A disenfranchised world

At an election watch organised at the American Centre in New Delhi on November 3. - S. SUBRAMANIUM

The consequences of the U.S. elections will affect the world in general. The only course open to countries like India is to accept and acquiesce in the empire's moves.

FOLLOWING the re-election of George W. Bush, there must be a great deal of celebration going on in the United States and an almost equal amount of grieving and misery. This election has, as a number of observers have said, polarised the U.S. as never before. There has rarely, they say, been such strong feelings for each of the candidates; if the Bush followers were fiercely determined to see their man win, John Kerry's fans were no less devoted to their candidate, no less resolute in their efforts to keep Bush from winning.

Whatever the reasons behind Bush's win and Kerry's defeat, and there will be a great deal of analysing and study on this, one may be sure, not only in the U.S. but in many other parts of the world, that the reasons are rooted obviously in what the American voters felt and believed in. Not a single reason had anything to do with any factor outside the concerns of the American people.

This is not as silly as it sounds, because the effects of the election do concern others; they concern the world as a whole in a manner that they never did before. In earlier years the U.S. tended to be a reluctant participant in global affairs, its obsession being the Cold War and its ramifications, all of which related directly to the security or what successive U.S. administrations felt was the security of the nation. Things are different now; the U.S. has shown that it is quite ready to attack and invade other countries, provided they are weak, impoverished and have few friends willing to come to their aid. It is also willing to help some, for a price.

These are categories into which many countries - sovereign so far, even though they are poor and weak - fall. All of them can be and may well be the objects of U.S. violence or assistance. Word is out, for example, that high on the U.S. list of priorities as far as South Asia is concerned is the gift of an undisclosed number of the most advanced version of F-16 fighter aircraft to Pakistan, a country designated a major `non-NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) ally'. These can hardly be used against small bands of terrorists who sneak through crowds or move quietly in the darkness of the night and certainly not against the single suicide bomber out on his final dreadful mission; so whom will they be used against? Everyone in this country knows the answer, and so does everyone in Pakistan. So, let us also say plainly, does the U.S.

The consequences of the election in the U.S., then, must affect the world in general; some countries directly, and others indirectly, and we have seen that other developed countries either support the U.S. administration, or stand by and do nothing. Many of them have had empires of their own; some many centuries ago, like Greece and Rome, and others relatively recently, like the United Kingdom, Spain, Italy, and France. They now see the emergence of a new empire, and they know only too well the consequences of crossing the path of this emerging empire, its procurators and its viceroys.

Across the world, we all know, John Kerry had much more support than George Bush. Not, I think, because people felt that Kerry was some kind of saviour, a knight in shining armour who would come and bring with him justice and happiness, but because they did not want George Bush. True, Bush has helped many countries as few Presidents of the U.S. have; the Indian authorities have particular reason to be relieved because many of the sanctions imposed, many blocks put in the way of greater exports and expansion of industrialisation, will in all probability be removed. But they must at the same time surely realise that these will be the actions of an empire that chooses to do what it does to make things better; it could just as well make things worse. We can expect, happily, the lifting of sanctions, and watch, apprehensively, the delivery of F-16s to Pakistan.

This is the exasperating and saddening truth behind this election. We - many of us in different countries - are going to be vitally affected by what George Bush does or does not do, yet we have no voice in his election or defeat. We have all followed the election campaigns and the opinion polls as anxiously as people in the U.S.; but only as subjects in an empire watching pro-consuls elect a leader in Rome.

The only course open to countries like India, which have become the objects of the empire's attention for better or worse, is to accept and acquiesce. Confrontation is an invitation to hostile action that could range from economic sanctions to invasion of the country and the killing of thousands of its citizens. Not that there will not be protests. There will be, certainly, in pockets scattered over these countries, but then the subversion of protest is a craft that some U.S. agencies have perfected, so if any resistance begins to gather any kind of momentum it will be neutered.

There are countries that stand to benefit from the emerging empire; India is one, in a limited manner. We can look forward to `closer ties', a phrase so dear to diplomats. This may mean lifting of sanctions, a re-vitalising of new industries like outsourcing, which will mean more jobs here, assistance in a variety of fields that we need. But these will all be hemmed in by the re-arming of Pakistan and the assistance provided by U.S. industry to the Chinese economy. In other words, you will be helped to develop, but on lines we think are good for you (and us, naturally).

This is not, by itself, something one need to look on with resentment or distaste or fear; these are, finally, just what they are supposed to be - means to develop the economy, improve the quality of life. And if it does mean that, then it is not certainly to be refused - assuming one had a choice to do so - but accepted, and it will bring benefits such as the much-rumoured increase in H-1 visas, providing avenues to our young, educated men and women to earn some money in the U.S. They will not, of course, come back, but some of their money may, in one way or the other.

But what needs to be remembered is that we are becoming a part of an empire that this U.S. administration seeks to establish, backed by the giant multinational corporations that have backed it. This means acquiescence, as we have done skilfully, on the Iraq invasion, and we can console ourselves that we have in the process strengthened our position as a country that can take decisions on its own. The fear of many who are concerned about the country's future is that acquiescence today may be compliance tomorrow, and complicity the day after.