|
Engaging India: Diplomacy and the Bomb
By Strobe Talbott, Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC 2006,
ISBN: 0815783019
Reviewed
by: Mirza Asmer Beg
This book provides a diplomatic
account of America’s
negotiations with India and
Pakistan subsequent to their May
1998 nuclear tests. It is Strobe
Talbott’s – who was Deputy
Secretary of State in the
Clinton Administration –
firsthand account of
behind-the-scenes diplomacy.
From June 1998 to September
2000, Strobe Talbott and Jaswant
Singh met 14 times in seven
countries. It was the most
intense and prolonged set of
exchanges ever between American
and Indian Officials at a higher
level than ambassadors. Their
personal rapport elevated the
Indo-US relations to a higher
level of “engagement”. Talbott’s
assessment of Jaswant was that
he was a “master of public
statements that made up in
panache what they lacked in
content and sometimes even in
discernable meaning” (p. 103).
Talbott mentions that the US in
1998 put forward certain
non-proliferation benchmarks for
negotiations with India, such as
joining the CTBT, making
progress on fissile material
treaty, exercising strategic
restraint and meeting the
highest standard of export
control. But the Indian
leadership was generally evasive
on all these issues.
Jaswant revealed to Talbott that
the Indian nuclear capability
was basically directed against
China which was “a power and a
threat worthy of India’s
strategic attention” and not
Pakistan which was “a
relationally small, incurably
troubled and incorrigible
troublesome country that dreamed
of a parity with India it would
never attain or deserve”.
Talbott tried to convince both
India and Pakistan that
maintaining the nuclear
capability was an expensive
exercise, which had cost the US
more than 5 trillion dollars,
and therefore, both India and
Pakistan could not afford it.
Talbott was unnerved in his
meeting with Advani, when he
talked about the happy days when
India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka,
Bangladesh and Myanmar would be
united in a single South Asian
“Confederation”. In his dealing
with Indian and Pakistani
leaders he faced the same kind
of complaints from both sides
when they accused the US of
discriminating against them, in
favour of the other.
Jaswant posited the need for
“the Judeo-Christian West,
secular India, and moderate
Islamic States to make a common
cause against a single evil of
global reach, rooted in radical
regimes like Pakistan’s ………”.
Talbott adds, that if “a
presumption of guilt about every
move of Pakistan, and utter
pessimism about its future
continued to dominate official
attitudes in New Delhi, then
India would loose whatever
chance it might have of ever
exercising a positive influence.
The same could be said of
assumptions underlying American
policy”. He was also concerned
with Jaswant’s understanding of
Islam which for him was “all
about conquest and conversion by
the sword”. He says that if
someone “as sophisticated as
Jaswant saw Islam this way, it
meant that there were surely
many who held more primitive and
virulent forms of this view”.
Talbott believes that the
concessions which India got from
the Bush Administration in 2005,
made a mockery of earlier
assurances which it had given
about its determination to
preserve the “red lines” between
those countries within the NPT
and those outside its bounds.
Bush had agreed to give “India
virtual membership in the club
of recognized nuclear-weapons
States. In return, the United
States (and the world) received
nothing in the form of concrete
Indian steps towards nuclear
restraint in its military
programmes. In fact, in one
important respect, the Indians
received more leniency than the
five established nuclear
“haves”.
Talbott suggests, that in future
conversations with an Indian
Prime Minister, “an American
president might use the prospect
of Security Council membership
and other possible sources of
leverage to coax India into the
nonproliferation mainstream. New
Delhi might be asked—once
again—to forswear further
nuclear testing, stop producing
fissile material, accept
international safeguards on its
nuclear facilities, go much
further than it has to date in
strengthening its controls over
transfers of technologies
relating to weapons of mass
destruction, redouble efforts to
ensure that its nuclear
installations and materials are
effectively protected against
theft or seizure, and limit its
nuclear-capable ballistic
missile programs, especially
operational deployment of those
systems.”
Despite all these efforts the US
could not get India to sign the
CTBT, and still India managed to
get along well with the US and
sign the Indo-US nuclear deal in
July 2006. According to Talbott,
during this period India was
more successful in furthering
its foreign policy objectives as
compared to the US.
This book is a welcome addition
to the existing literature on
the subject of Indo-US
relations. The available
material does not usually focus
on behind the scene diplomatic
manoeuvres, and therefore this
book becomes all the more
valuable. Students of South
Asian politics must go through
this fascinating book. |