baghdad treated some of the Iraqi detainees has shocked the world. Iraq and the Arab world have been swept by a new wave of revulsion towards the Americans.

The US establishment, from President George W. Bush downward, is engaged in damage control exercise with no apparent success. The US-appointed Human Rights Minister in Iraq, Abdel Basset al-Turki, has already resigned, though he took the step in protest against the US military offensive in Fallujah and Najaf.

None of these developments really come as a surprise. In January this year there were 'rumours' of 'misbehaviour' with Iraqis at Abu Gharib prison, notorious for torture and execution of prisoners during the Saddam Hussein regime. In May last year, there were reports of several detainees at Camp Bucca being beaten by US soldiers.

Obviously the occupying US force in Iraq took little notice of such 'rumours' or reports. It has to be emphasised here that there are 14 prisons run by the US army in Iraq. So there may be 13 more Abu Gharib type abuses. Who will believe that the US invaded Iraq to rid it of brutalities perpetrated by a ruthless dictator and 'reform' Abu Gharib type prisons?

Even as reports of outrage against the barbaric acts at Abu Gharib were reaching Washington, the Americans were busy in soft-peddling the effects on its soldiers. There is, of course, a sense of shame within the US, but the official machinery is busy in painting it as an aberration and an exception. Bush has refused to apologise, thinking that the crime by his soldiers did not merit more than saying 'sorry'. Six US soldiers may face court martial, but seven officers who were also at Abu Gharib got away with lesser punishment of reprimand or admonition. A blame game is also on. The US army says the CIA had motivated the acts of barbarism on Iraqi prisoners so that they became 'mellowed' during interrogation.

Knowing the shadowy ways of the CIA, which has not hesitated to stage assassinations and coups to meet some questionable American objectives, it may well be true. But the American army cannot use the CIA as a shelter for its own follies and crimes as it does not have a shining human rights record. It was not all that long ago that the world watched with horror as US army, with loads of chemical weapons and other deadly gadgetry, humiliated the Vietnamese for years. But the dubious tradition of violating human rights blatantly for the sake of American Glory has continued unabated right into the present day.

Before the sordid pictures from the notorious Iraqi prison shook the world, there were regular reports of human rights violation by US troops in Afghanistan. This included reports of custodial deaths and random killing of civilians on suspicion of being Taliban activists or supporters.

And it is not as though it is only the US soldiers fighting others' wars in foreign lands who are prone to these violations. Human rights abuses are also perpetrated by civilian police forces within the US and the victims are almost always either the minority black community or coloured immigrants, including people of Indian origin. The police in the US has done nothing to stem the tide of hate crimes against Indians and other 'Arab-looking' immigrants even as US officials have failed in their exercise to win over Muslims in and out of the US.

The indignities heaped on immigrants and even naturalised Americans from the sub-continent and other Asian countries do find mention in the media now and then. The anger of the suffering community is also recorded. But human rights abuses do not stop.

In fact, with America suffering from an acute sense of paranoia after the 9/11 attacks, there is a definite move by the US administration to underplay, or even ignore, the seriousness of human rights abuses within the country. Visitors from India and some other countries are fingerprinted upon arrival in the US and they can also be detained for interrogation and questioning as though all of them are terrorists.

The beastly behaviour by the US soldiers towards the Iraqi prisoners may not be surprising but what makes it more galling is that the US never stops lecturing the world, especially countries like India, on respecting and observing human rights. After the end of the cold war, human rights have become one of the instruments to brow beat nations into submission to American dictates.

Most countries, India included, have shown to be vulnerable to this kind of US blackmail. China is the only exception. It is let off only with a few screams and shouts as acts like the Tinamen Square massacre have seen only an all-round upsurge in US-China relations. On the other hand, Myanmar continues to face US sanctions because of its poor human rights record.

For years, the US State Department has been critical of India's human rights record, particularly in Kashmir and oblique hints are thrown at New Delhi that if things do not improve Indo-US relations will be taken off the fast track. It is nobody's case that India or Myanmar or any other country should have the freedom to violate human rights and brutalise its people.

What irks is the application of double standards by the US. The US demands for itself an unfettered right to kill or torture those perceived as inimical to American 'interests' even when such people pose no real threat to the US mainland and its sovereignty.

The US will not allow even a shadow from outside to fall on the detention centre in Cuba where prisoners have been held for over two years without any charge. The US frowns upon requests from independent authorities to look into US its detention centres, but Washington is all the time ready to intrude into any domain in India and also asks the government here to treat its 'political prisoners' (called 'freedom fighters by America's staunchest ally) with kid gloves.

The US will not tolerate India dealing sternly with terrorists even as they pose a real danger to its integrity and sovereignty. The terrorists operating in India are an identifiable group, raised by another sovereign country (and a staunch American ally), whose avowed mission is to disintegrate this country. America goes about blindly in hot pursuit of its 'enemies', but will allow India to do the same.

The Americans go about using 'unprovoked deadly force' while hunting for people they do not like. The Americans just smirk over 'collateral' damages' as if only inanimate objects are destroyed by their troops.

When civilians are caught in the cross fire in Kashmir, the US administration and their human rights organisations train their guns on Indian forces. And displeasure is conveyed to the Indian government, which meekly takes the insult in its stride. That may be the clue as to why the Americans always get away with murder.

There is simply no concerted worldwide move to call the American bluff. One can only expect more stories and pictures from many other Abu Gharibs under US control. (Syndicate Features)