Unaddressed Concerns

The Vajpayee government's evident reluctance to take a categorical position against a U.S.-led war on Iraq and its marked hesitation in articulating a clear policy before the country's Parliament on a matter of grave international importance and import are symptoms of the paralysis that is afflicting foreign policy. But for stray, casual comments from the Defence Minister, George Fernandes, the Government has kept the country in the dark about its policy on an issue that has been agitating the international community for weeks and seen millions pour out on to the streets to demonstrate in different capitals around the world. Instead of utilising the opportunity of a debate in Parliament to pass a resolution that would have added India's powerful voice for the cause of peace and reflected the overwhelming national sentiment, the Government chose to shy away on the plea that the Prime Minister needed "flexibility" when he attends the summit meeting of the Non-Aligned Movement next week.

There are strong reservations in this country against unilateralism in international relations and apprehensions over the attempts to undermine the authority of the United Nations. Without addressing these, the Prime Minister made a bland, all-embracing statement that he is against war "anywhere" and that it should be the last resort. The ambivalence was equally evident in the Finance Minister's response. The Government's position remained that a "war should be avoided", stated Jaswant Singh, standing in for the External Affairs Minister, when speaking Parliament. New Delhi's position was guided by its belief in maintaining the U.N.'s relevance in matters relating to international security, the need the implement the resolution on disarming Iraq, avert a humanitarian crisis and maintain international and regional stability. The weapons inspectors should have the opportunity to complete their task in Iraq, he said but added that the U.N. Security Council could not be expected to wait indefinitely to secure Iraqi compliance. The rider's inclusion was incomprehensible. If the objective was to please the sole superpower, it exposed the hollowness of the stated policy.

A Government that has surrendered its independence of action finds its voice muted. Its response has to some extent gone politically unchallenged, helped by a surprising lack of mobilisation on the street. The position in India contrasts with the response elsewhere in the region and in Europe. The Arab world's divisions continue to bedevil the region, with the seething anger in the Arab street put down by repressive regimes. But it is in Europe that the developments over Iraq are leaving their imprint most dramatically. The spontaneous anti-war protests in Europe signal major changes in trans-Atlantic relations. They portend a chasm developing between the Western allies of Cold War vintage, ironically France and Germany leading the rebel camp. The two sides have drifted apart since the Cold War's end. Europe, led by the two bitter enemies of World War II, has slowly turned its face against the anarchic world where power was the ultimate determinant of security — and has come up against the only remaining votary of power politics, Washington. The leaders of France and Germany have surprised the world and brought cheer to the liberal international community by standing up against the militarism of the Bush administration, laying emphasis on negotiation, diplomacy and international law and rejecting use of force and unilateralism in global relations. But the scars of this clash will undoubtedly remain, with the very real possibility that for the first time in a century the warmth in the trans-Atlantic relationship may never return. In this context, the contrast with India's current low-profile reticence could not be sharper.