-
-
Aug292007
123 Trilogy: Part 1
Exactly 60 years after independence, India stands on a precipice. If it is ready to open its arms and join the world powers, it can soar into the sky. If it acts afraid, and bows to China, it will plunge to the depths of its isolationist socialist past.
In this series, we look at the Indo-US Nuclear Deal in three parts. First, we examine it in the political context. Second, we will listen to the other voices from society. Third, we will explore the possibilities going forward.
The Left’s Opposition
There was a time when the Marxists blatantly stuck posters all over Kolkata stating “China’s Chairman is our Chairman!”. Many experts, like B. Raman, have conceded that “The Left’s campaign against India’s relations with the US reflects more China’s concerns and interests than those of India.”
While the Left is posturing as the supreme nationalist, Jaideep Mazumdar offers a startling snapshot of the mistakes they’ve made in the last 30 years of their governance in West Bengal:
- - Banned English from high schools, colleges, and even universities -as ‘imperialist’
- - Banished Computers, as they were a ‘capitalist and exploitative’ ploy
- - Banished Businesses and Industry - “Tata, Birla, Go Back!”
- - Promoted militant Trade Unionism
- - Shunned Global Institutions - World Bank, IMF, ADB were devils
- - Name the 2nd largest city in West Bengal after Kolkata. Stumped? Because of Urban Neglect.
All the above mistakes are now being reversed without being acknowledged. These are your righteous ideologues who’re out to protect you from imperialist Uncle Sam. So, why is China behind them? Because we’ve got a much better deal than them.
For a detailed analysis of the differences between China’s and India’s 123 agreements with the US, see this article in the IE.
What about BJP?
While Yashwant Sinha and Arun Shourie carried on with the BJP’s reactionary fervor, their reasoned arguments digging into the minutiae of the agreement haven’t roused much sympathy with the mainstream public. Today, most urban families have relatives staying in the US, and it is the dream of every lower-to-middle class urban parents to send their children to ‘America’. There is also the NRI factor. The BJP cannot risk alienating their largest constituencies, especially with the ominous possibility of elections looming on the horizon.
Hence, the complete turnaround by the shrewd L. K. Advani. Closer strategic cooperation with the US is deemed to be in the ‘national interest’ by most educated Indians. And ‘national interest’ in politics is as important a buzz-word as ‘thanda’ is in cola advertising. The BJP will not let the Congress steal it, like Coke stole it away from Pepsi.
The discrepancies between previous and current stances are being dismissed in the usual media-bashing manner. What remains is the BJPs suggestion to amend the Atomic Energy Act, which is a perfectly valid issue that can be debated upon by our Parliament.
What if India Backs Out of the Deal
Karan Thapar talked with K. Subrahmanyam on India Tonight (CNBC TV18). They concluded that there would be the following consequences if India backs out of the deal now.
International Diplomacy
India will lose its credibility so badly on the world stage, that our ties with countries such as France, Germany, Russia, UK, Japan, and Australia will be affected. From trade to WTO negotiations to immigration — all aspects of diplomacy will find us in difficult positions with little to bargain for. We may be able to do little if a Haneef kind of case happens again, and we sure can expect tightening of immigration restrictions against India.
Economic Growth
Forget 9% growth ambitions. There will be no FDI. Lack of political stability will pull out all those billions of dollars that have been pouring in the last few years. India’s isolation will have enormous economic impact.
Energy
The potential of nuclear power to supply up to 15% of our energy needs is a significant one. It can ameliorate our energy crisis substantially. By remaining in technological isolation, we will never be able to satisfy our energy requirements. This in turn, means an economic impact as well.
Strategic National Security
If this nuclear deal does not go through, India will permanently accept China as the ruling supremo in the Asian region. The deal is the backbone of a broader strategic alliance not just with the US, but with Japan, Australia, and Russia as well. The planned joint naval exercises in the Bay of Bengal are just one of the many that we will conduct with a host of other nations in the future - if we stick to the deal. Those who do not understand the strategic necessity of such a closer cooperation should familiarize themselves with the Chinese String of Pearls strategy. India will need to learn to bow before China and accept more sophisticated Pakistani infiltration in Kashmir. Today, claims that Arunachal Pradesh belongs to China are being made publicly. Imagine what can happen tomorrow, when no one in the world is going to listen to what India has to say.
Pessimism or Gravitas?
The above are not my opinions or conclusions. Do you think they are overly pessimistic or intentionally sensationalist? K. Subrahmanyam is not known to be either - he is India’s foremost strategic thinker, referred to as the ‘doyen of India’s strategic foreign affairs experts’. Both Vajpayee and Manmohan Singh’s governments have placed utmost trust in him. He had placed the Indo-US Joint Statement of 2005 as one of the “Five Decisions that Changed India“, since gaining independence.
