| Don't isolate India
BY CHARLES HAMILTON
Journal of Commerce, June 9, 1998
Charles A. Hamilton, an international trade consultant,was deputy
director of strategic trade policy in the Defense Department during the
Reagan administration.
Uncle Sam's doghouse is filling up. First, India earned a place there
for its
nuclear tests. Now Pakistan, where there is no love lost for India,
has
entered as well.
Despite all the finger pointing, the outcome of India's nuclear weapons
program should not have come as a surprise. The newly elected government
in New Delhi made no bones about its plans to join the club of nuclear
powers during the recent political elections.
India's action was triggered by Pakistan's testing of a new missile
with a
capability of reaching into Indian territory. The new coalition government,
under pressure to act, did so strongly, probably feeling that sooner
rather
than later would be better politically.
No wonder there was pride and jubilation in the streets. India had joined
the
nuclear club.
The scene was repeated in the streets of Islamabad. Pakistan has achieved
parity with India.
Shortly after the assassination of the late Prime Minister Indira Gandhi,
I was
a member of a U.S. delegation that went to India and negotiated a
Memorandum of Understanding on high-technology trade and cooperation
designed to speed the flow of computers and other high-tech products.
Both
sides were committed to a new era of relations between the world's
two
largest democracies.
As a result of that agreement, the United States quickly became India's
No.
1 trading partner. A new relationship was being established between
the
United States and India after years of distrust.
Since those dark days of 1984, much progress had been made in improving
the relationship. The beginning of economic reforms opened India to
further
commercial ties in the areas of energy, telecommunications and other
sectors
vitally important to the modernization of the country's infrastructure.
Now that relationship may have been jeopardized. What should we do?
The
clock can't be turned back. We must recognize that India has acted
in its
own self interest. It is time for clear heads on both sides to reduce
the
tensions and move forward, building for tomorrow on the progress of
the
past. It's time for the United States to exert some enlightened leadership.
I have always been struck by the American attitude that we as a nation
feel
we have a divine right to pick and choose which nations are to be
considered among the nuclear haves and have-nots, particularly when
our
ability to control proliferation of weapons of mass destruction is
limited.
Who are we to say that we know better than others what is in their best
national interest?
No wonder the Indians resent this attitude. Would the United States
stand
behind India if it were attacked by China or Pakistan? I think not.
Instead,
we talk a lot about India, but tend to take it for granted. Too often
we have
either patronized or ignored India.
From the perspective of someone in India, the course of action is clear.
With
the United States embarked on a confusing foreign policy toward China,
the
politically attuned Indian on the street sees U.S. technical assistance
going to
one unfriendly neighbor who in turn is assisting another unfriendly
neighbor --
Pakistan -- in developing a nuclear delivery capability. Having fought
several
wars with both countries, what would you do? Once burned twice shy.
While the Clinton administration had no choice but to impose unilateral
sanctions, which were required by law, one can only hope that reason
will
prevail on both sides and that an appropriate exit strategy can be
found. All
need not be lost, for the United States could benefit politically and
economically from compromise.
Furthermore, President Clinton should go ahead with his projected visit
to
India in the fall, not only to carry forward negotiations on nuclear
issues, but
to show a new American interest in a long-neglected part of the world.
Such
a visit would provide hopeful encouragement when American investment
commitments in India exceed $8 billion. To do otherwise would be
short-sighted and not in our long-term strategic interest.
As an observer of India for more than 30 years, I have been struck by
its
progress. It is clear that as India continues to develop, it will become
a
major player in the global economy. It has the potential to attract
enormous
amounts of investment capital for modernization, which will enhance
the
standard of living and expand employment opportunities for its people.
As one high-ranking Cabinet official in a former government remarked,
"We
need all the help we can get."
It's time for a long-overdue reality check in our relations with India.
On the one hand, we need to review our obsession with China's
communist-led government, where policies and relationships are governed
by dictatorial whim.
On the other hand, we tend to forget that India, with all its problems
and
needs, has tremendous potential. It is the world's largest democracy
with a
parliamentary government, a sound legal system based on English common
law, an independent judiciary, a free press, and a well-developed private
sector and financial system. And yes, English is spoken.
Dr. Fred Ikle, former undersecretary of defense for policy in the Reagan
administration, in a recent article on India, stated it rather well
when he
wrote, "We must keep the big picture in mind." |
