The nuclear mess continues

News reports in the last few days indicate the current government's penchant for bending all rules continues unabated. The government is in a hurry to sign up a deal with the US nuclear suppliers without due diligence. And, apparently, at  the cost of signing an illegal agreement.

Chellaney tweeted about an article published at www.project-syndicate.org which yet again reveals the lack of logic in pursuing nuclear power. But then when was logic the strong point of the current dispensation

Nuclear Upsets

If it seems to be a season of "I told you so", I cant help it ! The PM's much touted success in the Indo US nuclear pact is now in tatters. To use the words of my favourite strategic affairs writer Brahma Chellaney,

the deal has come to symbolize the travails of the Singh government — scandals, broken promises, malfeasance, poor public accountability, and the resort to casuistry to camouflage reality. The cash-for-votes scandal in Parliament set the stage for the other scams that have followed.

Even writers who were earlier supporting the deal, have had to do an about face. Writing for the Hindu, Dr Anil Kakodkar, who had earlier been co-opted by the government in negotiating the "deal" with the NSG expresses

Nuclear Suppliers' Group (NSG)..additional restrictions for transfer of ENR (enrichment and reprocessing) technologies with adherence to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) being a condition for transfer has caused huge unease in India

 Vardarajan, the Hindu's strategic affairs analyst, and a former supporter of the deal too, has had to admit that the deal is dead.

Meanwhile, China has gone ahead and "grandfathered" another two reactors for Pakistan. In other words, without committing anything, Pakistan has as much access to technology and fuel as India has after it has waived its sovereign rights to develop its own nuclear techology for its protection. Ofcourse, India is open to buying reactors from the rest of the world, when Germany and now Japan have taken legislative steps to shut down nuclear power, given its unviability when total cost of operations and accidents are accounted for.

It may serve our negotiators well to remember that NSG was set up as an Anti India cartel. Nothing has changed. The latest guidelines on technology transfer impact only one country - India.

Spot the difference

“Pakistan, perhaps the world’s greatest victim of terrorism.... Let us be frank. Pakistan has paid an enormous price for its stand against terrorism.”  May3, 2011-05-09

“it is also true that incidents take place in Pakistan also. That Pakistan is also a victim of terrorism. These groups, whether it’s Lakhsar-e-Toiba or Jaish-e-Mohammad, they can act autonomously” Sep 11, 2006

Same thought, two speakers - guess who? The first was written by Pak President Zardari in a recent op-ed in the Washington Post. The second is a quote from a gentleman who originated the idea - our own venerable PM Dr Singh.

The USA has released documents that show the complicity of ISI in the Mumbai attacks. It makes Dr. Singh's willingness to "talk" to Pakistan - with no emphasis on them attempting to show remorse - much less take action against the perpetrators, even more inexplicable.

Dr. Singh's governments continues its focus on "hindu terrorists" rather than on those from across the borders. One can only conclude that perhaps Dr. Singh, when he was a little toddler, was nursed by a particularly ferocious member of the hindu community. After all they say that childhood trauma can leave deep scars!

India's strategic loss

My first post in the new year, from a new location - Hyderabad (I should now rename the blog perhaps) has to do with some sad news - the passing away of K. Subrahmanyam – regarded as the father of strategic planning on issues regarding defence and foreign affairs. Unfortunately, I had no interaction with him – except for reading most of his columns appearing in the press – where he was a prolific contributor.

Subrahmanyam – a one-time nuclear hawk – inconsistently supported the nuclear deal that India signed up with the US – a move I would ascribe to advancing age, and a lack of appreciation of the economic realities of the new world. That opinion notwithstanding, I always found his writing to be interesting and well informed. While his insights were called upon by many governments – the Congress government, and the NDA, they were not always taken to their logical conclusion - many of the recommendations of his report after the Kargil war remain unimplemented.

In his demise, India has lost a strategic thinker who had the best for India at heart. May his soul rest in peace.

Af-Pak - the new US FAK-AP

One organization in the US that is taking the "short term" view is certainly the white house. With its Af-Pak policy predictably falling apart, and with their self-imposed deadline of 2011 to exit Afghanistan fast approaching, the US government is creating a new breed of armed goondas to manage law and order. As Chellaney points out here this too shall end in tears - except that these may involve Indian lives as well.

More shame in Indo Pak talks

M J Akbar's view
Chandan Mitra's column
Varadarajan in the Hindu (the "official" spin?)
The outcome of the talks in Afghanistan

And an article in Pakistan Daily  that seems to surprisingly, articulate a view that Dr Singh would find interesting:
"Manmohan Singh, despite his conciliatory nature, seems to be awakening to the realisation that the objective of those involved in terror plots against India is not simply Kashmir but the reversal of India’s growth story. They seek to make India unsafe for investments, by scaring away even international sports teams, they way they have succeeded in Pakistan. They have been funding agitations against industrial and other projects, so that vast regions of the country remain backward. Thus far, the Manmohan Singh government has adopted an ostrich policy towards this growing threat, hoping that it will disappear. Instead, it is becoming worse. India has always seen a cycle of inaction that creates a crisis, which is then met with overwhelming resources and – where needed – force. The Pune blast has been a wake-up call for Manmohan Singh. Unless he takes much more active steps to stop terror networks in India from killing innocents, he risks seeing the end of the Indian economic miracle. Much more is at stake for India than relations with Pakistan."

