A recent report of Obama administration exploring all options to conclude a civil nuclear agreement with Pakistan, on the lines of India-US pact of 2005, has literally stirred up a hornet’s nest in New Delhi.
A panicky Indian government reacted rather sharply, reminding the world of Pakistan’s alleged proliferation malfeasance. “Whosoever is examining that particular dossier should be well aware of Pakistan’s track record in the area of proliferation,” asserted India’s foreign ministry spokesperson, adding “when India got this particular deal it was on the basis of our own impeccable non-proliferation track record. That is the reason the US gave us 123 Agreement in 2005 and that is why we got an NSG waiver in 2008. Pakistan’s track record is completely different so we hope that will be taken into account in making any such decision.”
With each passing day, Modi government is tying itself up in knots over the evolving politico-strategic developments in the region. After antagonizing the friendly Nepalese people by needlessly meddling in their constitution making, New Delhi has started harping on the same old string of Pakistan being at the root of all evils that has befallen India and her neighborhood. It is a pity that a nation, which considers itself a global player with legitimate right of gracing the high stage at UN Security Council is not only bogged down by a lack of vision but is also gripped by intermittent bouts of Pakistan mania. And Modi, going by his admirers’ claim, is supposedly playing a stellar role in restoring India’s leadership within the subcontinent as well as on the world stage. But then, despite being hailed as a visionary leader, he is unable to recognize that the turbulent sociopolitical and economic environment of the present times and the resultant societal friction calls for renunciation of triumphalist jingoism, especially in a region like South Asia, gripped with endemic poverty. Instead of baying for each other’s blood, there is an urgent need to promote tolerance and peaceful coexistence, as outlined in the India-espoused principle of Panchsheel and enshrined in the UN charter. Modi, however, has displayed extreme vacillation vis-à-vis his foreign policy goal in South Asia. From inviting all regional leaders, including Pakistan’s Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, in his inauguration to advocating covert sabotage mission deep inside Pakistani territory, Modi has been oscillating aimlessly and making it more difficult to stabilize a historically troubled Indian subcontinent.
His government even tactfully sabotaged bilateral official discourses scheduled in the recent past, thus putting a spanner on all efforts to restore some semblance of sanity in the tensed India-Pakistan bilateral relationship. One wonder, if Washington wants to negotiate a pact on new limits on Pakistan’s nuclear weapons and delivery systems, why does India want to play spoiler? After all, India’s journey toward acquiring nuclear weapons capability or embarking on a covert thermonuclear weapons production program, despite self-imposed moratorium, has not been ethical in the strictest sense. A very senior official of the Vajpayee government, who was intricately associated with the 1998 nuclear test, shared with this author how New Delhi exploited the economic insufficiency of some friendly African nations for ensuring acquisition of logistic support for the critical project. He also confirmed that the Vajpayee government had projected India as a strategic leverage against China to soften Washington, though a strategic intelligence source, later on, gave a detailed account of clandestine American complicity in preparations for the Indian nuclear test.
“Israel, a natural partner of any government led by the right-wing Bharatiya Janata Party, was used as a front to encourage India in testing nuclear device,” revealed the source. No doubt, America’s pursuit of an ever-increasing aggressive policy toward China has prompted successive administrations in Washington to boost India’s military and economic capability for counterbalancing Beijing’s growing stature in world politics and economy. American strategic planners have acknowledged candidly that their country’s global dominance is threatened by the rise of China and this process needs to be reversed by economic, diplomatic and military means. Even former US Ambassador to India Robert Blackwill had conceded that without the China factor hovering over the strategic calculations of American policy makers the “Bush administration would not have negotiated the civil nuclear agreement with India and the Congress would not have approved it.”
By the same logic, Islamabad too would find itself in US’ strategic radar, not only because Washington wants to involve as many regional players as possible in its revised “grand strategy” to counter Beijing, but owing to the reality of Pakistan being at the front-line of global war on terror, thanks to its geostrategic centrality. Besides, Pakistan’s cooperation is critical for achieving lasting peace and stability in Afghanistan on account of geographical contiguity. True, unlike India, Pakistan do not have a huge market that can act as a lollipop to commercially entice established nuclear powers to violate the same international nuclear non-proliferation law provisions, once ratified by them. But it would be strategically suicidal for New Delhi to oppose any deal that can help Pakistan attain the desired stability and prosperity. A crippling energy crisis, triggering socioeconomic instability due to vulnerable economic output, will have a cascading effect, thereby affecting regional security.
India should, therefore, be at the forefront of any international move to bolster nuclear and renewable energy in Pakistan and focus on enhancing economic ties for the greater good.