Such a man does not make statements lightly or sensationalize issues. We are standing on a precipice. If the Indo-US nuclear cooperation doesn’t go through, expect more brain drain, rather than the reverse. This is critically important for the future of India. We cannot afford it to be left to the Left and be left behind.
The views expressed in this post are those of the writer and are not necessarily endorsed by Mutiny.in
Subscribe
Submit Link
woke
001
10:07 am
Very well written.
However, I think the quoted repercussions if India backs out of the deal is over-estimated.
International Diplomacy - This is a bilateral deal and not something other countries are looking forward to and hence there is no reason to expect any major backlash in terms of foreign policy.
Economic Growth - maybe but political stability? If the Congress gives in to the Left demand isn’t it for avoiding mid-term polls and thereby ensuring political stability (though losing out on foreign affairs?
If this nuclear deal does not go through, India will permanently accept China as the ruling supremo in the Asian region
Completely disagree. There are no permanent implications in the world scenario. There might be a development that overturns the equation.
It might be a major setback but I’m not yet convinced that this is a make or ‘break deal’ like what K. Subrahmanyam suggests.
Sanjoy Das
002
12:13 am
As Ronen Sen described, the “left” can be best described as squawking headless chicken.
Driven solely by an anachronistic ideology, these jokers certainly do not have India’s security, political, or economic interests at heart.
Let us not forget that they opposed the Quit India Movement back in 1942:
http://banglapedia.search.com.bd/HT/Q_0017.htm
Mathew Thomas
003
12:33 am
Dear,
Sounds overwhelmed with the deal and the gross mistake we are going to commit if we failed. But the issue can be viewed from two aspects, one ofcourse from our point of view and the other one from the big B’s. Yes the deal is benefitial for us and the only thing which pulls us back from growth is lack of energy production.
A growth of 20% in power generation is really going to rock our growth. But…….
Deal means benefitial for both sides…..
I have got two questions for which an answer if given properly will make the issue a storm in the tea cup.
1. What is the benefit that US is going to get from this deal?
2. Yes, think about INDIA, the super power by 2020, running fully with an American loaded gun. Do we have any backup plan to survive if we overdepend on our American friend in power production where a situation arises where the friend refuses to provide any more ammunition.
This is not pessimism but just a common sense, we can go forward if we have a backup plan or a substitute for energy production.
Regards
Mathew
Mahendra
004
9:37 am
Woke: thanks again for the response; somehow I didn’t get a notification of your comment.
//International Diplomacy - This is a bilateral deal and not something other countries are looking forward to…//
1. It is a bilateral deal with the only superpower. We have been begging nuclear deals with Russia, France, and other countries, and all they’ve been saying is, first get US clearance, then we will deal with you.
2. Other countries are very much looking forward to this deal, for both political and economic reasons. Notice how France and the UK have publicized their support.
3. Signing the deal committed India to respect and oblige it. If we back out now, we completely lose international credibility in terms of signing any agreements! How can this not have repercussions?
//Economic Growth - maybe but political stability? If the Congress gives in to the Left demand isn’t it for avoiding mid-term polls and thereby ensuring political stability (though losing out on foreign affairs?//
Such a kind of political stability will mean a lame duck government. It will lose out on several counts. But I don’t think Congress will ‘give in’ and maintain status quo. All parties have already begun planning for elections.
Regarding Chinese supremacy: //Completely disagree. There are no permanent implications in the world scenario. There might be a development that overturns the equation.//
‘Might be a development’ is fine in an academic sense. There are always possibilities. We need to think of the most likely scenarios.
Note that the Chinese supremacy referred to is also in the context of Pakistan. India keeps getting bogged down in conflicts, power struggles, alleged terrorist sponsorship, and so on with Pakistan. This puts a great strain on our government, diplomacy, and economy. Western countries do not pour FDI into India because of the ‘two nuclear-armed neighbor rivals’, and pour it into China instead. This is also accepting China’s supremacy - they’re intentionally fighting a proxy cold war with us via Pakistan. It’s just that we haven’t yet warmed up to the Chinese strategy.
I’ll let K. Subrahmanyam do the talking for himself for the above points.
Mahendra
005
9:46 am
Sanjoy: yes, very much so. And thanks for pointing out their opposition to the Quit India movement!
Matthew:
1. What benefits does the US get from this deal?
A. This is a big question that will require another post, but to state the key aspect succinctly: Just like dictator China needs India’s neighbor - military-ruled Pakistan - to counter India, the democratic US needs a democratic Chinese neighbor - India - to counter China, the upcoming rival superpower to the US.
2. What if we overdepend on the US?
A. I don’t think we will. This agreement with the US is just first step towards opening up our doors to do business with 45 countries. You can find this question addressed in Part 3 as well.
woke
006
12:44 am
Mahendra,
What do you have to say about the concerns listed here?
http://awmyth.wordpress.com/2007/08/31/india-us-123-the-lefts-have-9-queries/
Mahendra
007
10:13 pm
Woke: See my response here.
