Author: G. Parthasarathy
Publication: The Indian Express
Date: May 26, 2004
URL: http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=47632
Introduction: It's time the communists
coloured their foreign policy with realism
National security and foreign policy
issues attracted little attention during the agonisingly long electoral
process. This was not surprising. Successive governments have adopted policies
that have enjoyed a broad national consensus. There are few who could fault
recent measures to normalise relations with China and Pakistan and to embark
on a process of accelerated economic integration with our partners in Saarc
and Asean. While the NDA lauded the accomplishments of the Vajpayee government
in these areas, the Congress was critical of its opponents for a lack of
preparedness to deal with the Kargil intrusion and of Vajpayee's repeated
and inexplicable flip-flops on relations with Pakistan.
The Congress has promised to implement
the Kargil Review Committee Report and give the uniformed services their
legitimate say in management of national defence. Reiterating its commitment
to a time-bound, non-discriminatory plan for nuclear disarmament, it promises
to "fine tune" the higher command for India's nuclear and missile capacities.
It advocates enhanced scientific, commercial and technological cooperation
with the US. It has pledged to strengthen ties with Russia, Japan and the
EU. It has reaffirmed its commitment to improve relations with China and
carry forward a dialogue process with Pakistan, while cautioning it would
be "firm in responding to any threats emanating from Pakistan". There is
also a commitment to strengthen ties with Asean, enhance cooperation in
Saarc and strengthen India's engagement with partners elsewhere in the
world. The Congress naturally stresses the need for India to be nonaligned,
but realistically avoids eulogising the nonaligned movement.
The Marxists have a radically different
agenda. While describing the Vajpayee government as "pro-imperialist",
they make no reference to the challenges posed by global terrorism. They
fault the NDA for supporting the US in its "war on Afghanistan". They would
like us to end all military cooperation with the US and demand its withdrawal
from bases in our neighbourhood. They oppose any nuclear weapons programme
for India. By espousing the denuclearisation of South Asia they'd like
us to abandon our longstanding policy of seeking nuclear disarmament on
a non-discriminatory and universal basis. Their endorsement of proposals
for regional denuclearisation, advocated jointly by China and the US, would
render us vulnerable to nuclear blackmail from existing nuclear weapons
powers, who do not rule out the use of nuclear weapons to promote their
interests. The one-sided rhetoric on Israel suggests that the Marxists
are also oblivious of the national security imperatives of India-Israel
relations.
The Marxists advocate a drive to
build a multipolar world by cooperating with Russia and China, with a view
to curbing American influence. But is China keen on seeing the emergence
of India as an independent power centre? If this were indeed the case,
how is it that for the past three decades China has provided unprecedented
military assistance to Pakistan to enable that country to develop nuclear
weapons and missiles that can target every urban centre in India? It is
now an established fact that China provided Pakistan the designs for its
nuclear weapons. Pakistan also has unsafeguarded plutonium facilities provided
by China, for miniaturisation of nuclear warheads. The "Shaheen 1" missile
capable of striking at Delhi is a replica of the Chinese M9 missile. The
"Shaheen 2" missile capable of reducing Kolkata and Thiruvananthapuram
to ashes is a replica of the Chinese M18/DF15 missile.
The Chinese have extensive cooperation
with Pakistan's defence production outfits. Pakistan's air force chief
recently announced that China will be supplying the PAF with 100-150 "JF7
Thunder" fighter aircraft that the Chinese are developing, with technology
for engines and other accessories they obtained from Russia. The Chinese
defence minister assured the visiting Pakistan navy chief on May 18 that
China would add punch to the Pakistan navy by supplying it with four modern
frigates. It is also worth recalling that in May 2001 General Musharraf
pointed out that the main reason for seeking Chinese assistance to build
the Gwadar port on the Baluchistan coast was that "as and when needed the
Chinese navy would be in Gwadar to give a befitting reply to anyone (who
threatened Pakistan)". India should naturally expand cooperation and seek
to resolve differences with China. But we'd be living in an unreal world
if we believe that China's long-term strategic policies towards us are
entirely benign.
It would be wonderful if foreign
military presences are withdrawn from our neighbourhood. But is this a
realistic proposition? To our west, a number of members of the Gulf Cooperation
Council like Qatar, Oman, Bahrain, Kuwait and the UAE have urged the US
to maintain a military presence in the Gulf to balance Iranian and Iraqi
ambitions. To our east, Singapore welcomes an American military presence.
The US has bases in Central Asia in Tajikistan, Kyrgystan, Kazakhstan and
Uzbekistan. In Tajikistan and Kyrgystan there are Russian and American
military bases located barely a few kilometers apart. Any suggestion by
us to these friendly partners that they should ask the Americans to leave
would not be welcomed.
While there is some justification
for criticising the Vajpayee government for appearing to be bending rather
too easily to American pressures, it would be unfair to criticise the cooperation
extended to the US for the successful ouster of the Taliban regime from
Afghanistan. It is primarily as a result of this that Afghan soil is no
longer available to anti-Indian terrorist groups like the Lashkar-e-Taiba
and Harkat-ul-Mujahideen that were operating there with ISI support. It
is the American intervention that resulted in the Northern Alliance, armed
and supported by India, Iran and Russia, entering Kabul. It is the American
military presence in Afghanistan that has led to Musharraf becoming more
circumspect about aiding the Taliban and terrorist groups affiliated to
the Taliban and Osama bin Laden, that have been active in J&K.
I admire the Marxist leaders for
their unswerving commitment to secularism and financial integrity. But
in dealing with national security and foreign policy issues one has to
recognise the realities of the contemporary world. One hopes young Marxist
leaders remember the words of the venerable Jyoti Basu to Sanjaya Baru,
when Deng and Gorbachev were radically changing their countries. Basu then
remarked: "Mikhail Gorbachev and Deng Xiao Peng are doing what they must
do for their countries. You see, the world is changing. We communists must
change too."
