India declines U.S. proposal to head caucus of democracies

By Malini Parthasarathy

WASHINGTON, SEPT. 20. Even as New Delhi has been arguing forcefully the case for a seat on the U.N. Security Council, in an unpublicised move that has perplexed officials in Washington, the Vajpayee Government has turned down a proposal by the Clinton administration that India assume the leadership of an informal caucus of democracies, representing some 100 countries, at the United Nations. India's sudden reticence in this regard is described as ``baffling'' by officials here who noted that India along with the United States had since March been expressing great enthusiasm for the idea of a community of democracies. India was, in fact, a co-convenor of the conference of this Community of Democracies (CD) hosted by Poland in late June, this year.

The idea of a caucus to function in the U.N. which would coordinate perspectives on issues relating to democracy that were on the U.N. agenda that had relevance to democracy emanated from the Warsaw meeting in which some 100 countries had participated. Apart from the host Poland, India and the United States, South Korea, Chile, Mali and the Czech Republic were co- convenors. The CD had decided to work on some common goals such as encouraging relevant international and regional institutions to be transparent and supportive of efforts to strengthen democracy, facilitating the sharing of the best practices to deepen democracy, improving mechanisms to respond to threats to democracy and coordinating assistance for countries undergoing democratic transitions.

It was also suggested at Warsaw that a ``democracy caucus'' be created within existing institutions ``as a mechanism to promote dialogue and build consensus'' among those who shared these goals. The United States, which believed that India had the strongest credentials in the grouping by virtue of its vibrant democracy, had been strongly urging India since June to take the leadership of this proposed caucus. Even as recently as September 12, in New York at a dinner for Foreign Ministers, the U.S. Secretary of State, Ms. Madeleine Albright, renewed her suggestion to the External Affairs Minister, Mr. Jaswant Singh, that India lead the proposed democracy caucus. Mr. Singh is said to have reiterated India's disinclination to do so while promising that India would continue to participate actively in the processes of the CD.

Poland, the host country, had evidently expressed its logistical unpreparedness to take on this responsibility and so also South Korea which is scheduled to host the next meeting of the CD. Therefore the search for another leader had become inevitable and the United States thought India should take the responsibility. This reflected, according to an administration official here, ``a vote of confidence in India'' by the United States. The Clinton administration has been stressing the fact that a binding factor between India and the U.S. is the shared commitment to democracy which it sees as the basis for more substantive cooperation between the two countries. In the Vision Statement that emerged from the U.S. President, Mr. Bill Clinton's visit to India last March, this envisaged cooperation between the United States and India is referred to. ``... that is why the United States and India are and will be allies in the cause of democracy. We will share our experience in nurturing and strengthening democratic institutions the world over and fighting the challenge to democratic order from forces such as terrorism. We will cooperate with others to launch an international Community of Democracies this year.''

American officials say that they find India's hesitation surprising especially because it had already agreed to be a co- convenor of the Warsaw Conference and had participated as such. Therefore the arising of second thoughts about taking a leadership role is seen here as inexplicable. The proposed democracy caucus is not one that would ``beat up on other countries'', an American official pointed out, ``but is intended to strengthen democracy in existing democracies.''

The deliberations of the CD as had reflected in the Warsaw meeting had attracted some controversy. Apart from the unease expressed by some countries that the CD represented an initiative by the United States seeking to thrust its own political agenda on other nations, France had also refused to endorse the Warsaw declaration and had withdrawn from the CD, criticising its ``evangelical'' tone, saying that Western standards were being shoved down the throats of other countries. It had also raised an objection to the idea of a ``democracy caucus'' saying that it would in effect create a new bloc, replicating Cold War divisions. However, India had not expressed any misgivings on this score at Warsaw.

Asked whether the unwillingness to risk a confrontation with France could currently be the reason for India's expressed disinclination to take a leading role in this caucus, sources here said that they had not really been given any clear reason by the Indian side as to why it was holding back. But what appears to have left the Clinton administration puzzled is the contradiction in India's approach. On the one hand, India is seen as seeking international support for its initiatives against terrorism and has been canvassing vigorously its claims to a Security Council seat, but on the other hand it seems to have passed up an opportunity to take on a high-profile role in the context of the United Nations.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Front Page
Previous : Jaswant seeks support against terrorism
Next     : Striking telecom staff warned