Opinion
-
News Analysis
Managing the `nuclear flashpoint'
By C. Raja Mohan
NEW DELHI, DEC. 16. Indian analysts of foreign affairs used to bristle every time a visiting American scholar or policy-maker mentioned the phrase that Kashmir is a ``nuclear flashpoint.''
Not any more; since the Kargil crisis in 1999, the American concerns on the dangers of a ``nuclear flashpoint'' in the subcontinent have worked against Pakistan and in India's favour.
In the early years of the Clinton administration, the flashpoint argument was used to either press India to roll back its nuclear programme or do something quickly about Kashmir. After May 1998, the U.S. understood that the rules of the game in the subcontinent have changed. Washington is clear in its mind that there can be no forcible change in the status quo between nuclear-armed India and Pakistan.
The U.S. would, of course, continue to encourage a peaceful dialogue between India and Pakistan on all issues, including nuclear confidence-building measures and Kashmir.
It was the concern about the nuclear flashpoint that made the U.S. put relentless pressure on Pakistan in June 1999 to unconditionally and unambiguously withdraw from across the Line of Control in the Kargil sector. The same logic should apply as it explores ways to prevent the latest round of Indo-Pak. tension from escalating into a war that could see the use of nuclear weapons.
The U.S. knows more than anyone else that stable deterrence cannot be sustained between two adversaries, when one of them is engaged in an incessant war of terrorism against the other. And today, it cannot afford to let India and Pakistan drift towards a nuclear confrontation. Nor can it tell India not to respond against acts of terrorism.
But it is entirely within the power of the U.S. to press the Pakistan President, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, to tighten the screws on the terrorist organisations operating on the Pakistani soil. As tensions rise between India and Pakistan after the terrorist attacks on the Parliament House last week, all eyes are on the Bush administration to see how effectively it can get Gen. Musharraf to change course on Kashmir.
Having got the General to swallow the bitter pill on Afghanistan, it should not be impossible for Washington to administer another one to him.
***
The U.S. Ambassador to India, Mr. Robert Blackwill's presence in the visitors' gallery of Parliament on Friday has made a good impression on the political establishment. The Indian political class is not used to finding America on its side amid a national security crisis. The helpful American role during the Kargil confrontation had led to the belief that a ``paradigm shift'' was in the making.
Mr. Blackwill's presence at Parliament was aimed at demonstrating that the ``paradigm shift'' is indeed real. But the proof of the pudding is in the eating. The paradigm could indeed shift dramatically, if the U.S. succeeds in getting Gen. Musharraf to crack down on the terrorist groups based in Pakistan and operating across the border.
***
The appointment of Mr. C. V. Ranganathan as the convener of the newly-constituted National Security Advisory Board comes as a welcome surprise. Mr. Ranganathan is from the Indian Foreign Service and has served as ambassador to France and China. He is one of India's leading China experts and should hopefully bring some sophistication into the Indian thinking about China that has long been divided into two camps - China lovers and China baiters.
As China looms large over the national security environment - both as a difficult neighbour and as one of the world's largest economies - it is time for an innovative approach to Beijing.
Mr. Ranganathan was India's first Ambassador to Beijing who could speak fluent Chinese, and represented the maturing cadre of China hands in the Foreign Office. The convener for the two earlier Boards was Mr. K. Subrahmanyam, described generally as the ``Bhishma pitamaha'' of the strategic community. Mr. Subrahmanyam is believed to have suggested that no one should serve more than two terms on the Board.
As a result, there are a number of new faces in the Board, expected to advise the Government on security matters.
***
At least one chain of transfers in the Foreign Office will begin to move soon, when Mr. R. S. Kalha, Secretary (West) in the Ministry of External Affairs, retires early next year. He will be replaced by Mr. Kanwal Sibal, India's Ambassador to Paris.
Ms. Savitri Kunadi, India's Permanent Representative (PR) to the United Nations in Geneva, will move to Paris. And Mr. Hardeep Puri, Deputy High Commissioner in London, will take charge as PR in Geneva.
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Opinion
|
