archive: America At Full Tilt
America At Full Tilt
Pramit Pal ChaudhurI
The Telegraph
July 8, 1999
Title: America At Full Tilt
Author: Pramit Pal ChaudhurI
Publication: The Telegraph
Date: July 8, 1999
Anyone surprised by Washington's decision to tilt sharply against
Pakistan during the Kargil crisis needs to wake up and smell the
post-Cold War coffee. United States anger with Pakistan proceeds
logically from its assessment of how best the globe should be managed.
Looking beyond Kargil, however, one can see embedded in this worldview
the potential for stronger and deeper Indo-US ties.
It helps to understand what the US, as the sole superpower, wants in
the world these days. It wants what historically any country or group
of countries desires when it finds itself numero uno in the world:
stability. This was true of the United Kingdom and the Concert of
Europe in the last century. It is true of the US after the Soviet
Union's demise. When the status quo puts you on top, you do want no
disturbances.
Bill Clinton's administration has not defied history. His first term
national security advisor, Anthony Lake, outlined a three part
doctrine on keeping the world steady: promote democracies, promote
free trade, stop weapons of mass destruction. Studies showed that
democracies did not fight each other and that a ticking global economy
ensured prosperity. Security could be guaranteed by the US military so
long as too many countries did not develop nuclear, bacteriological
and chemical arsenals. The US's first priority, Lake said, "is to
strengthen the core community of market democracies.''
The doctrine has been retouched over the years. The democracy bit was
finetuned to include opposition to ethnic nationalism a la Slobodan
Milosevic. The US also built an uneasy working relationship with
undemocratic China. The odd financial meltdown among the emerging
markets tempered free market advocacy. However, Lake's troika remains
largely in place.
To the White House, India - democratic and opening its economy - was
cut from just the cloth the new world order needed. In 1997, Clinton
ordered the state department to explore means to expand Indo-US ties.
New Delhi had other concerns and blew a nuclear hole in these plans.
Pokhran II clearly ran counter to Lake's third pillar. In Washington's
eyes, India went from possible hero to possible zero.
The accomplishment of the interminable Jaswant Singh-Strobe Talbott
talks was India persuading the US that the tests did not constitute a
threat to the post-Cold War order. India was not a rogue, it was not
out to rock the boat, it just wanted to be counted among the big boys.
The US was further reassured when India outlined a restrained nuclear
deterrent policy. Atal Behari Vajpayee also inched towards the
comprehensive test ban treaty and took a bus to Lahore.
The US was generally reassured by India's actions. It was assumed
Pakistan would follow suit. Instead, Islamabad ignored the nuclear
tests and stuck to its tradition of pulling risky rabbits from its
beret. Kargil was the upshot.
However, Pakistan's aggression was so blatant, its strategy so
foolhardy in a nuclear environment and its incursion so pointless once
Indian forces had secured the Srinagar-Leh highway, that the world
community was unanimously disapproving. Though the nonaligned
countries remained quiet, the West wagged its fingers. The US was
irate. Pakistan was more than rocking the boat, it was threatening to
breach the hull with a nuclear explosion.
As the hills came alive with the sound of gunfire, the US position
against Pakistan hardened. Pakistan claimed India had dropped bombs
across the line of control. The US said it lied. Pakistan claimed the
line of control was not demarcated. The US said rubbish. Pakistan
claimed it had nothing to do with the intruders. The US said nonsense.
Pakistan tortured Indian soldiers. The US asked for the post mortem.
Pakistan tried to get support for a ceasefire. The US blocked such
moves, even consulting China. Finally, the US placed a knife on
Pakistan's International Monetary Fund jugular.
Washington's reaction was not a matter of whimsy. The writing was on
the doctrine.
The endgame has begun in Kargil. The issue is where will India and the
US go from here. There are signs the US may try to pick up the threads
it had begun weaving before the Pokhran tests. Clinton is ready.
Talbott said the US president saw "India and the United States -
fellow democracies with highly developed entrepreneurial economies -
as natural partners.''
This spring, a state department analyst spoke to two senior Indian
journalists in Washington. The official said the US no longer sought
"symmetry'' in its relations with India and Pakistan. Pakistan would
focus on its internal problems. India, however, would play an
increasingly important global and regional role. The US would not
block its international aspirations. Washington wanted its strategic
dialogue - Talbott said with a "with a capital S and a capital D'' -
to continue even after the Pokhran detritus was cleared.
Strategic dialogues and partnerships are hallmarks of the new world
order. Treaty alliances are dead. Such dialogues stress soft issues
like values, institutions, trade, people to people stuff and frank
discussions to ensure differences are not allowed to fester because of
misunderstanding.
Will this worldview in which India fits so neatly survive Clinton's
departure? Probably yes. The US began tilting against Pakistan when
George Bush was in power. He imposed Larry Pressler's famous
amendment. Clinton painted on a canvas first sketched by Bush. The
continuity is still there: the two main contenders for the US
presidency both share Clinton's liberal internationalism.
The rival foreign policy school in Washington, the realists, believe
military power and alliances are the stuff of international relations.
Democracy and trade are side issues, atom bombs and geopolitics are
the final arbiters. The realists' attitude towards India ranges from
neutral to positive. None see India as a threat. Some even see it as a
counter to China or a regional power the US could ally with.
Most Indians will be suspicious. Cold War memories still linger. It
helps to recognize that the 1971 tilt against India also derived from
the then logic of US foreign policy. It was not about personalities
but interests. It is because the present US tilt against Pakistan is
derived from a similar, hardnosed calculus that it has the potential
to serve as the basis for a longterm relationship. Vajpayee had
declared in New York City last year that India and the US were
"natural allies.'' Kargil's greatest accomplishment may be its
clearing the air between the world's oldest and largest democracies.
Back
Top
|
