NEW DELHI, 29 July 2003 — Washington’s top soldier, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Richard Myers, landed in New Delhi yesterday to press India to send troops to Iraq as the US struggles to find Asian allies to share the burden. Although Japan has agreed to send peacekeepers, it has not set a timeframe. Pakistan, a key US ally in the war on terror, has adopted a wait-and-see approach and Bangladesh appears unlikely to commit troops.
Rejecting Washington’s request for a division — 15,000-20,000 men — New Delhi said this month it could not join peacekeeping operations in Iraq without a clear UN mandate.
A US Embassy official in New Delhi said Washington was having “ongoing talks” on peacekeeping contributions with several countries, including India, and it could certainly come up during Myers’ meetings later today and tomorrow. An Indian Defense Ministry spokesman said New Delhi’s position was clear, but added Myers was expected to discuss operational details in the event India changcd its mind.
India, an old friend of Iraq, opposed the US-led war to depose Saddam Hussein and Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee was unable to win widespread support for sending peacekeepers without UN backing. Almost 20 countries have contributed troops to the US-led stabilization force, but it remains dominated by the US.
The US is considering seeking a UN resolution to persuade more countries to send in soldiers, but has given no timeframe. “There has to be some forward movement on the other side,” said C. Raja Mohan, strategic affairs editor of The Hindu newspaper, referring to Washington’s consultations with the United Nations. “India will not change its position until then.”
Analysts said New Delhi also had reservations about working under a US command, with critics saying India would become part of an “occupying force”.
“It has to be a true blue-beret force,” retired Major-General Afsir Karim said, “not just a US force with a UN figleaf.”
While the US increases its diplomatic pressure on India for sending troops to Iraq, the big question is: Will New Delhi’s refusal lead to any negative impact on bilateral ties?
In an exclusive interview with Arab News, former Indian ambassador to US, Dr. Abid Hussain said, “Since the United States has been desirous of Indian troops for Iraq, Washington cannot be expected to be pleased by New Delhi’s refusal. However, this cannot have a negative impact on the two nations’ relations.
“Given the two nations’ relations in the field of communication and their bilateral trade, it would not be wrong to say that they entertain close economic ties at present. And India’s insistence not to send troops cannot have a negative impact in these areas.”
Besides, in context of Indian businesses still eager to play a role in the Iraq’s reconstruction drive, the general opinion is that there are other ways for India to play a major part in the war-ravaged area. However, even in this domain, prospects of India playing a meaningful role can be given substantial importance only if Iraq ceases to be occupied by coalition forces. Dr. Hussain said, “It is extremely important for international organizations, say the United Nations to play a crucial role in Iraq’s reconstruction drive.”
This also implies that as long as the coalition forces remain in Iraq, prospects of India moving in the nation remain as dim as before. While a US request for Indian troops will top Myer’s India agenda, he will also discuss prospects of improving Indo-US security ties and military partnership for defeating terrorism. The Indian Army’s request for specialized counter-insurgency equipment and nuclear, biological and chemical warfare suits will also figure in the talks, sources said.
