Round The World

New Delhi, 22 July 2008

Anti-Americanism in India

OBFUSCATION ON US HYDE ACT

Prof. Chintamani Mahapatra

School of International Studies, JNU

There is considerable anti-Americanism in India and it seems to be growing. During the long Cold War years, successive Indian Governments often displayed anti-Americanism by remaining on the opposite side of the Cold War divide. Anti-US rhetoric and anti-US stand on the Cold War related issues were so intense at times that the US and its allies came to suspect India's professed non-alignment.

The Government of India's foreign policy views generally got reflected in the expert opinions and scholarly writings. It was not easy for commentators and scholars to give views on certain issues that could even remotely appear to be along the lines supported by Washington.

The US policy of containment and confrontation with Communism; close alliance with capitalist and industrial nations; strategic alliance with Pakistan and the Indian policy of non-alignment, closer security ties with the former Soviet Union and reactive foreign policy vis-à-vis Pakistan and China were all accountable for anti-American sentiments in India.

The end of the Cold War, disintegration of the Soviet Union, temporary end of the US-Pakistan alliance, Indian economic reforms and the end of ideological competition and conflict between a liberal capitalist democracy and socialist authoritarian states altered the image of the US in India and the Indian image in the US.

As India began to institute a series of economic reforms and decided to be an integral part of the globalization process, the image of the US among a large number of traders, businessmen, investors and IT professionals turned very positive. The IT boom in the US enabled thousands of IT students and professionals to move there for contractual jobs and assignments. A large number of Indian families in India greatly benefited from the IT boom and considered America and Americans as very friendly to Indians.

As the business climate changed so did the strategic landscape. Former US President Bill Clinton's historic visit to India in March 2000 set the stage for a new kind of strategic partnership between the two countries. The terrorist attacks on the US in 2001 elevated further the security ties between the two countries. The Bush Administration, while witnessing growing anti-Americanism in the Islamic World and even in friendly European countries, was witness to the rising pro-American perception in India.

By completing a process known as the Next Step in Strategic Partnership, the Bush Administration worked towards generating goodwill for America in the world's largest democracy at a time when the US image was getting a beating elsewhere in the world.

The Indo-US nuclear deal was considered to be the most significant effort that would cement a new strategic partnership between the two countries and reorient the Indian attitude towards global affairs.

Besides, President Bush took personal interest in the nuclear deal, initialled an understanding with India in 2005, visited India in 2006 and after incessant lobbying in the US Congress got a Civilian Nuclear Cooperation Act passed by the legislature.

The US President expected the deal to bring smiles on the face of Indians, since it had the potential to legitimise the nuclear weapon status of India, to allow India to retain its nuclear arsenals and remove India from the list of countries in the target list of the non-proliferation regime.

However, the calculations backfired since the enactment of the Hyde Act on the Indo-US civil nuclear cooperation. It generated considerable heat in India’s political processes, even as the Left Parties, supporters of the UPA Government led by Manmohan Singh, left no stone unturned to raise anti-American sentiments in the country.  Several other Opposition political parties picked up the threads and began to chorus anti-Americanism.

Major allegations against the US included Washington's goal to extend its hegemony over India and limit its sovereignty; neutralize New Delhi’s non-aligned foreign policy by making it part of anti-China containment strategy and make India a partner in the perceived anti-Islamic policy of the US.

Frankly, most of these fears and concerns are without strong foundation. The US has so far been the unchallenged hegemonic of the world since the end of bi-polarity with the demise of the Soviet Union. The US is a global hegemonic and its hegemony already extends to India. The nuclear deal has little that could make India kowtow to American diktat and has nothing that could deny or fight back the US global hegemony.

Secondly, India has been building economic and political relationship with China and has come to a stage where China has replaced the US as India’s largest trading partner. Significantly, this happened in the midst of the national debate on the nuclear deal with the US.

It is preposterous to argue that the nuclear deal would make India a partner of the US in containing China. By the way, the US has a much stronger economic, political and even security cooperation with China than has India. The Chinese trade surplus with the US is several times higher than the total US-India trade. The US investment in China too is much higher than that in India.

China as member of the APEC, permanent member of the UN Security Council and member of the Nuclear Suppliers' Group interacts more closely with the US than India, which is a member of none of these bodies. The Indo-US strategy to contain China is like building castles in the air, searching for water in the sun or looking for fish in the desert.

Finally, the argument that the nuclear deal is anti-Muslim is outrightly outlandish. The US non-proliferation pressure on Iran and the American military intervention in Iraq or even in Afghanistan give us little evidence to conclude that Washington is anti-Muslim. These examples need to be understood with other instances of US ties with Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Indonesia, Malaysia and several other Islamic countries.

However, the fact remains that growing anti-Americanism in India has resulted from the debate on the nuclear deal. The Bush Administration is also partly responsible for this phenomenon. While the leaders from the Left Parties have taken an ideological stand and have opposed any kind of strategic partnership with the US, the statements from Washington officials have not helped allaying certain genuine concerns in India.

The most serious concerns in India are related to certain provisions in the Hyde Act. These provisions are certainly unwelcome in India, including by the UPA Government. The Indian Ministers, as also the Prime Minister, say that India's nuclear relations with the US will be guided by the 123 Agreement and not the Hyde Act. But the Indian public is not satisfied with this answer.

While the Bush Administration officials have admittedly no problem in going ahead with the decision of a minority Government in Delhi, none of them has clarified the White House position on the Hyde Act. A clear-cut interpretation of the Hyde Act by Washington could have reduced anti-Americanism in India and also could have given the much-needed momentum to the completion of the process of implementation of the deal. ---INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)