Just as South Africa’s government sticks to its racist position despite pressure from the world community to abandon it, India is fast emerging as a country determined to violate human rights of its people. While the situation in South Africa may be on the mend, India is headed in the opposite direction. That sums up the proceedings of last week’s summit conference of the Commonwealth heads of State held at Harare.
India’s Prime Minister Narasimha Rao “rejected” linkage between human rights and foreign aid by citing a perverse argument that countries not receiving aid are not free to violate human rights of their subjects. That amounts to treating the problem of India’s minorities in Kashmir, Punjab, Assam and elsewhere as academic. While Great Britain and Canada deserve appreciation for raising the issue at such a prestigious forum as Commonwealth Summit, one wishes that the two countries had been more forthcoming on the plight of Indian minorities vague references to the linkage provide no relief to the victims of Indian States policies and practices.
In any case, were the British and Canadian representatives seeking India’s consent to the linkage idea? It is well known that India is a prominent aid recipient and not an aid giver. It could be expected of Rao to consent to the British and Canadian proposal. Thus, it is evident, that Britain and Canada were trying to score a point vis-a-vis India rather than mean business. The two countries are known to have a soft corner for South Africa and its racist politics which was on the agenda of the Harare summit. They appeared to be keen to persuade India as well as some anti-racist states to tone down their criticism of the South African regime. Otherwise, the two countries would have gone ahead with their commitment to human rights and straightaway warned countries like India to behave. So much so that Delhi has not been permitting entry of Amnesty International and other human rights groups into Kashmir, Punjab or Assam.
A hypothesis put afloat by a section of the Indian media that British and Canadian initiative on human rights was at the instance of U.S. administration also appears to be wide off the mark. Washington is in no need of building up public opinion in favor of human rights vis-n-vis countries like India. The U.S. administration could have used its influence with the LMF. to stop Delhi from its anti-human rights course.
Instead, it gave the world financial forum a go-ahead with its massive commitments of help to India. Delhi’s guilt on the issue was not compounded during the period between the grant of LMF, bounty and the Commonwealth Summit to necessitate U.S. intervention. Obviously, President Bush has no connection with the British-Canadian initiative at Harare.
More credible proposition is that U.S, administration has already worked out deal with India to allow it all the financial support He requires to cope with its critical economic position notwithstanding India’s dismal record on human rights and despite its insistence on carrying on nuclear arms development program. Delhi on its part volunteers to be America’s client state in south-east Asia.
Proceedings at Harare constitute a moral victory for Sikhs, Kashmiris and Assamese. Much more, however, remains to be dene.
Article extracted from this publication >> October 25, 1991
