Row Brewing over Proposal to Send Troops to Iraq
Praful Bidwai
IPS, 19 June 2003
NEW DELHI, Jun 19 (IPS) - A major political face-off is brewing in India over the issue of dispatching troops to Iraq to partially relieve the US and British soldiers now occupying that country.
The US government is insistent that India should send about 17,000 soldiers as a "test" of its commitment to fighting international terrorism, and more important, of India's bid for great world-power status and its much-coveted "strategic alliance" with Washington.
Washington is offering India the carrot of military hardware and lucrative contracts in Iraq's "reconstruction".
On Jun. 16, the US government sent a senior-level Pentagon delegation to talk to Indian ministers and diplomats. It did not get an assurance that India would send troops, but was told that the government is trying to generate a "consensus" on the issue by talking to all political parties, as well as Iraq's neighbours.
Indian public opinion and the political opposition is set against sending troops to Iraq and bestowing legitimacy on what it regards as the illegal and immoral invasion and occupation of Iraq.
Besides, Indians would not like their sovereign army's soldiers to salute the US flag or fight under a US general command.
Caught between the two forces, the Indian government is desperately looking for a figleaf such as authorisation for the troops' dispatch from the UN Security Council. For it, this is a test case for diplomatic fancy footwork and spin-doctoring.
New Delhi would like to depict military cooperation with the occupation powers in Iraq as a variant of a "peacekeeping" operation. It would like to get around the problem of a US-dominated command structure in Iraq by asking for an "autonomous" operating area or zone for Indian troops.
In reality, this is a litmus test of the independence of India's foreign and strategic policy and its potential contribution to making the global order less skewed and unipolar than it is.
It is also a test for New Delhi's responsiveness to domestic public opinion - in short, for the quality of democracy.
If India fails this test, it could move towards consolidating a close and unequal relationship with the United States, to the point of allowing Washington to build military bases on Indian soil.
The number of soldiers India is being asked to send is nearly six times higher than the troops committed by the United States' closest military allies - barring Britain - which supported the Iraq war, such as Italy (3,000) or Spain (2,300).
It is not just India's opposition that is against sending Indian troops to Iraq. Even some coalition partners of the ruling pro-Hindu Bharatiya Janata Party - including Defence Minister George Fernandes' Samata Party - are opposed to the proposal.
US pressure on India has become especially heavy over the past few weeks as most of the US strategic allies have refused to send troops and bestow legitimacy on the occupying powers.
US diplomats, and President George W Bush himself, have repeatedly raised the issue of the dispatch of troops with Indian leaders. So have Vice President Dick Cheney, Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice.
Despite Washington's best efforts, it has received promises of only 15,000 troops from other countries - in place of the tens of thousands it needs to take the heat off its own 130,000 soldiers and Britain's 15,000 troops stationed in Iraq.
The Iraqi political situation remains messy and the prospect of a representative government a mirage. The US-British coalition is suffering the loss of one soldier every other day or so. The United States would like some of its army units to be pulled out and Indian troops to be placed in the line of fire. However, Indian troops are not being invited as peacekeepers under UN auspices - a role they are familiar with since the 1950s. Rather, they are being asked to assist the occupation powers in ways that will bring them into hostile contact with Iraqi civilians through heavy-handed policing and imposition of order amidst unrest. Matters are further complicated by the fact that the Indian government took a stand against the war on Iraq, under pressure from the national Parliament, which held that Iraq's invasion breached all criteria of "just war" - including military necessity, non-combatant immunity, proportionality in use of force..
The US-British coalition waged war in violation of the UN Charter and without the authorisation of the Security Council, which alone can sanction the use of armed force - except in self-defence.
Indian public opinion holds that the coalition failed to demonstrate that programmes for weapons of mass destruction that Iraq may have had posed a credible threat to anyone. No such weapons have been found more than two months after US troops took Baghdad.
It now emerges that the US and British governments deliberately 'sexed up' and exaggerated intelligence reports on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.
This has embarrassed even the US Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA), the Central Intelligence Agency and MI-6. The DIA now confirms that one of its reports concluded that the agency "had no reliable information" that Iraq had chemical weapons.
The reason why the Indian government wants to collaborate with the United States in Iraq has to do with its eagerness to seal a long-term military alliance with Washington and outflank Pakistan.
India is also keen to buy top-of-the-line US and Israeli military equipment, including missile-defence systems and the 'Patriot' missile.
The United States is keen to hold joint exercises with Indian forces and establish access to military bases. According to a Pentagon report, quoted by US defence specialist John Carbaugh, who advises the US defence industry and policymakers: "American military officers are candid in their plans to eventually seek access to Indian bases and military infrastructure".
Says Carbaugh: "India's strategic location in the centre of Asia, astride the frequently travelled sea lanes of communication linking West Asia and East Asia, makes India particularly attractive".
The issue of sending Indian troops to Iraq thus goes well beyond the particular circumstances of Iraq. It directly relates to India's potential collusion with US plans for a global empire. The Hindu-sectarian government in New Delhi runs a huge risk in working against the domestic consensus. The risk is all the greater because secular opinion in India - comprising a majority of its 820 million Hindus and its 120 million-strong Muslims - would see any collaboration with the United States as driven by anti-Islamic prejudice.
One thing is certain: dispatching troops to Iraq will be extremely divisive and create serious strife in India.
Copyright 2003 Inrer Press Service
|
