ADVANI’S VISIT TO US

Govt Readies To Bring India Under US Tutelage  

Harkishan Singh Surjeet

IF anything, deputy prime minister L K Advani’s latest US visit would go down in history as one that brought ignominy to our country’s name in the world community. For the last several decades, the Sangh Parivar has been vocal in advocating that India must give up its policy of non-alignment and strengthen relations with the United States, the leading imperialist power in the world. Therefore, few would be surprised over what the BJP-led central government is doing nowadays. What is astonishing is that while the BJP is unabashedly trying to bring the country under US tutelage, no one in the motley combination called the NDA seems to be worried over it, despite the stated position of many NDA parties in favour of non-alignment.  

GENESIS OF NAM & INDIA’S ROLE

ONE will do well to recall here that our policy of non-alignment was no fad on part of Jawaharlal Nehru or any other leader or party. It was rather a product of the situation that emerged in the aftermath of the second world war. The period saw the liberation of a number of colonies from imperialist domination the world over, so much so that these newly liberated countries had become a big force in world politics within two decades after the war. Though these countries adopted a wide variety of economic systems and political regimes, they were all motivated by a common desire to pursue the path of independent development. This was natural as these countries had suffered intense and sometimes brutal exploitation of their material and human resources by their imperialist masters.

The non-aligned foreign policy of these countries was an outcome of precisely this circumstance. The Sino-Indian declaration of Panchsheel (five principles of peaceful coexistence), the Bandung conference in Indonesia and the formation of non-aligned movement (NAM) at a summit in Belgrade, all reflected this urge of the newly liberated countries to pursue a path of independent development --- so much so that the NAM’s membership constantly went up from hardly two dozen in the beginning to 113 at the latest count. It also emerged as a major force in United Nations and other international forums, playing a key role in the Suez crisis, in Congo, in Korea and mobilising support for Vietnamese freedom fighters. The NAM also played a laudable role in the liberation of many existing colonies in Asia and Africa, the last notable example being Namibia’s independence. It also mobilised world opinion for an end to the hated apartheid regime in South Africa.     

It was the NAM’s basic tenets that enabled it to play such a role. These were --- striving for independent development of each country, resistance to imperialist attempts to dominate any country by military power or otherwise, aloofness from military blocs, peaceful negotiated settlement of any dispute between nations, and a demand for total disarmament for the sake of lasting world peace.

India, as we know, played a leading role in this movement, and this was what brought the country immense prestige. As recalled in an earlier issue of this paper, India was Mandela’s first destination outside South Africa after he came out of jail and the Indian delegation was received with honour at the celebration of Namibia’s independence. How can one forget the immense jubilation felt the world over when, about two decades ago, Fidel Castro handed over the NAM’s leadership to India at a summit in New Delhi?   

Thus the reality is that non-alignment was the consensual foreign policy of the entire country and, despite differences on other issues, all parties and groups barring a few supported it. So much so that even Vajpayee had no guts to say anything against it when he was India’s foreign minister during 1977-79.

FOREIGN POLICY MISDEMEANOURS

BUT it was this very policy the BJP began to torpedo when it came to power with the clutches provided by a number of smaller parties. In less than two months of coming to power in 1998, the BJP government went in for nuclear explosions, giving a rude shock to the worldwide striving for total disarmament. Then followed a series of other foreign policy misdemeanours. The government withdrew recognition from the Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic in a bid to appease Morocco, a US crony, and maintained a stoic silence when the Zionists went on a spree to kill and maim innocent Palestinians. The government of India (GoI) did not protest when the US-NATO launched a war against Yugoslavia and abjectly offered support when the US went on a war against Afghanistan, though that offer was as contemptuously rejected.

And then came the US-UK war against Iraq when the BJP-led government’s pro-imperialist character was exposed as never before. For days together, the Vajpayee regime refused to condemn the US aggression and demand that the US withdraw itself from that country. It was only a huge public uproar that made the government bend a little and move a resolution in parliament to “deplore” (not condemn) the US-UK action in Iraq. At no point of time during the war did the Vajpayee regime offer any support for the hapless people of Iraq.

It was in this very situation that Advani’s US visit took place. That Advani would go to the US as a guest of vice president Dick Cheney was decided upon when the US defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld was on a visit to Pakistan and India last month. It was clear at time too that Rumsfeld had made an informal request to India for sending an army division to Iraq for “stabilisation” duties. Though the GoI protested that no such request was made, it also added in the same breath that India could send its forces to Iraq provided the UN authorised it. This was a plain enough indication that Rumsfeld had indeed made a demand for dispatch of Indian troops to Iraq (see People’s Democracy, May 18).

Advani’s entourage to the US was exceptionally big and included not only the government officials but also their and the minister’s family members, obviously for some sair-sapata at government cost. According to The Asian Age, June 11, “Sources in the home ministry said that the Indian embassy in the US and high commission in UK have been asked to keep at least 45 vehicles and 35 hotel rooms ready for Mr Advani’s entourage.” 

WILLING TO ACT AS MERCENARIES

HOWEVER, the visit will be remembered more for the reason that the Indian government’s deputy prime minister gave up all pretense while in Washington and virtually agreed to send a division of the Indian army to Iraq, even though it is clear that the Indian troops would work there under US command. 