India - the new US lapdog

Does personal integrity extend only to not taking bribes? or does it require the Prime Minister to stand upto power centers that are inimical to the interest of the nation?

Dr Singh has weakened India's position in international fora on more than one occasion. Sharm el-Sheikh is a case in point. Copenhagen was another. The recent shocking resignation of Shyam Saran on Feb 19 seems to point to a similar direction. Mr. Saran, the PM’s special envoy on climate change has been "permitted to demit office" from Mar 14. 

What caused this? An attempt has been made to explain this in terms of protocol. Shivshankar Menon, his junior in the foreign service was elevated to Minister of State level, while he was not. This does not seem to be the whole story. Commenting on this, the Hindu writes:

“Whatever the trigger, Mr. Saran is the second high-profile climate negotiator to exit the stage after crossing swords with the United States. Last December, the Philippines government sacked its chief negotiator, Bernaditas Castro-Muller, in the run-up to the Copenhagen summit, a move civil society groups said was taken to please Washington.”

Within two days of Mr Saran quitting, Mr Dasgupta, one of India's top negotiator on climate change too put in his papers. Mr Dasgupta reportedly said: 

“I find it shocking that (Jairam) Ramesh (Minister of state for environment) has asked US-based Arvind Subramanian to consider various options available to us so that we will have the new formula ready by the time the Bonn round of talks start in May this year. These options are not being discussed by Indian climate change experts, but are being referred to an international group. Is this how foreign policy on such a crucial issue is being addressed?” When asked, however, he refused to say if in his opinion this was being done due to pressure from the United States.   

Clearly, India is giving up its well-grounded negotiating position to take up one that is suitable to the USA and one that will likely impose unjustified conditions on India.

An alternate viewpoint, expressed by MJ Akbar, postulates that the reason lay in the substantive disagreement between the PM and him. Shivshankar Menon was appointed NSA and not Shyam Saran, because the Prime Minister decided that Shivshankar Menon was, intellectually and temperamentally, closer to his line of thinking on Pakistan. MJ writes:

"Dr Singh knows he is taking huge risks. He has deliberately underplayed hard evidence from Indian intelligence that Pak-based, anti-Indian terrorist organisations continue to get active support from the Pak military, and that they are not non-state actors. Pakistan’s Army chief, Ashfaq Parvez Kayani has reiterated, in his latest doctrine, that India remains the pre-eminent threat to Pakistan, implicitly justifying the military’s support for the second arm of his country’s response to India, the terrorist network." 

So why is the risk worth taking? It is not for any Indian PM, except if viewed from the eyes of US policy makers. Senator John Kerry has described the resumption of the Indo-Pak dialogue as “critical to the United States”, and suggested that the Indian initiative is an extension of the new India-US relationship. 

So we dutifully troop off to "talk" to Pakistan, though no one knows about what! 

Whatever the view you favour, it appears that India's position vis a vis the US is now similar to that of the British under Blair - that of the lapdog!

Weak leader, weak response

This morning started with another report of an attack on an Indian in Australia. This time, four youngsters attacked a taxi driver from India while travelling in his cab. The Australian response would have been hilarious if it were not so tragic.

The Australians have claimed once again that this was not a "racial" attack - simply "opportunistic". I wonder what that means. I guess the Indian taxi driver gave the white Australian an "opportunity" to attack him since he took them in as passengers, and they were only using that opportunity to beat him and spit at him. Presumably, that is what all civilised passengers in Australian cabs are expected to do if given the "opportunity"! Poor chaps, we should not blame them. Does this remind you of the response to a recent rape case in Goa, where a venerable member of the assembly had accused the victim of "allowing" herself to be victimised?

The next question to ask is - how do the police know that these attacks are NOT racially motivated? Since they claim to have not yet solved any case - or made any arrests, where is this certainty coming from?

I came across a website with an interview with, seemingly, some Indian official. Both, the tone of the questions (suggesting Indian media were blowing up the cases without adequate information), and the Indian officials obsequiousness (suggesting that Australia was a better place than India) almost made me throw up. The only blog comment on the site is telling - the writer commends the Indian government advisory to students - since that would restrict Indian from taking away jobs!
 
The US, meanwhile, has issued a demarche to China - asking for an explanation wrt the hacking attempt on Google! Just goes to tell you how important it is for US to protect commercial interests. For the current Manmohan Singh government, on the other hand, a few Indian lives is not worth protesting over - Will someone please tell  Shashi Tharoor that tweeting on visa issues is not the only job of a junior minister of foreign affairs. Writing out a demarche to Australia may be more workmanlike. But then who ever said that we had a government that wants to work.