ELECTIONS '98
COMMENTARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ARCHIVES

American military action is the best thing to happen to India in a long time

There are a lot of reasons why the United States's action against what it perceived to be terrorist beehives in Afghanistan and Sudan need to be condemned.

For one, this action was unilateral, and bypassed the normal convention of appealing to the United Nations and the like. In fact, Washington's sudden display of machismo is the single biggest blow against the world organisation and will further emasculate it.

Secondly, by bombing sovereign nations -- even if they were believed to be harbouring international terrorists -- the US has cast itself in the role of aggressor, which is a far cry from the role it seeks for itself, of globocop.

Third, and most importantly, the US says it was acting against international, Islamic terrorism. This is a facetious explanation, since there is very little difference between counter-insurgency and terrorism, at least to the victims of the two phenomenon. It is no secret that for decades, the US has been funding, planning and executing counter-insurgency operations against regimes it perceived to be inimical to its geopolitical interests, most notably in Afghanistan. Now that its sins are coming home to roost, Uncle Sam is alarmed, but that does not obliterate the fact that he sired many of these prodigal children.

However, there is an overriding reason why India needs to ignore all of the above and pitch its lot with the Americans, at least on this issue. Just as America is today the victim of global terrorism, so is India, which has had a considerably long brush with purveyors of mayhem and bigotry from across the border.

India's efforts to draw the West's attention to the bleeding inflicted on it, by cross-border terrorism masquerading as revivalist faith, have so far been in vain, with the West not only being disdainful of New Delhi's claims but as a further rebuff, continuing to hobnob with the nations that have sworn to take the undeclared war against India to its logical conclusion.

The new Indian government, despite its bravado of carrying out hot pursuit of terrorists into hostile territory, has been able to do little in the matter, ostensibly owing to the West's reluctance to overlook such adventurism. Now that Washington has refused to toe the line it wants India to, New Delhi can feel vindicated.

However, the battle against terrorism, especially one that has at its core religious dogma, is not going to be won by sporadic bombings of factories purported to be manufacturing poison gas and the like, or even by L K Advani's pet theme of hot pursuits. On one level, the battle has already been lost in the minds of the ever-burgeoning band of mercenaries and insurgents whose motivation goes far beyond waging a war for survival. This is the clash of civilisations on a micro level, and the outcome is not going to be decided in a hurry.

On another level, America needs to realise that terrorism can only be combated by victim nations coming together, without any discriminations between those in the First World and elsewhere. It also needs to realise that if it is the target of zealots all over the world, then it has to blame its own policies which spawned these guerrillas in the first place. On a much smaller scale, it is like the Bhindranwale syndrome.

In the coming days, America will realise that its military action -- carried out by a beleaguered Bill Clinton to shore up his domestic ratings, say cynics -- will have created more harm than good. Islamic terrorism has never suffered from a dearth of new recruits. For every one eliminated in the military action, ten others are ready to take his place.

Leaving all that aside, the American action finds India in an unusual position. For long unhesitant to raise its voice against such cowboy tactics, India owed its high standing among Third World nations to its ability and willingness to look the US in the eye. Even as recently as Operation Desert Storm, the Chandra Shekhar government was rocked by the furore over its decision to allow American airplanes to refuel. That, alas, may have won us friends and eclat in the region, but little beyond that. That alone must have cost the country dear, in terms of American goodwill.

Breaking out of the past is the most difficult thing for nations to do, even as individuals themselves seem to do it with felicity. It is as if collectively, human beings become that much more rigid and unwilling to change.

In that context, Prime Minister A B Vajpayee's endorsement of the American action is more significant than has been perceived. On a cynical level, it can be attributed to bringing the country back in America's good books, from which India was expelled following its nuclear tests, but I believe it goes beyond that.

As a victim of trans-border terrorism itself, India needed to be on the right side of the battle. It would have been easier to remain caged in shibboleths and raise one's voice against transgression of sovereignty, national dignity and the like. But just as we are fighting an undeclared war on our northern border, so is the United States of America. This is not a situation where the Marquis of Queensberry Rules apply.

The Indian approval may, as a fallout, bring it closer to Washington, but that need not be the main concern. If it leads to a better understanding on 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, of the extent of terror being faced by India, that would be enough.

Saisuresh Sivaswamy