Well, there is no simple answer to this questions.. is there? The answer to this question will also put to rest the recent soul searching exercise the nation is going through – Are the Gandhian and Neheruvian elements of non-alignment, ahimsa, moral standing relevant today?
I say “NO”. Heck, by all means, have opinions even argue about them and stand by them. But when it comes to decision-making and policy-making, at the risk of sounding harshly conservative & right tilted, I believe its best to put India’s national interest first. Indians should come first to the Indian policy makers. Given its economic growth, protecting India’s political stability, securing and expanding its energy sources, advancing its economic sphere of influence (or simply put trade partners) and securing its water sources should of primary importance. People, India has million poor hungry mouths to feed and clothe. Once they are taken care of them, then let India worry about pontificating, or better, “teaching” others about democracy, human rights, equal rights and such issues. There is nothing morally wrong with this stance…India is not the cause, effectors of the course or catalysts to the results of any of these problems. Should it maintain a stand?…Absolutely. Argumentative that the Indians are, need to have their opinion. However, opinions should remain just that…opinions. It should not cloud policy.
Burma – so they are under military rule, but so was (or is) Pakistan for most of its documented history, and so are many other country’s. Has that stopped India from doing business with those countries? Then, why such a hue and cry about India not intervening in this political mess. What Burma does with its people its own problem. India is not selling arms to the junta. India is just, and rightly so, protecting its energy and geopolitical maritime security interests there. It’s easy to make the argument that any economic benefit that Myanmar receives will go to silencing its people. Killing cannot be justified ever, however, the situation in Myanmar is far different from the situation in Dafur. Myanmar is a country that will write its own history of moving towards democracy, India has no place or right to hurriedly supply ink to the pen or influence the font in which that history is going to be written. Doing so is same as ”promoting” western style democracy to the ones that don’t have it…Sounds familiar? I am glad to see Indian foreign affairs office mature up to realize this and have a frenzied, but belated, diplomatic buzz with Myanmar.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/JD05Df01.html
Dafur, is unforgivable, here we have a moral standing. The chinese are wrong to do business with the Junta that has unleashed horrors of rape, pillage and genocide. every dollar that goes to the Sudanese govt invariably ends up in the hands of the power that seeks to wipe of natives in Dafur. The Chinese even sold weapons to Sudan, that is just sic. India is right in its policy of ostracizing Sudan. Its blood money, blood oil and blood everything if you do business there.
Leave me a comment if you still have not understood the difference between Myanmar and Dafur, I will explain in greater detail.
All anyone needs to say about Palestine is that Israel is one of India’s largest economic (mostly military) trading partner. Far cry from the days of Arafat hugging Indira. India’s stance and opinion is still very clear: Palestinians deserve their homeland. However, that has not stopped it from doing “business” with the Israelis. I know there is the whole Saudi, Indian Muslim population angle, Books have been written about it, so I shall not waste precious blogshpere sphere discussing this:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/IC31Df02.html
http://www.amazon.com/India-World-Order-Major-Power-Contemporary/dp/0521528755
Foreign Policy Challenges : India and the Afro-Arab World/Jagdish P. Sharma
The Arab-Israeli Peace Process : Lessons for India and Pakistan/edited by Moonis Ahmar.
Iraq & Afghanistan…Its not India’s war. India is doing the right things by staying away from it. Should it do business there? Sure, it already imports Pom’gnates from Kabul and sells sugar there. Indian doctors can build a better healthcare system in Iraq that anyone else can.
Iran, again not India’s problem, its difficult to fathom how the Indians got bulldozed into voting against them at IAEA / Security council. Now you have an India-Pak-Iran pipeline without India. If Iran agrees to US / UN resolutions in the near and diffuses the situation, what then? What happens to our stand? As a country, you can choose your friends and enemies anytime; you do not have that choice when it comes to your neighbors. Iran is in India’s sphere of influence. Decide wisely o learned grand old parties.
Out of all the burning issues, Tibet and Sri Lanka are probably the closest to India. Both highly emotional, strategic, economic and all the ‘ics that follow. It is going to be very difficult to say “Not our problem” to those. Tibet holds the key to the water availability to India, Nepal and Bangladesh and Tibet itself in the next coming century. Chinese designs are clear. So are India’s needs, India need Chinese economic partnership for progress, god forbid the US recessions stays longer than expected. India definitely needs the Tibetan plateau to water its hinterland. India should “actively” engage China rather than make rhetorical statements. I have great respect to B Raman, however his open letter to Aamir Khan does not make complete sense. His comparison of Chinese in Tibet to Nazis is well founded. However his call to action to ban the Olympic torch from passing through India is quiet tenuous. Why people still give a crap about Olympics in this day and age is beyond my comprehension…That’s for another Blog.
http://www.rediff.com/news/2008/apr/03guest.htm
Sri Lanka: The most well kept (maybe not so well kept because public junta like me know it) secret is that Triconamalee is the best natural blue water port in the Indian Ocean and the Bay of Bengal. Chinese trade with SL last year crossed the $1BN mark, a good 27% ahead of India (Global Trends 2007, Leading Economists). American Interests in these areas are evident by their reaction to the tsunami. India was extremely resilient and clever in taking care of SL with minimal international intervention. That, friends, is how you secure your sphere of influence. Unlike Tibet, India is in a very delicate with SL. The tamil’s in SL have a strong bond with the Tamils in India. It is going catastrophic if it gets to a point where Tamil Nadu has to choose if it is Tamil first or Indian. Emotions aside, if not India, someone is going to be doing business with SL and that does not bode well for India. India should do what the Norwegians or the Swedes have been doing all along. Play a serious moderator, continue business as usual with SL.
India shining…, maybe now, maybe for a few… But 650 million still don’t see that shine and the ones that do, see it despite the power cuts and water shortages. The fundamental duty of the government is to care for its peoples well-being. Let it do that first and then worry about the other 6.5 billion problems that currently inhabit the earth. Anyone still discussing Miloslavich?
I’ll leave you guys with some great quotes from the movie The Lord of War, starring Nicholas Cage
-
They say, “Evil prevails when good men fail to act.” What they ought to say is, “Evil prevails.”
-
Some of the most successful relationships are based on lies and deceit. Since that’s where they usually end up anyway, it’s a logical place to start.
-
I had a flair for languages. But I soon discovered that what talks best is dollars, dinars, drachmas, rubles, rupis and pounds fucking sterling.
-
Say what you like about warlords and dictators; they always pay their bills on time.
-
I’d tell you to go to hell, but I think you’re already there.
Cheers.
Subbu-
One thought that comes to mind–you should post an India 101 re: economics, wealth, etc. For the uninitiated, India is “known” for the caste system, tons of people, enormously packed trains, and very hot weather (sorry, don’t mean to stereotype).
The question that stands out in my mind–there must be a very wealthy segment of India society. Further, there must be an emerging segment of new wealth. Are these “segments” of the population as extreme as the US? Do wealth disparities foreshadow a future problem for India?