ELECTIONS '98
COMMENTARY
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ARCHIVES

The Rediff Special/ Jaideep E Menon

Hypocrites, all of them!

Poor Mother India. Battered for a millennium, the venerable old lady finally summons the mental strength to hike up her sari and look straight into the eyes of ghosts past, and what does she get? She gets hit by the Nuclear Proliferation Prevention Act of the US and a slew of aid cuts by other countries jostling for an opportunity to display their best moral posture. The chorus of disapproval continues. India has destabilised South Asia, say some; nay, the whole world, say others.

Of all the brickbats being thrown at her, the projectiles of two countries can be tolerated: Japan and, to some extent, New Zealand. Japan, having had two atomic weapons used against her civilian population by the US, has earned the right to criticise us -- even if she is stealthily stockpiling tens of tons of plutonium. New Zealand is at least consistent, by and large. She minces no words, whether it is France that does the testing or India; small virtues go a long way these days.

Amidst the desiccation of India in the western media, reader, you may be forgiven for thinking that we Indians must be downright callous to have made the "terrible mistake" of testing, as US President Bill Clinton put it. Well, we're in good company. This "terrible mistake" has been made by the five nuclear powers 2,046 times -- of which, our critic-in-chief Washington is responsible for more than one-half.

Come now, you say, they did it all long ago and have been exercising tremendous restraint of late. Indeed they have: China since July 1996, France since January 1996, the US since September 1992, Britain since November 1991 and the former Soviet Union since October 1990. We may be on the "wrong side of history", as Clinton claimed, but not by much. (One joke a Russian diplomat cracked the other day was that Moscow should, in fact, be our chief critic rather than the US because Russia can call itself the only nuclear power which has not tested even a single weapon -- it was the Soviet Union which carried out all 715 tests. In testing times, the Russians can always be depended upon to be ready with their brand of black humour).

OK, you tell me, the nuclear powers have at least all agreed to stop testing under the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. Not quite true. As Ms Arundhati Ghose valiantly pointed out numerous times during the CTBT negotiations, that sham of a treaty is neither comprehensive nor does it amount to a ban on tests. To remind you of the picture -- I'm sure you are already in it from reading countless editorials -- the US has over the last year conducted "sub-critical" tests which don't fall under the CTBT. Convenient, is it not? It will continue to conduct such tests in order to refine its nuclear weapons for the next century. Total disarmament, of course, comes into effect after the galactic war with the Klingons is ended in favour of the Starship Enterprise (evocative name that).

You can bet your bottom dollar that even as the US state department and sundry politicians were blasting India, people in the departments of defense and energy were preparing for the next sub-critical tests and studying data from the previous one. I pick on the US here, but it is not the sole hypocrite -- just the only one foolish enough to impose sanctions that, in the long-term, will send its multinationals into battle for the global market-place with one-hand tied behind their backs.

And for what? It has been pointed out umpteen times that by conducting the tests India has broken no treaties which it has signed, violated no international laws, proliferated no nuclear technology (unlike some other nuclear powers), and shown a forbearance and restraint for 24 years that would put any of the other nuclear powers to shame. Our pleas for total disarmament were barely heard, let alone seriously considered. And for good measure, many if not most of the reports about Chinese nuclear/missile technology transfer to Pakistan come from leaks emanating out of the American defence/intelligence complex.

In such a context, one would say that we had at least some justification for our action. But the US administration does not share that view. To tell India how "wrong" she was, William Jefferson Clinton used the same well-practised, taut-jawed, "concerned world leader" look that he used to defend himself against Paula, Monica and others. It seems American attitudes towards India have remained more or less unchanged from the days of Tricky Dick to those of Slick Willy. Richard Nixon's bungle in 1971 was well documented. Let's hope Clinton is a fast learner. So far, anyway, so good -- after the initial fit of pique Washington now appears to be backpedalling; all manner of experts and what not have begun to offer more nuanced opinions. But don't expect much to come out of that -- they'll probably hit us as hard as the sanctions act requires.

It is clear that in realpolitik Washington has a lot to learn from the old continent. It is an education to watch the Europeans keeping a steady eye on their interests. Amid the near hysteria on the Hill, the Europeans seemed almost reticent. France, no stranger to independent action in the nuclear field, stressed that sanctions are not the way to go. And Britain, a country even continental Europeans had begun to view as a dummy to ventriloquist Uncle Sam, has taken a position that is not to our detriment. India should note for future reference Prime Minister Tony Blair's measured comments and actions, such as making sure the G-8 summit did not get carried away by Bill's enthusiasm to "punish" India. Blair has more than made up for Foreign Secretary Robin Cook's cock-up over Kashmir. If London stays the course, there should be a clear payback, in time.

Let's now spare a thought for that amorphous agglomeration known as the "Third World". Criticism of India, if any, from this hapless group -- which, by the way, constitutes the majority -- has been muted beyond recognition. In the Arab World, most countries haven't even bothered to make a statement so far -- they're much too familiar with Washington's double standards on nuclear and other issues to be particularly surprised. If anything, the tend to look with a sneaking admiration at the Indian move. (There were even reports of minor celebrations in Egypt over the Indian tests).

The joker in the pack so far has been Pakistan. The government has taken the position that it will test, but at a time of its choosing -- "when", not "if", is the watchword. Foreign Minister Gohar Ayub Khan struts about making sound bites to whoever will listen, preferably a western news agency, about how Pakistan's missile and nuclear capability is well ahead of that of India. This is along the lines of the one Pakistani is equal to 10 Indians theory, which originated in his father's time. But the last word must go to Benazir Bhutto, who in an article contributed to the Global Viewpoint of the LA Times, published on May 16, identified India as a "rogue" state and stated: "if a pre-emptive military strike is possible to neutralise India's nuclear capability, that is the response that is necessary". She didn't venture to speculate as to who would carry out such a strike under the current circumstances. We can all rest easy that she is no longer the prime minister of her country but the target of an arrest warrant (bailable) issued against her in Pakistan. Thank God for small mercies.

Amid these Strangelovian goings on, ordinary joes and janes are left to ponder about what happened to total disarmament, as envisaged under the Non-Proliferation Treaty. To put it bluntly, that was just claptrap mouthed often enough that many people believed it. We may have, too, in the beginning but now it's clear we've come back to earth with a bang, or rather five of them. It's no wonder that, for the vast majority of Indians, such realism comes as a welcome relief. Of course, some self-declared foreign friends -- no doubt with the best of intentions -- may find all this "terribly cynical" on our part. Perhaps. But no more so -- and probably less -- than those armed to the teeth with doomsday bombs. We have no reason to be apologetic.

What's the point, you ask, hasn't India joined the immoral group by testing? Yes, absolutely. But there's one mitigating factor. India has always said it's ready for total verifiable disarmament. It is ready now. Are the other five nuclear powers? Don't hold your breath.

Still, Mother India wonders, did nobody who condemns me now hear the noise when I was being battered? Did none of the good members of the community in this global village see the bruises in the morning, when my head was black and blue after terrorist bombs or massacres? Maybe they did, at first, but like neighbours suppressing an uncomfortable secret, they had long since stopped seeing and hearing. Perhaps it was the realisation that she would have to depend upon her own resources that caused Bharat Mata to hike up her sari. Now that she has looked deep and long into the blackness, she will no longer be afraid. No one will batter her again without facing the response of a mother whose children are endangered.

Jaideep E Menon is a Middle East country risk consultant, based in Cyprus.

The Rediff Special

Tell us what you think of this feature