POLITICS: India Cannot Expect too Much from Powell’s Replacement

By IPS Correspondents Reprint | | Print |

Analysis - By Siddharth Srivastava

NEW DELHI, Nov 16 2004 (IPS) - Outgoing U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell might not have had much say in Washington’s critical policy decisions in Iraq, North Korea and Iran, but he managed to jar India on several issues that resulted in a less than happy relationship with New Delhi.

Powell’s tenure was marked by several utterances and steps, which never went down well with the Indian establishment. The U.S. state secretary had a penchant for public diplomacy on India-Pakistan issues that have not been appreciated by foreign policy mandarins here.

He has been blamed for lacking sensitivity and imagination in dealing with India as well as maintaining the delicate balance between India and Pakistan.

”It is an unstated rule that India prefers all U.S. apprehensions to be dealt with an element of secrecy, given the high decibel jingoism associated with even a whimper of giving in to the superpower,” a senior official with the foreign ministry, who requested not to be named. ” The U.S. foreign policy under Powell broke this dictum.”

On Monday, Powell announced his resignation as state secretary from the second Bush administration. U.S. President George W. Bush, in turn, announced on Tuesday that national security adviser Condoleezza Rice was his choice as the new secretary of state.

If confirmed in the post by the U.S. Senate, Rice will be the first black female secretary of state.

Earlier this year, Powell announced the designation of Pakistan as a ‘major non-NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) ally’ (not a big deal, actually) a few hours before one-to-one meetings with the Indian leadership – without hinting about any such move.

But it embarrassed India and added to the belief that when it comes to the war on terror, the U.S. has a blinkered view of going about tackling the malaise by siding with Pakistan.

By keeping Pakistan happy, Washington was ignoring India’s long-standing complaint that its neighbor harbours terrorists that are equally dangerous to India, U.S. and the rest of the world.

More recently (curiously, before the U.S. elections held on Nov. 2), the U.S. secretary of state took credit for initiating telephone calls between the leadership of India and Pakistan that led to the eventual peace process that began in January this year.

That, however, has not been taken too kindly here.

The last impression that any government in India wants to create is the fact that the talks with Pakistan are at the instance of Washington – which never goes down well with the Indian population.

Former Indian foreign minister Jaswant Singh was livid when Powell claimed that it was due to his considerable skills in patching calls together that India and Pakistan began their current ‘thaw’.

”For Powell to suggest that he set it all up is the height of imagination,” Singh told reporters. ”I do not know that apart from formulating foreign policy, the State Department also acts as a telephone exchange and as an elocution instructor for South Asia,” Singh said, adding Powell’s comments were ”objectionable.”

According to another former foreign minister of India, Yashwant Sinha who enjoyed a good relationship with Powell, the current peace efforts between India and Pakistan are bilateral in nature without any prodding from anybody. Sinha was appointed India’s external affairs minister, under the previous government, on Jul.1, 2002, against the backdrop of a new geo-political reality of the post 9/11 world.

While on India-Pakistan relations, India is still smarting under the sanctions imposed on two Indian scientists for selling nuclear secrets, in the absence of any bit of evidence while the father of Pakistan’s nuclear programme A Q Khan, is scot-free in the face of the most damning proof of peddling nuclear arsenal to Europe and Iran.

Powell, a former four-star general, assiduously promoted U.S. ties with the military regime of Pakistan, while trying to keep a public profile of a balanced relationship between the two countries

Indeed, the feeling here is that Powell did have as much of a say as he did in India-Pakistan relations as the ''hardliners” within the Bush administration who really called the shots.

Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld did not consider it politically or financially prudent to spend too much time on subjects concerning this region, and so Powell was relatively free to lay down policy decisions.

But there were differences in the treatment of China though, with Cheney and Rumsfeld, of the view that India and Japan be co-opted to rein the Asian giant in contrast with Powell’s pro-China thoughts.

In such a scenario India’s irritation with Powell has only grown over time.

Diplomats here complain that the State Department under Powell played ball with despotic regimes as China and Saudi Arabia. He indulged dictators such as Pakistan President Gen. Pervez Musharraf, to fight the battle of terror on behalf of the United States.

At the same time he criticised India, for not maintaining the moral high ground, by rolling out the red carpet to Burma’s Senior General Than Shwe, who visited India recently as head of a military regime. Just days before his India trip, Than Shwe placed his reformist prime minister Khin Nyunt under house arrest.

The question is, what after Powell?

Is he likely to be replaced by more hawkish Condoleezza Rice? It must be kept in mind that the new incumbent after Powell will be in place due to the intrigues and inner dynamics of the Bush administration – where the conservative voices had lined up against the moderate Powell.

According to foreign policy expert, G. Parthasarthy, the progress in India-U.S. relations will be rooted in the talks that happen within the broad framework of what has been termed as the Next Steps to Strategic Partnership (NSSP).

Parthasarthy revealed that Washington would continue to put up a tough bargain on issues related to supplies of dual technologies for peaceful purposes as well as military relationships.

Indeed, the broad parameters of the relationship between New Delhi and Washington have already been established and it is not likely to change much.

India, unlike Pakistan, does not figure in the core strategic thinking of Washington – and many observers do not expect that to change for another 25 years. It will be shortsighted for India to expect any kind of turn around in the way the U.S. perceives Pakistan, given that it has remained much the same for a long time.