The Hindu : Treading with caution

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Thursday, Jun 12, 2003

Opinion

Opinion - Editorials

Treading with caution

INDIA'S EXCELLENT TRACK record as one of the leading partners in the peacekeeping operations of the United Nations over the past half a century should ensure that one more engagement of a similar nature does not raise any controversy or opposition. But the American request that India contribute soldiers for the stabilisation force Washington is putting together in Iraq under its occupation falls under a totally new category and calls for precedent-setting decisions, demanding utmost caution and dispassionate consideration of all pros and cons. Considering that there are still many unanswered questions about the American-led war on Saddam Hussein and his Iraq and many imponderables about an as yet undefined stabilisation assignment, a decision on the U.S. request must follow a clear national political consensus. That the Government is aware of the need for evolving a consensus is evident from the fact that it has deferred a decision despite two meetings of the Cabinet Committee on Security. The Deputy Prime Minister, L.K. Advani, struck the right note when he said in reply to questions in Washington after a series of meetings with American leaders that New Delhi would not be hurried into a decision. An American team of experts is coming to Delhi to respond to the queries that have apparently been raised by Government interlocutors.

Transparency in decision-making is essential on a contentious issue of this nature since the country is entering uncharted territory. There are genuine apprehensions that Indian participation may lend legitimacy to the U.S.-led invasion of a sovereign nation, launched in violation of international law and without sanction from the international community as represented by the U.N. But these fears may at this late stage be deemed irrelevant, in particular following the May 22 Security Council resolution that tacitly endorsed American control over the occupied land while simultaneously providing for a marginally enlarged role for the United Nations. The 14-0 vote on the resolution effectively closed the debate on whether the U.S.-led war was legitimate or not. The entry of U.N. organisations, even if at the present stage only on humanitarian relief work, may perhaps facilitate the participation of member-nations such as India which had opposed the war. Objections have also been raised about the fact that while in U.N.-sponsored operations Indian soldiers have served under commanders of different nationalities but under the U.N. flag, they will for the first time come under American command and control if allowed to be deployed in Iraq. These are valid objections and relevant in the extraordinary instance of Iraq, where the stabilisation force can come face to face with unpredictable and unpalatable situations. Indian soldiers should not be committed without full clarity and understanding on command and control and their specific duties. The bitter feuding in Sierra Leone nearly three years ago should serve as a warning, too.

As Washington steps up pressure on New Delhi to fall in line and perhaps assist with its democracy-building effort in Iraq, among the other imponderables that face India are the type of signal that Indian troops serving in Iraq under U.S. command can send to the Arab world and the evolving lessons held out by a similar (but U.N. supported) effort in Afghanistan. With the leading members and supporters of the former regimes not totally defeated, peacekeepers are targets of attack in both countries. German soldiers returning home after a stint in Afghanistan fell victim to an apparent terror attack last week outside Kabul. In Iraq, American and British peacekeepers are everyday facing the hazards of occupation. In the absence of a properly structured programme, the U.N. has also had its share of tragedies when it tried to bring about peace to end internal conflicts, such as in the Horn of Africa. If these pitfalls are to be averted, New Delhi should give the nod to sending a peacekeeping force to Iraq only after concerns of safety and the political implications are assessed.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

Stories in this Section

Treading with caution

Stop smoking on screen

A tale of two Ministers

Congress, Dalits and elections

Should India do the U.S. bidding?

Where the public is kept in the dark