Despite possibly justified criticism, the PM's Washington trip is a landmark. India has been recognised as a nuclear power. It can enter the big ...
Despite possibly justified criticism, the PM's Washington trip is a landmark. India has been recognised as a nuclear power. It can enter the big league. To do it effectively, Indian leaders must learn to distinguish the exercise of power from empty posturing.
To illustrate: the popular view is that Indira Gandhi was our strongest PM because of her Bangladesh policy. This scribe believes that Indira became a puppet.
The recently declassified 1969-72 dialogues between Nixon and Kissinger do not reflect reality. Archives seldom unmask conspiracies. Kissinger was the hatchet man for US big business to create America's powerful Pacific lobby which changed global politics. To neutralise America's anti-Communists for successfully wooing China, Nixon was used. He was never trusted. He was out of his depth. Years after Watergate, talking about China, he confessed to his former speechwriter and nyt columnist William Saffire: "We created a Frankenstein!"
Watergate removed Nixon. But Kissinger thrived. He helped China take over the US market. Thanks to him, despite security threats, America dare not today confront China for fear of ruining its own economy.
In the 1971 election, East Pakistan won a majority and was set to rule Pakistan. To prevent the heavily-populated East Pakistan dominating the country, Bhutto sought a permanent split. Indira Gandhi served his purpose. She served, too, Kissinger's secret purpose. After the Bangladesh liberation, Kissinger said part of his grand objective had been achieved.
The Simla summit exposed Indira. To stabilise Bhutto she sacrificed Indian interests! No strategic advantage was derived after our army liberated Bangladesh. As Lt-General Jacob, then chief of staff, Eastern command, subsequently wrote: "The advantages gained on the battlefield were frittered away in the political negotiations in Simla."
Like the soldiers, our scientists were let down, too. After the 1974 Pokhran nuclear test, Indira chickened out from making the bomb. Had she done so then, our recent history would have been different. Post-1962 Nehru sought a strategic defence relationship with America. Kennedy's death, then his own death, aborted it. Now, India and America are entering that phase. What we get out of it will depend upon our own will.
Has our PM got the will? Appears unlikely. Dismissing prospects of the Pakistan-Iran gas pipeline he told the Washington Post editors: "There are many risks. Consider all the uncertainties of the situation in Iran." Apart from sucking up to America, what purpose did he serve by commenting on the internal situation of friendly Iran?
(Puri can be reached at rajinderpuri2000@yahoo.com)