| 14-11-08 00:00 |
India dissents from Obamania —Pr |
The new Obama administration will seek to restore an international
status quo that preceded the Bush presidency. This includes restoring
ties with Europe, tightening the nuclear non-proliferation regime and
possibly a restoration of China as the centrepiece of US policy in
Asia. The question for India will be whether this is accomplished by
reducing the international space that the country gained under Bush
India is among the few dozen countries, largely clustered in Asia and
Africa, where sentiment in favour of the United States actually rose
during the administration of George W Bush. Nonetheless, more Indians
favoured the election of Barack Obama than they did John McCain. What
explains this seeming contradiction?
At the heart of the Bush administration' s success with India was a
belief that India was a nation whose rise was beneficial to US
interests. This led Bush to seek to adjust the international order to
India's benefit, most notably by negotiating an exemption from the
Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty for India. The net result was a
closer Indo-US relationship and a positive view of Bush that overrode
unpopular actions such as invading Iraq.
Obama's election — the success of a member of a non-white minority in
the world's oldest democratic polity — has seized the imagination of
many Indians. He is exhorted in the media and among the intellectual
classes. Among the most fervent supporters of Obama in the US have
been the nearly three million-strong Indian-American community. "You
can't swing a dead cat in the Obama camp without hitting an Indian-
American," said an Obama advisor.
In the run up to the election, many Indians could not believe that an
African-American would ever be chosen to reside in the White House.
His election inevitably enhanced the standing of the US as a land of
genuine opportunity, a nation whose multicultural credentials were as
great if not better than polyglot and poly-ethnic India.
The greatest scepticism about an Obama presidency lies among Indian
strategic elite, who are focused on promoting India's economic and
political interests in the wider world. They found an ally in that
cause in Bush. Whatever Obama's ethnic credentials, India's
government has detected in his statements reason to believe that he
will be less supportive than Bush.
First, India is wary that any Democratic administration will include
the same proponents of nuclear non-proliferation who opposed Bush's
exemption for India. Obama has publicly said he intends to push for a
comprehensive test ban treaty, a treaty that India opposes because it
feels its own nuclear deterrent remains incomplete.
Second, Obama has attacked the outsourcing of service jobs to places
like India and the off-shoring of manufacturing jobs to Asia as a
whole. His advisors also indicate that they will seek to incorporate
social provisions, like labour standards, into future international
trade negotiations. Though candidates tend to rollback from
protectionist stances once they come to power, the Democrats' control
of both houses of Congress may not give Obama that leeway.
Third, a Democratic administration has said it will put climate
change at the forefront of its global policy concerns. If the focus
is about mitigating carbon production through technological means,
there will be few concerns. However, if the policy slips into more
coercive measures such as carbon tariffs and the like, the result is
likely to convert climate change into an energy security struggle. It
will also pit the big carbon emitters of the future, like India and
China, against present polluters like the US and Europe.
Finally, conversations with a few Obama advisors and his own speeches
indicate that Washington's number one security concern in the coming
years will be Afghanistan and Pakistan. "Iraq is yesterday's
problem," said one advisor to an Indian audience several weeks ago.
At the heart of that problem, say Obama advisors, is the growing
neurosis of the Pakistani regime. Pakistan suf |
|