Mathew
008
2:42 pm
For the time being let us not talk about the left or right and only about the deal and the possible good and bad effects of it.
The answers given for my earlier questions explains the screw in the deal.
1. US need a friend and ofcourse I think we cannot speak bad if our friend do something which we cannot accept at any cost like, the Great Iraq Revolution which is initiated with the apprehension that the Iraq posses Chemical weapon !!!!!
2. The deal is all about supplying fuel and they can stop it at any moment.
Rather than having such a friend we need a plan which is sustainable, which will do benefits for our counry and only benefits, What about a deal for combating terrorism? For Economic development? What about initiating FIIs and FDIs, What about making a deal with US so that they can produce power in our country with their nuclear stuff and sell it to us. In all these cases there are mutual benefits which are tangible and hence more clear.
In today’s world everybody is smart and the only way to exist is to be smarter. Ofcourse our friend is smart.
Mahendra
009
2:59 pm
Mathew:
//For the time being let us not talk about the left or right and only about the deal and the possible good and bad effects of it.//
I did not talk either about the Left or the Right in my response to your questions above. And I don’t see you talking about the possible good effects of the deal in your comment; only the bad.
1. Are you saying that we cannot criticize or not support anything that the US does in the future, even though we believe it to be wrong? If so, why do you think so? If you do not substantiate what you believe, I cannot respond.
2. //The deal is all about supplying fuel and they can stop it at any moment.//
Yes, both parties can withdraw from the deal with a 1-year notice. What do you expect from a bipartisan deal?
I agree with you that a sustainable plan is required. That does not mean we do not need this deal. All the other areas you mention also require deals, cooperation, and diplomacy. These issues are not at conflict with each other at all.
Mathew
010
3:33 pm
Dear, We of course need the deal and that is the problem, we only need the deal.
The deal if work out it can bring prosperity, growth, economic development and a lot to us, but this is not a matter which we can discuss with emotions but with facts and figures.
Just think that I am giving you x Rs. a month for your growth and prosperity and again think that your family relies on my x Rs. for existence and all the glory you got is because of my money. How can you blame me even if I do something bad. I haven’t said that I will rethink about giving you the money again but!!!.
The simple logic is we shouldnot be ready to accept anything for free. There should be something that the US should get back from this deal apart from our friendship.
Mahendra
011
3:49 pm
There is nothing being offered free to India. The deal will open up a $40 billion market, 50% of which will go to foreign companies, many of which can be US companies.
See here for more details.
Mathew
012
10:24 am
Please…… Indian market is open and the US don’t want the “Nuk deal” for starting business in India. More over if the US has got any investments in this deal then only we can say this opens an arena of interdependence.
Mathew
013
4:24 pm
Wow!!!!
I regret for the big mistake I made. We ofcourse need the deal and no more discussions over this from my side. Hope you are the supreme authority in deciding the quality of analysis.
Shyam, thanks for the wonderful comments. Good luck and bye.
Mahendra
014
11:26 am
Note: Shyam’s comments have been deleted as they violated the comments policy: please do not engage in personal attacks or use rude or inappropriate language.
Request to all who wish to disagree on the 1-2-3 posts:
1. Disagreements are welcome. If you wish to debate, I’m more than willing to engage in dignified intelligent debate.
2. Personal attacks will be deleted. If you have the interest of our country at heart, you will agree that hurling personal abuses at each other will not get us anywhere. The ‘hope you are the supreme authority’ sarcasm in Mathew’s comment above is retained to highlight that this is just stepping over the borderline of inappropriate language.
3. If you find any law, act, legislation, article, paper, or Ph.D. thesis that you like, do not simply give the URL and say “Have you read this?”. It would facilitate the debate if you quote from that source and substantiate your disagreement.
4. Lastly, for an informed debate, it would be better if you read all the 4 posts. For e.g. 123 vs Hyde Act is discussed in the last post, so disagreeing on that in the 1st post really doesn’t help.
tapan chakraborti
015
7:39 pm
In the para——Left’s Opposition
It was written…..”.CPI(M)blatantly stuck posters all over Kolkata stating China’s chairman is our Chairman..”….etc etc is completely wrong. With due respect to the writer of the said article I like to say
he probably not gone through the history of that period ie early ‘70.
It was the slogan of a section Naxalite. I thing that the writer of this article is not so serious re: politics, I am sorry to say - it is a casual approach to the serious political article. I am sincerely in favour of serious political approach which not distort the history and historical background.
Mahendra
016
2:11 pm
Tapan,
Thanks for pointing that out. I am not knowledgeable about the history of that period, and had not written that myself.
I was quoting from the source I had linked to, B. Raman’s article in Outlook Magazine, but had misquoted him by terming it as CPI(M) instead of Marxists, as he did. I’ve corrected the error in my post.