Don't
Send Indian Troops To Iraq
The Hindu
04 July, 2003
The Vajpayee government appears to be considering a course of dangerous
adventurism that would surrender the nation's long cherished independence
in foreign policy, ignoring in the process the national interest, a
categorical parliamentary resolution, the overwhelming national mood
and the disastrous consequences of a precedent setting decision.
After the Government's failure
to construct a political consensus, any decision to agree to the American
request to send Indian soldiers to serve on the so-called stabilisation
force in occupied Iraq will be illegal and unacceptable as illegitimate
as the Bush administration's unprecedented invasion of a sovereign nation.
The unilateral military campaign founded on the dangerous Bush "doctrine
of pre-emption" and on blatant falsehood and deceit the
hearings in the committees of the American Congress and the House of
Commons were a revelation is sought to be legitimised post facto
through the induction of soldiers from willing or bendable nations around
the globe. Faced with the hazards of occupation and perhaps surprised
by the intensity of opposition and unprepared for it, Washington is
desperately searching for partners to bail it out. Donald Rumsfeld,
the voice of the ultra right group that has taken a stranglehold at
the White House, has wondered with unconcealed exasperation what else
Washington can do besides asking 20 nations through threats and offers
of bounties to help "stabilise" the occupation. The face of
unilateralism stands exposed.
India should immediately
declare that it will not join this unjust venture and that Indian soldiers
are not mercenaries but part of a professional force, which is not ready
to give up its blemishless record of performing peace-keeping operations
under the United Nations for more than half a century. The apparent
vacillation raises the suspicion that the Government is persisting with
its clandestine efforts to strike a deal with the U.S. It is time the
Government ended this dangerous exercise and told the U.S. that it is
unable to participate. It needs to put into practice the commitment
it made in the recently concluded Joint Declaration with China to "strengthen
multipolarity at the international level." New Delhi's dilemma
is no doubt understandable. A Government that deludes itself with visions
of great power status and rushes to Washington at the drop of a militant
bomb must find the American pressure quite unsettling. Its ideological
affinity with the leading lights of this Republican administration and
its inexplicable obsession with regional competitive diplomacy
the recent Advani visit to the U.S. coincided with the tragi-comic talk
of an Asian NATO have reduced its options and constrained its
independence of action, with little room for manoeuvre. But it will
be abdicating its national responsibility if it pledges the country's
resources and the lives of Indian soldiers to American empire building.
That some sections in the Government are inclined to go along with the
American strategy has been evident for quite some time. The Deputy Prime
Minister's high decibel campaign in the U.S., the effort to persuade
the Congress party to get on board, American spokesmen's unashamed expositions
on the benefits that can accrue to India through oil deals and reconstruction
contracts, the Pentagon team's well-publicised visit to Delhi to offer
"clarifications" and the Foreign Secretary's just-concluded
visit to Washington are all part of this campaign to secure legitimacy
for an apparently imminent decision to fall in line behind the U.S and
play junior partner to it.
With the legitimacy and acceptance
of the American-British occupation being challenged every day on the
streets of Baghdad and other populated centres, any Government sensitive
to the national interest should have seen through the high pressure
sales campaign to get India to send troops. The unilateralist U.S. is
eager to share the burdens of occupation. In this big business of war,
there is nothing that India stands to gain through its participation
in the occupation. Nothing that has been dangled before the BJP Government
is worth the heavy price in terms of loss of goodwill that the country
will pay in the long run by supporting the U.S. Government. Spin-doctors
have ceaselessly cited the offer of oil and contracts. But India does
not require the back door to enter Iraq with which it has had a fruitful,
longstanding bilateral political, economic and trade relationship, without
American patronage. It will be ready to deal with a free and democratic
Iraq, the ties founded on equality and shared experiences. Among the
other "benefits" on the table is a permanent seat on the U.N.
Security Council. This, again, is India's due and can be no superpower's
gift, considering its unstinted support to the world body and its Charter
and its participation in the U.N.'s wide-ranging activities. The same
evasion and prevarication on the part of the Government is evident over
the very real concerns that have been expressed over command and control,
the fears being sought to be skirted through vague talk of "independent"
sectors of operation parcelled out by the U.S. as it retains control
of the overall strategy and pulls out its men. Again, as the Congress
party has pointed out, this will be another unacceptable departure from
the fundamental principle that Indian soldiers on global duty will operate
only under the U.N. flag and U.N. command. The U.N. Security Council
resolution 1483, which recognises the reality of the occupation, leaves
no scope for dual military command.
The nation will also reject
the disingenuous argument of Government spokesmen that India will send
troops if the Iraqis want them. Such obfuscation cannot hide the hard
reality that it will be a long time before the free Iraqi voice is heard.
The trigger-happy American actions in the past month carry a clear message:
the U.S., in no hurry to look for those weapons of mass destruction
whose presumed existence brought it to Iraq, has come to stay as it
consolidates its hold and sets up its own political-military arrangement
with assistance from willing, subservient nations. There is one more
combined message from the streets of Iraq: a widening, deepening resistance
that seeks an end to the occupation and early return of a semblance
of normality under free conditions. In fact, all the debate on the post-Saddam
Hussein Iraq has unfortunately pushed to the sidelines the one issue
that demands immediate international attention: the very urgent requirements
of the Iraqi people whose lives have been traumatised by the indiscriminate,
hi-tech bombing campaign of the U.S. and the U.K. India is eminently
suited to answer this call from the Iraqi people. It should move to
bring the U.N. and its agencies back into the reconstruction and rehabilitation
effort. The world body has experience and expertise in nation-building
as evidenced in East Timor and more recently in Afghanistan where it
is an effort in progress. Instead of seeking to play proxy to the superpower,
New Delhi should work in coordination with countries such as Russia,
China, France, Germany and Iran to empower the U.N. to take over and
restore Iraq to the Iraqis.