Towards a sound relationship

THE FIRST VISIT by an American President to this country in the post-Cold War era raises hopes that bilateral relations, caught in the vicissitudes of the ideological war for most of half a century, will be allowed to take a more sound and stable course. Mr. Bill Clinton's extended sojourn in this country, which will apparently take him to a few other centres apart from New Delhi, will hopefully give a qualitative push to the relationship, imparting a long needed new orientation. The Clinton Presidency's strident advocacy of non- proliferation had for far too long distorted the relationship to the detriment of the longer term opportunities. With the American Senate, on partisan considerations, sidelining his one-point global agenda and unintentionally easing the pressure for nuclear surrender by India, and with many common interests between the two countries surfacing in the wake of the Cold War's end, the visit can serve to redefine the relations. The path-breaking, marathon dialogue extending to 10 rounds that senior officials have had in the past year has helped to develop a level of confidence where, as Mr. Strobe Talbott, the U.S. Deputy Secretary of State, said during an interview to this paper the two countries are ``getting better at disagreeing without being disagreeable with each other''. If this is a far cry from the fierce antagonism with which Washington greeted the Indian nuclear tests of the summer of 1998, it is also a welcome sign that both countries will guard against the euphoria that has often distorted the relations.

The objectives and experiences of the two will continue to remain different in areas such as nuclear disarmament, and security and international trade and instead of striving for agreements a mature relationship will seek to understand and accept each other's perceptions. The restraint shown by India during the Kargil war and the Christmas-eve hijacking have, in a bizarre twist, helped to restore some balance in the ties, highlighting some convergence of interests in the region. The joint working group on terrorism that the two countries have set up signals the change in orientation that has resulted from the willingness to show greater understanding. With the prospective lifting of the sanctions imposed in the wake of Pokhran II, economic relations are set to regain their vigour and scientific and technological cooperation can acquire dynamism. More significantly, there is every prospect that where ideology once divided, high technology will unite. There are many high technology areas where the two countries can intensify their active cooperation - areas of activity that Mr. Clinton may be interested in glimpsing. On the information highway, with many Indian-Americans already showing the path, the scope for cooperation is limitless.

Striking a discordant note, however, is the hardly concealed concern in New Delhi over plans for a Clinton stopover in Pakistan on his way to India. It is not India's business to decide what quality of relationship the U.S. has with the countries in the subcontinent or elsewhere and it is not in good grace to campaign against the planned Pakistan visit. A Clinton stopover in Pakistan, signalling a desire to keep the Musharraf regime engaged, need not necessarily mean that Washington is back to playing the old game of equating the two countries. America's relations with Pakistan or any other country in the region are certainly no reference point for relations with India. Such campaigning, indicating a dependence on others, can erode New Delhi's capacity to keep out third parties from the Kashmir dispute and retard the development of its overall relationship with Pakistan in the future.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Opinion
Next     : Dara singh's arrest