Look guys - I'm reproducing from Ambassador Bharadkumar piece, now is the ambassador not stating facts? is his analysis less than compelling? Does the ambassador have a secret agenda??
l Security Advisor M K Narayanan made an astounding claim in a television interview on Saturday that "divine intervention" might have secured for the country a "waiver" from the Nuclear Suppliers' Group (NSG)
He then went on to launch a tirade against China, alleging Beijing tried to spoil India's party at Vienna. He said India was taken by surprise by the Chinese doublespeak since Chinese President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao had assured the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh that Beijing would play a constructive role when the issue of the "waiver" for India came up for consideration in Vienna.
He lamented India's misfortune to have countries like China as neighbors. "We cannot choose our neighbors. We have China and Pakistan as neighbors
The timing of the broadside is intriguing. It stands to reason that Yang's visit would have provided a splendid opportunity for Delhi to do some plain-speaking with the Chinese one-to-one. India's veteran External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee could have ably done that. Yet Delhi chose to go ballistic
A spate of Indian media reports have since appeared based on government "leaks", thumb-sketching behind-the-scene efforts by Chinese diplomats to somehow scuttle a NSG consensus decision on Saturday
All said, therefore, the Indian government's decision to whip up a degree of public frenzy over China has been deliberate and well-conceived. To be sure, a powerful imagery has been conjured up: Hindu Gods spiking the Chinese dragon. The thesis is that China worked hard at the NSG to obtain a similar waiver for it close ally Pakistan. As proof, the government has given to the media a statement by Yang, "It is also China's hope that the NSG would equally address the aspirations of all parties for the peaceful use of nuclear power while adhering to the nuclear non-proliferation mechanism." The corporate media eagerly lapped up the China-bashing. The large anti-China lobby in the strategic community in Delhi promptly acquiesced with "expert" opinion
The government's purpose has been well-served. The public attention has been almost entirely deflected from the core issue: What is the additional price that Washington has extracted from Delhi for obtaining this NSG waiver? The government struck with immaculate timing just as misgivings were beginning to be voiced in India that Delhi paid a high price to get the NSG waiver.
The statement contained an innocuous reference to India's commitment to observe a moratorium on nuclear testing. At first glance, it seemed Mukherjee was only restating India's stance. But as it turned out, the resonance was directed towards Vienna and the NSG waiver was forthcoming on its "basis".
Clearly, the NSG waiver was neither "clean" nor "unconditional" as Delhi claimed but instead signified yet another surrender of national sovereignty. The waiver has converted India's voluntary moratorium on testing into a multilateral commitment. Effectively, India has now agreed that any fuel supply agreement for its imported reactors will be subject to regular NSG review, while restrictions remain on India gaining access to uranium enrichment and reprocessing technologies and India's nuclear facilities come under the safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA] in perpetuity.
In other words, India has been virtually brought within the ambit of the CTBT and NPT. India has given an open-ended commitment to abide by all NSG guidelines, including any future changes that the body may make in its guidelines, while India cannot participate in the NSG decision-making as such. In overall terms, India's nuclear program will be brought under US monitoring and control
This is where an orchestrated diversionary tactic becomes useful for the Indian government. By projecting China's perceived unfriendliness, Delhi insinuates that India has been left with no option but to proceed on the present track of forging a strategic partnership with the US. The Indian government's submission to the domestic opinion is that Chinese unfriendliness as manifest yet again at Vienna last weekend provides the raison d'etre for what Delhi has embarked on with the US.
Indians are a deeply nationalistic people. When a Chinese threat is invoked - and, that too, in combination with the Pakistani - as the rationale of US-India strategic partnership, the Indian public really has no choice but to rally behind the government's current policies. Dissenters will be simply branded as "anti-nationals" - or worse still, "Chinese agents". It is a shrewd strategy, as it deflects criticism regarding the matrix of US-India relationship as such, which is an unequal partnership where India is bound to end up playing the role of a junior partner
Can you see what I driving at? Do you not think that elements in this piece will show as element sin the debates to come??
