The manner in which Ms. Robin Raphel visited India and made Statements on Kashmir and other issues has not helped to enhance the prestige of the Clinton administration in south-east Asia. India had left no one in doubt that the undersecretary was not welcome to that Country. Yet, the administration thought it wise to push the Official into Delhi Raphel in her pronouncements all these months followed in the footsteps of her predecessor, John Mall out, who, too, had spelled out the Clinton administration’s views on India’s handling of the human rights of the people of Kashmir and Punjab. But the Indian government showed great annoyance personally With Raphel. The Indian media took the cue from the government and heaped seem on the official. I would have behooved the U.S. administration to defend Ms. Raphel and the stand she took on all the issues of mutual concern. The main theme of her statements ‘was expression of concern at the violation of human rights by India in Kashmir and Punjab, Instead of upholding that stand, the ULS, administration directed Its delegates to the Geneva conclave of the U.N, Human Rights Commission to maintain silence on India’s poor record on the human rights front. Then, why did the President speak on the issue in the first instance? Were all the Statements meant to serve as a trial balloon? Was the U.S. administration aiming at something different? Assuming it to be $0, the administration played with the prestige of the President himself. The same kind of statements could have been made by persons of lower denomination. One wishfully hopes it to be not 50. The U.S. President and his subordinate officials were serious about all the pronouncements they made on India, Kashmir, Punjab, the nuclear issue etc. Then why be apologetic about the Stand? Why should one explain over much as Robin Raphel did during her stay in India? More specifically, the U.S. administration had expressed the view some time ago that the Shimla agreement became irrelevant in so far as it had failed to resolve the Kashmir issue ever since it was concluded in 1971. The U.S. emphasis was on a forum for Kashmir talks other than the bilateral forum of Indo-Pak talks. But suddenly Robin Raphel reverted to the Shimla agreement and wanted the Kashmir dispute to be settled by India and Pakistan through bilateral dialogue. The earlier U.S. stand was that the people of Kashmir, too, were an interested party and ways should be found to ascertain their views. Now the U.S. administration through its visiting official appears to have assured India that the people of Kashmir did not matter and that India was free to ignore them and their views, a stand India would relish. One explanation of why the U.S. administration changed its Stand on the Kashmir issue in particular and other human rights issues in general is that India has succeeded in mobilizing American businessmen to put pressure on President Clinton and his administration to become pragmatic on the human rights issues and accord primacy to the growth of business ties with India which offers scope for profitable exploitation. Assuming this to be a credible explanation, the affected nations in India would certainly deplore the U.S. climb-down. At this rate, the administration will, have to older concessions to India even on the nuclear proliferation issue. The proposal to organize a regional conference to be attended by Japan and Germany as well as fine permanent members of the U.N. security council, in addition to India and Pakistani, is bound to become non-starter, India has already frowned upon the idea. Eventually, the administration will have to contend with the new nuclear nations in south-east Asia. That will mean a big blow to the very foundations of the U.S. foreign policy even after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Is India emerging as a replacement for the vacuum left by the collapse of the Soviet Union? The long-term implications of the U.S. administration’s policy of dithering towards India deserve a careful analysis.
Article extracted from this publication >> April 1, 1994
