The latest WikiLeaks disclosure that appeared in Hindu newspaper today with Hasan Suroor’s byline regarding Indian diplomacy makes one shrivel with embarrassment. An incumbent joint secretary heading the America division in South Block telephoned the American embassy counsellor in Chanakyapuri to underscore that India had placed itself as a doormat during a UN voting on Guantanamo Bay and some measure of reciprocal US gratitude was in order. He highlighted the uniqueness and deliberateness of the Indian decision by pointing out that India stood by the western powers although all its south asian neighbours - including little mountainous hopelessly dependent Bhutan - chose to abstain. The joint secretary proudly said he was making sure Americans took note of the Indian servility to identify with the US.
The cable exposes the extent of the
toadyism that crept into Indian diplomacy vis-a-vis the US in the years since the UPA rule began in 2004. What a time that period (2005-2008) in particular turned out to be when the nuclear deal took immaculate conception - we dumped the Palestinian issue; atrophied ties with Russia; rubbished our ties with Iran; tiptoed into the
quixotic idea of quadrilateral alliance with US; and, now it seems, we threw overboard the last residues of decency and humaneness within us toward human suffering! In short, we really did ‘earn’ the hard way our credentials to become the US’ ’strategic partner’. Don’t these guys who served the enlightened national interests - all of them - at the very least deserve a
Padma Sri?
Substantively, it was a shameful issue on which India should have chosen to prove its credentials as the US’ junior partner. It was over GUANTANAMO BAY. It was about the crimes Americans perpetrated on the internees in that prison, which even Barack Obama later admitted to be a blight on the US’ standing internationally. And those crimes happened to be in blatant violation of international law. The tragedy is that the Indian vote also turned out to be the ultimate clincher in the UN - without it, the UN would have censured Washington. Boy, our joint secretary was right in taking pride, wasn’t he? India rescued the reputation of the sole superpower in the world order. Wasn’t that something to remember and to be reminded about?
A sad thing is that the protagonists who figure in the Wikileaks cable are all still ‘operational’ somewhere or other on this planet and are still capable of finessing the saga of US-India strategic partnership. What is the guarantee that their mindset has since changed about all those dead souls interned in Guantanamo Bay - that they have since become capable of holding an ounce of milk of human kindness? India is not meant to be like this - a bleached, pitiless land…
Posted in Diplomacy, Politics.
Tagged with Guantanamo Bay, Iran, Russia, US-India, WikiLeaks and Indian foreign policy.
By M K Bhadrakumar
– March 25, 2011
When a diplomat normally takes recourse to emotions, he takes this stance because he is weak on substance. But here something has really touched the raw nerve and the sense conveyed by Mr Bhadrakumar needs to be taken with utmost seriousness.
The Iron frame we inherited in 1947 always had soft corner for the Empire, being its creation was mostly in consonance with it. This culture of comfort zone with colonials and the seconding ways, it seems has got extended to US administration. The real sad part is not the vote itself, which may have been made on a rational criteria but subject to different interpretations, but the phone call which firmed up the interpretation. Even more pathetic than this reiteration is the quid-pro-quo demand. This tactics of vote by vote alignment to a Geese like formation militates against the very essence of Non-alignment principles. It may be okay for Japan, Germany and other allies to do so, but not for India.
Our Non-alignment principle needs a case by case approach where the application of international law, the principles and policies of Indian interpretation are applied with care, on merit not for seeking a non-contextual favour nor under any pressure or fear. This derailment of Indian non-alignment by an eager beaver, who must have the interest of India dearly in his mind can prove very costly if this kind of intellectual corruption seeps in the administration of foreign policy.
One sallow does not make a summer, and this fine piece of writing of one of our best diplomat, hopefully would help find the consensus amongst our wonderful body of talented diplomats, to correct such veering away from the judicious course of non-alignment which makes India really the idea it is.