The bear hug

The visit of George Bush was marked by huge protest rallies against him and his administration's hegemonic designs.

JOHN CHERIAN in New Delhi

THE visit of United States President George W. Bush to India, Pakistan and Afghanistan in the first week of March is being billed as one of his most successful diplomatic forays. The focus of the visit was on India. An American columnist observed that Bush "found more respect in India than at home".

The people Bush interacted with, including mediapersons, did not ask him inconvenient questions about Iraq and the controversial issues. Bush himself expressed his happiness at the "grand" reception he received in the Indian capital though he may not have been completely oblivious to the fact that for the two days he was in Delhi, there were demonstrations in which hundreds of thousands of people participated. In fact, from Kerala in the south to Kashmir in the north, there were huge rallies on the streets to protest against the U.S. President.

In his speech from the ramparts of the historic Purana Qila in Delhi, Bush talked about spreading "democracy" to countries such as Cuba, Syria, Iran and Zimbabwe. The countries he mentioned have traditionally enjoyed a close relationship with India. Incidentally, Cuba is set to host the next Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) summit. The developing world still considers India as a pivotal player in NAM despite some policy reversals in recent months.

Many diplomats based in New Delhi said that it was a ham-handed effort on the part of the U.S. President to co-opt India into the fight against the so-called "axis of evil" nations. If his speech is any indication, Bush would like India to be further enmeshed in his pet democracy project that is being used as a pretext to destabilise progressive and secular governments all over the world. The U.S. government is now pouring in millions of dollars to undermine the governments in Venezuela, Cuba, Syria and Iran, all friends of India.

Many in the diplomatic community suspect that the Indian government must have given some assurances to the U.S. before the presidential visit. Otherwise, India has been contributing to the "Democracy Fund", started under the auspices of the United Nations, with the strong backing of Washington. The Indian government has so far not bothered to distance itself from the remarks of Bush, nor has it bothered to clarify its position to the representatives of the countries named by him on Indian soil.

Prakash Karat, general secretary of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), told Frontline that the outcome of Bush's visit only strengthened the "strategic alliance" between the two countries, which started after the July 18, 2005, defence agreement signed in Washington. Following that agreement, India had pledged to join the "International Centre for Democratic Transition". Karat is of the view that the "democracy project" will be used by the U.S. to further its hegemonic aims. "In a real sense, India has become a strategic partner of the U.S. It was after the July agreement that India reversed its stand on Iran in the International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA]. The U.S. expects India to be a partner in regime change," he said.

The two governments have signed the Maritime Cooperation Framework and the Logistic Support Agreement. There is talk of India joining the Proliferation Security Initiative, which will involve joint maritime patrols with the navies of countries such as Japan, Singapore, and Australia.

Karat warns that if the nuclear pact gets the approval of the U.S. Congress and the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), then pressure will mount on India to live up to its role as America's strategic partner. The other problem he envisages is over-dependency on nuclear power. "Nuclear power will become our mainstay, and it is in India's interest to build up an Asian energy grid". He emphasised that there are serious differences among the United Progressive Alliance partners on foreign policy issues, especially on the question of strategic alliance with the U.S.

China has been critical of the deal. The official Xinhua news agency said that the deal "would set a bad example for other countries". Iranian officials have once again highlighted the "double standards" being adopted. The conservative American commentator, Patrick J. Buchanan, has said that Bush's decision to transfer U.S. nuclear technology to India has "insulted Pakistan and blown a hole right through the NPT [Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty] regime on which we stand to make a demand on Iran and North Korea". Democratic Congressman Edward Markey has said that "America cannot preach nuclear temperance from a barstool".

Diplomats from countries that have had close relations with the U.S. warn of the consequences of the American bear hug. The U.S. is already offering advanced military hardware to India. It could be an offer that India may find difficult to refuse.

Former U.S. Ambassador to India Robert Blackwill argued in an academic journal that the U.S. should sell advanced weaponry to India to help it acquire nuclear and missile parity with China. The Pentagon has issued a statement praising the India-U.S. deal, saying that it would enhance military ties. It says: "Where only a few years ago no one would have talked about the prospects for a major U.S.-India defence deal, today the prospects are promising, whether in the realm of combat aircraft, helicopters, maritime patrol craft or naval vessels".

Bush had also demanded the opening up of all sectors of the Indian economy to foreign direct investment . "The nuclear deal may be good for India. But after this the U.S. will demand that Wal-Mart, the American supermarket chain, should be allowed to open in the country," said a diplomat.

The CPI(M) has warned that accepting the American blueprint for India would entail the loss of economic sovereignty and could impact adversely on domestic industry and agriculture.

The Pakistan leg of Bush's visit was not without incident. Big crowds had staged anti-American demonstrations before his arrival. The rage against the cartoons denigrating the Prophet Muhammad had not ebbed. Just days prior to his visit, there was a terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Karachi, which killed an U.S. diplomat.

When Bush was in the Pakistani capital, a ban was imposed on all demonstrations. Politicians such as Imran Khan, who had planned to stage anti-Bush protests, were put under house arrest or barred from entering the capital. Bush preferred to spend most of the day within the confines of the strongly fortified U.S. Embassy.

The U.S. had nothing tangible to offer Pakistan. Bush made it a point to emphasise that the main reason for his stopover in Pakistan was to thank President Pervez Musharraf for remaining committed to the "war against terror". In a show put on for the visiting President, raids were staged on militant hideouts by the Pakistan Army along the volatile border with Afghanistan. Pakistani authorities claimed to have slaughtered more than a hundred militants in the encounters.

During his visit, Bush made it clear that there was no question of treating Pakistan on a par with India on nuclear issues. U.S. officials told the media accompanying the President that Pakistan had no chance of making a deal similar to the U.S.-India one because of continuing concerns about proliferation and terrorism.

Musharraf had publicly called on Bush to put pressure on India for arriving at a solution to the Kashmir issue in exchange for the nuclear deal. American officials, on the other hand, had assured New Delhi that they would not like to act as third-party mediators.

The White House has clarified that it remains opposed to the proposed Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project. Bush had told the media in Islamabad that his objections were against Iran's nuclear programme and not against the gas pipeline. Many Pakistan watchers say the U.S.' pro-Indian tilt will make things even more difficult for the beleaguered Musharraf. The sentiment on the Pakistani street is virulently anti-American. Articles in the Arab media have said that the India-U.S. deal is one more illustration of the anti-Muslim bias of the U.S. government.