Yet the fact remains that US troops are still like unwelcome guests in Iraq and are facing mass anger every now and then. It is this thing that prompted the US to ask India, Pakistan and Poland to send their forces to Iraq for “stabilisation” duties --- in fact to protect the American interests and American soldiers there from the local people’s wrath. Evidently, US bosses have still not forgotten the huge casualties their forces suffered in Vietnam, which gave rise to huge protests within the US itself. They are obviously not willing to take any such risk again and prefer to have other countries do mercenary jobs on their behalf. As Seema Mustafa says in The Asian Age, June 10, “The Americans, facing the ire of local Iraqis through daily sniper attacks and hostile fire that is taking a heavy toll, are now keen to get out of the firing line by moving in troops from other countries into position.” While Pakistan is yet to take a decision on the US requisition, Poland has already moved its forces in. It is thus that the “US has not let up pressure on India to agree to deploy at least one division of soldiers in Iraq…. The US embassy here has been very active in pushing through the proposal, with Delhi-based diplomats recently holding a meeting with top Indian Army officers.” This comes in the wake of some newspapers reports that Indian army is already making preparations to send one division to Iraq.

In Washington, while Advani was closeted it with the US national security advisor Ms Condoleezza Rice, there took place yet another drama of the same type as was witnessed when Brajesh Mishra was closeted with same Ms Rice. What we mean to say is that President Bush “dropped in” when Advani and Rice were holding talks. It was reported last month that Bush had not casually dropped in when Mishra was holding talks with Rice; rather Mishra was taken to the Oval Office under a plan. This time too, Bush held about 30 minutes talk with Advani in the White House. Nay, a day prior to it, Rumsfeld too had similarly “dropped in” in a similar “unplanned” way.

In other words, such “dropping in” by US leaders seem to have become a funny joke. Yet, if both these figures “dropped in” to meet Advani, the purpose was one and the same --- to bring pressure on India to send at least one division of its troops to act as mercenaries in Iraq.

On the face of it, the GoI is not yet acceded to the US requisition. But it is not so because of any principled position. As the statements from Advani and others go to show, if the GoI has not formally conceded the demand, it is only because the US administration is not yet prepared to declare Pakistan as a terrorist state or to act against it in any way for its role in fostering cross-border terrorism. Not only that, Bush is even to meet General Pervez Musharaaf at Camp David on June 24; and this has made the GoI jittery.

BRINGING INDIA UNDER US TUTELAGE

ANOTHER reason for the GoI feeling shy is that the Indian parliament has already passed a resolution demanding that the US withdraw its forces from Iraq and leave the task of Iraq’s reconstruction to the UN supervision. Therefore, till the time this resolution is in force, any dispatch of Indian troops to Iraq for acting under US command can only be an illegal act. Needless to say, this violation of the law of the land and of the parliament’s sanctity is not likely to go well with the peace-loving and freedom-loving people of this country. All the major parties in the country and even some NDA parties have already voiced opposition to the government’s idea of sending our troops to Iraq.

In the meantime, there is news that the Pentagon has already started bringing pressure on the GoI to allow it access to our military bases. (See The Statesman and The Asian Age of June 9 for details.) Moreover, grapevine says that the GoI may allow the US Navy use of Andaman and Nicobar Islands. The Statesman quoted some US officials as saying: “India not only has a good infrastructure, the Indian Navy has proved that it can fix and fuel US ships. Over time port visits must become a natural event,” Nay, some other US officials too were quoted as saying that “the US Air Force would like the Indians to grant them access to bases and landing rights during operations, such as counter-terrorism and heavy airlift support.”

All this means only one thing, pure and simple: that the BJP-led government has, on its part, completed its preparations to bring India under US tutelage, and it is simply waiting for an opportune moment when it may effect this abject surrender without much of a resistance.

IMPERATIVE OF TODAY

THERE are of course some pen-pushers in the media who would justify this surrender in the name of the current situation or realpolitik. There is no doubt that the Soviet Union’s demise and the creation of a unipolar world has been excruciating for the developing countries. But does it mean that these countries and peoples must prostrate before the world gendarme and give up their fight for independent development, total disarmament and world peace, as these pen-pushers would have us believe?

India was, and is, expected to play a significant role in such a situation. It has been one of the leaders of the non-aligned movement from the very beginning and is one of the key members of G-15, the executive body of G-77 that has most of the developing countries as members. As such, India could have, and should have, mobilised the marginalised peoples of the world against US moves at global hegemony. But India, under the RSS-BJP dispensation, has not done anything of the sort. Even though the NAM has not yet lost its relevance, it lies paralysed and India has singularly failed to activate it despite demands from the world community.

As for the BJP government’s expectations that the US would back India against Pakistan, this cannot be anything but a pipedream. Time and again, the US has given enough indication that while it would like to bring India into its sphere of influence, it is not going to give up Pakistan that has been an old ally of the US in South Asia. Through the mechanism of Camp David accords, the US brought both Jordan and Egypt to its side while Israel was already its crony in the Middle East. Now the US is also trying to have a puppet regime in Palestine. In fact, bringing the warring countries together under its tutelage is an essential ingredient of the US design of global hegemony and this is what the US would like to do in South Asia as well. It is another thing that the BJP leaders have miserably failed to grasp this point.

But the people of this country are not going to tolerate what their present-day rulers are doing behind their backs. Our people have been vocal in opposing the US war against Iraq and the Vajpayee regime’s stand on it. They want an end to the present unipolar world and desire to move towards a multipolar world in its stead, so that the sovereignty of various countries may be safe and world peace protected. An essential condition for this change is that India must cooperate with Russia and China for an end to the present day unipolarity. The reason is simple. These three countries account for no less than 45 per cent of the world population, and if only they come together for mutual cooperation, there is every possibility that the peace-loving, freedom-loving people of the world will rally with them. This is what the Left and democratic forces in India and the world have to strive for.