Karma vs nukes in India

JYOTI MALHOTRA
Gulf News, Dubai, August 2007


As India and the US negotiated a new path-breaking nuclear deal a fortnight ago, an ancient, karmic ritual was playing itself out over the Indo-Gangetic plain. Hundreds of people were dying, thousands more marooned as flood-waters from an unusually active monsoon submerged large tracts of land.

On television, meanwhile, smart men in smartly-tailored suits in Delhi and Washington DC announced special privileges for India in the new world order. Back there in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, where the flood fury has been the worst, women spread their thin, cotton saris around their children, in the full knowledge that destiny was supreme. Entire villages just sat like that for hours waiting for the waters to ebb.

Which, then, was the real India? The one pumping new nuclear iron, preening in the knowledge that the US has, in a matter of a couple of years, made it a card-carrying member of the exclusive atomic club? Or the one that evokes stereotypical, but nevertheless too-true images of malnutritioned children with stomachs so bloated they could compare with large parts of sub-Saharan Africa?

It’s a question that Indians, celebrating the sixtieth anniversary of independence from the British empire this month, are still struggling to answer.

Perhaps, India does live in several centuries at the same time. Some years ago when an indigenously constructed rocket was placed on several bullock-carts and transported to the firing range in Sriharikota in the deep south, because it was the easiest way to get there, the image gave way to a collective mirth. It easily remains the most evocative symbol of the evolution of India.

The last fortnight has been witness to another major milestone. After two years of tough negotiations, the US has finally agreed to provide an uninterrupted supply of nuclear fuel for India’s civilian nuclear programme. Significantly, India’s military programme remains secret, away from the prying eyes of international inspectors.

Meaning, while India gets Western help to build nuclear reactors that will produce the electricity so essential to sustain a 9 per cent growth – and indeed, import the nuclear fuel from the US and other nations to power those nuclear reactors -- India can continue making atomic bombs from its military arsenal.

In all but name, US officials concede, India has become the world’s sixth nuclear weapons power.

Certainly, this is no mean achievement in the exact week of India’s 60th anniversary of independence. Although for the mild-mannered Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, the criticism of the nuclear deal by his own allies, the Left parties, has been a bitter pill to swallow.

The Left criticism caused a national furore, the worst since the government came to power three years ago. And although the immediate crisis seems to have blown over, the sight of allies bitterly squabbling in public has confirmed national perceptions that the alliance is shakier than before.

The Left criticism is that the nuclear deal ties India down into an American embrace, which it cannot allow to happen. Government sources argue the Left is unhappy because the nuclear deal, which considerably strengthens India, actually challenges China’s economic and military dominance in Asia. Certainly, the last has not been heard on this score.

Certainly, too, India’s domestic travails cannot compare with the situation in South Asia. In this independence week, the sight of India straddling two military dictatorships – the Bangladesh military is certainly the power behind caretaker president Fakhruddin Ahmed’s throne – cannot be a vote for the Athenian democratic ideal.

On the other hand, in the 60 years since the departure of the British and even though Pakistan continues to be ruled by the all-powerful army, civil society in Pakistan is possibly experiencing its most robust period.

The irony is that the expression of free speech, protest and demonstration galvanising Pakistan today could not have taken place without General Pervez Musharraf’s pursuit of enlightened moderation at home.

The General’s been in power for nine years and seems determined to stay on for a bit. But even if he’s toppled by a combination of forces, which may or may not include the US, it must be said that if he hadn’t encouraged the Pakistani spirit, it may never considered escaping from its genie-bottle.

The genie won’t swallow up Musharraf, it’ll do worse, it’ll spread the democratic infection. Looks like Musharraf’s most honourable exit strategy now is to guide Pakistan’s political churning in the direction of truly free elections, and hope to return as an elected leader.

As for Bangladesh, army chief General Moeen U. Ahmed has sent India a major signal that it will not countenance any religious extremism, by hanging six fundamentalists a couple of months ago.

For an army chief, Ahmed’s democratic credentials are pretty irrepressible. Although he has had major political leaders thrown into jail, he has also come out strongly against the assassination of `Bangabandhu’ Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in 1975. That one statement has had the power of shaking the core of Bangladeshi politics.

So in the 60th year of its existence, is South Asia on the cusp of dramatic change? All the signs point in that direction. The region’s socio-economic indicators remain abysmal, and at least for India-Pakistan, the lingering pain of partition is exacerbated by the lack of continuing political trust.

Watch out for the straws in the wind, though. I will argue that the groundswell of public opinion will grow and grow so high and so strong that it has the capacity to sweep the leadership off its feet.

It was the power of public opinion that gave South Asia its freedom 60 years ago. Perhaps the time is ripe for a second coming.

ENDS