Kanwal Sibal,
Dean, Centre for International Relations and Diplomacy, VIF
US diplomacy is a cynical mixture of principle and expediency. The
world’s foremost power needs to project internationally that its
policies are based on certain high principles so that its global
hegemony is not seen as resting on raw power alone but has a moral
basis. Hence its crusade for democracy, rule of law, human rights and
individual enterprise, on which rests its “soft power”. Juggling moral
posturing and hard-headed pursuit of national interest often lands the
US into contradictions from which opportunism is the only way out.
An immediate illustration of this is the US decision to reach out to
BJP’s Prime Ministerial candidate Narendra Modi. Since 2005, Modi is not
eligible for a US visa under its domestic law for “severe violation of
religious freedom”. For the US to unilaterally hold Modi guilty of
violating religious freedom, without the Indian legal system concluding
that smacks of the usual US imperiousness. The Europeans ended their
boycott of Modi months ago, but the US has stubbornly refused to do so
until now. If the UK with its respect for rule of law, its large
population of Indian origin and conflicting pressures from diverse
India-connected lobbies could see the absurdity of ostracising Modi
despite the latter being wrung through domestic political and legal
processes without proof of guilt, the US has obviously believed their
superior legal and moral bench-marks precluded equally sane thinking.
Now that Modi appears to be coasting towards political success in the
coming elections, the US ambassador has received the green light to
engage him. If the US believes in the democratic process legitimising a
political leader, why has it disregarded the fact that Modi has won two
legislative elections after 2002? If despite sustained enquiries, police
investigations and court proceedings Modi has not been found guilty of
the acts of commission and omission imputed to him in the 2002 riots,
why has the US treated him as a political pariah for the last eight
years? So much for US championship of democracy and the rule of law
internationally.
The US obstinacy on Modi has also constituted an interference in
India’s internal political affairs, as it took, in effect, sides in the
bitter internal debate in India about his conduct during the Gujarat
riots. Sections of our own political class have tried to exploit the
visa denial as a moral indictment, if nothing else, of the Gujarat Chief
Minister. That this class should judge a foreign government’s position
on an internal matter more worthy than the political judgment rendered
in elections in Gujarat and the legal outcome of our own investigative
and judicial instances is unworthy in itself.
The cold-shouldering of Modi also points to the distorting influence
on US diplomacy of agenda-driven civil society and religious lobbies.
The US Congress is especially vulnerable to them, and because of
separation of powers in the US, the administration often acts
erratically and arbitrarily under Congressional influence. This places a
burden on the international system because the US extends the domestic
pressures within its territory to its external relations, pushing others
to subscribe to the US world view, its solutions to problems and often
its laws.
Naturally, the US reach-out to Modi will be interpreted as signifying
that the US now expects a change of government in Delhi and
acknowledging his possible ascension to power. The US is belatedly
trying to extricate itself from an untenable position; its step should
not be given any undue importance as its political impact is highly
marginal. Exaggerating its importance will only play into US hands,
persuading the Americans that they can take objectionable decisions and
retract from them at a moment of their choosing, without paying any
price because they are too important to be ignored or penalised. The US
ambassador need not be rebuffed, but the political insult administered
to Modi should not be overlooked easily or too soon.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.