Iraq

Communalism

US Imperialism

Globalisation

WSF In India

Humanrights

Economy

India-pak

Kashmir

Palestine

Environment

Gujarat Pogrom

Gender/Feminism

Dalit/Adivasi

Arts/Culture

Archives

Links

Join Mailing List

Contact Us

 

Don't Send Indian Troops To Iraq

The Hindu
04 July, 2003


The Vajpayee government appears to be considering a course of dangerous adventurism that would surrender the nation's long cherished independence in foreign policy, ignoring in the process the national interest, a categorical parliamentary resolution, the overwhelming national mood and the disastrous consequences of a precedent setting decision.

After the Government's failure to construct a political consensus, any decision to agree to the American request to send Indian soldiers to serve on the so-called stabilisation force in occupied Iraq will be illegal and unacceptable — as illegitimate as the Bush administration's unprecedented invasion of a sovereign nation. The unilateral military campaign founded on the dangerous Bush "doctrine of pre-emption" and on blatant falsehood and deceit — the hearings in the committees of the American Congress and the House of Commons were a revelation — is sought to be legitimised post facto through the induction of soldiers from willing or bendable nations around the globe. Faced with the hazards of occupation and perhaps surprised by the intensity of opposition and unprepared for it, Washington is desperately searching for partners to bail it out. Donald Rumsfeld, the voice of the ultra right group that has taken a stranglehold at the White House, has wondered with unconcealed exasperation what else Washington can do besides asking 20 nations through threats and offers of bounties to help "stabilise" the occupation. The face of unilateralism stands exposed.

India should immediately declare that it will not join this unjust venture and that Indian soldiers are not mercenaries but part of a professional force, which is not ready to give up its blemishless record of performing peace-keeping operations under the United Nations for more than half a century. The apparent vacillation raises the suspicion that the Government is persisting with its clandestine efforts to strike a deal with the U.S. It is time the Government ended this dangerous exercise and told the U.S. that it is unable to participate. It needs to put into practice the commitment it made in the recently concluded Joint Declaration with China to "strengthen multipolarity at the international level." New Delhi's dilemma is no doubt understandable. A Government that deludes itself with visions of great power status and rushes to Washington at the drop of a militant bomb must find the American pressure quite unsettling. Its ideological affinity with the leading lights of this Republican administration and its inexplicable obsession with regional competitive diplomacy — the recent Advani visit to the U.S. coincided with the tragi-comic talk of an Asian NATO — have reduced its options and constrained its independence of action, with little room for manoeuvre. But it will be abdicating its national responsibility if it pledges the country's resources and the lives of Indian soldiers to American empire building. That some sections in the Government are inclined to go along with the American strategy has been evident for quite some time. The Deputy Prime Minister's high decibel campaign in the U.S., the effort to persuade the Congress party to get on board, American spokesmen's unashamed expositions on the benefits that can accrue to India through oil deals and reconstruction contracts, the Pentagon team's well-publicised visit to Delhi to offer "clarifications" and the Foreign Secretary's just-concluded visit to Washington are all part of this campaign to secure legitimacy for an apparently imminent decision to fall in line behind the U.S and play junior partner to it.

With the legitimacy and acceptance of the American-British occupation being challenged every day on the streets of Baghdad and other populated centres, any Government sensitive to the national interest should have seen through the high pressure sales campaign to get India to send troops. The unilateralist U.S. is eager to share the burdens of occupation. In this big business of war, there is nothing that India stands to gain through its participation in the occupation. Nothing that has been dangled before the BJP Government is worth the heavy price in terms of loss of goodwill that the country will pay in the long run by supporting the U.S. Government. Spin-doctors have ceaselessly cited the offer of oil and contracts. But India does not require the back door to enter Iraq with which it has had a fruitful, longstanding bilateral political, economic and trade relationship, without American patronage. It will be ready to deal with a free and democratic Iraq, the ties founded on equality and shared experiences. Among the other "benefits" on the table is a permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council. This, again, is India's due and can be no superpower's gift, considering its unstinted support to the world body and its Charter and its participation in the U.N.'s wide-ranging activities. The same evasion and prevarication on the part of the Government is evident over the very real concerns that have been expressed over command and control, the fears being sought to be skirted through vague talk of "independent" sectors of operation parcelled out by the U.S. as it retains control of the overall strategy and pulls out its men. Again, as the Congress party has pointed out, this will be another unacceptable departure from the fundamental principle that Indian soldiers on global duty will operate only under the U.N. flag and U.N. command. The U.N. Security Council resolution 1483, which recognises the reality of the occupation, leaves no scope for dual military command.

The nation will also reject the disingenuous argument of Government spokesmen that India will send troops if the Iraqis want them. Such obfuscation cannot hide the hard reality that it will be a long time before the free Iraqi voice is heard. The trigger-happy American actions in the past month carry a clear message: the U.S., in no hurry to look for those weapons of mass destruction whose presumed existence brought it to Iraq, has come to stay as it consolidates its hold and sets up its own political-military arrangement with assistance from willing, subservient nations. There is one more combined message from the streets of Iraq: a widening, deepening resistance that seeks an end to the occupation and early return of a semblance of normality under free conditions. In fact, all the debate on the post-Saddam Hussein Iraq has unfortunately pushed to the sidelines the one issue that demands immediate international attention: the very urgent requirements of the Iraqi people whose lives have been traumatised by the indiscriminate, hi-tech bombing campaign of the U.S. and the U.K. India is eminently suited to answer this call from the Iraqi people. It should move to bring the U.N. and its agencies back into the reconstruction and rehabilitation effort. The world body has experience and expertise in nation-building as evidenced in East Timor and more recently in Afghanistan where it is an effort in progress. Instead of seeking to play proxy to the superpower, New Delhi should work in coordination with countries such as Russia, China, France, Germany and Iran to empower the U.N. to take over and restore Iraq to the Iraqis.