US Shift on Kargil - The Undertones
Diplomatic
Correspondent
Very early
in the Kargil war, Karl Inderfurth, US Assistant Secretary of
State stated that, “the Indians are not going to cede this territory. They
have to depart, and they will depart either voluntarily or because the
Indias will take them out,” Indian media described it as the first outspoken
statement by US in the last fifty-two years. Washington also admitted
involvement of mercenaries and the role of Pakistan army regulars. US
President in his joing statement reiterated “the line of control in Kashmir
be respected by both parties, in accordance with the 1972 Shimla accord.”
American Government also issued a statement condemning cross-border
terrorism.
There is virtually euphoria among the Indians over US role in Kargil. They
have started perceiving it as a paradigm shift in the US strategy in South
Asia. Mr Jaswant Singh, Minister of external affairs has seen “strategic
shift taking place towards India.” The union home minister, Mr LK Advani
said Kargil was a turning point in Indo-US ties. He cited bus diplomacy and
the statesmanship displayed by Mr Jaswant Singh for this change.
Indian policy makers, perceiving shift in US attitude towards India argue
that cold war certitudes which defined US relations with Pakistan and China
are beginning to disappear. New concerns about an Asian balance and rise of
religious terrorism in Pakistan have begun to impinge on US thinking. For
explaining the theory of paradigm shift at economic level, India’s
impressive economic performance as contrasted with Pakistan’s deepening
economic crisis are also cited. It is stressed that US is perceiving
Pakistan as a failed state. It is also argued that US has realised that
economic sanctions against India cause direct export losses as well as the
loss of clientele to its other business, hitting economic growth.
Changing in polarities in the Afghan region are also mentioned for decline
of Pakistan’s role in US foreign policy perceptions. For tapping Central
Asian oil and gass reserves, US no longer looks to Pakistan as the
favourite, it is rather a liability. US is trying to mend relations with
Iran and is also pressurising Taliban regime to reach an agreement with the
opposition alliance. Even Saudi-Iranian relations are improving. Pakistan’s
role in this scenario gets gradually marginalised. There is also growing
reputation criticism of Clinton’s appeasement policy towards China and bias
against India. India becomes US’s new favourite. Reports are quoted the US
shared sensitive intelligence data with India and acquiesced in India’s
decision to make it public.
Is there really a positive shift in America’s policy towards India? Why did
US take so forthright a stand.
US’s positive sand towards India was only Kargil specific, restricted to
restoring status quo ante at LoC. Even on Kargil, though US and UN Military
observers group (a US shadow group) were well aware of what was happening in
Kargil for the last two years. It did not inform India unlike in 1987 when
US gave full details to Pakistan about Operation Brasstacks and warned New
Delhi against any escalating measure. Not only that US role in escalating
Kargil has not been above board. A report carried by the prestigious news
agency, ADNI is alarming. It says, quoting reports, that around the time Gen
Mushraff was visiting Skardu, preparatory to the massive infiltration, a
special US commando team was seen in Pakistan. “The team may well have been
assisting the Pakistan Army assemble Pusto-speaking guerrilla fighters many
of whom are known to be in the pay of CIA since the days of the war against
the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.This suspicion arises from the fact
that the infiltrators used much the same tactics as did the CIA-trained
Afghan fighters in the highlands of Afghanistans,” the report adds.
Stephen Cohen, a US think-tank says that end of stalemate in Kargil was
limited victory for India and limited for Pakistan, “Both sides won and
lost”. US took no hostile or damaging steps against Pakistan. America forced
a commitment on India that it will not cross LOC. India soldiers suffered
huge losses because of this.
US may not have taken even a forthright stand on respect for LoC, but the
aggression was too blatant. Also in the absence of minimalist position it
could lose mediatory role. Even while not criticising Pakistan, it has
gained positive leverage in India. This has dangerous implications,
considering that despite end of cold war there has been persistent American
diplomatic activism on Kashmir indicating consistency in US position.
Second gain for America has been that it has pushed Kashmir to the centre
stage with itself as the mediator. The joint statement of Clinton and Sharif
was emphatic on this. It said, “he (Clinton) would take a personal interest
in encouraging an expeditious resumption and intensification of those
bilateral effors, once the sanctity of the Line of Control has been fully
restored.”
Prof Robert Wirsingh, a US think tank and a collaborator of Kashmir study
Group report said with Kargil US has acquired the status of a mediator.
“This (the Kargil conflict) will be dragged out with formal additional
participant in Washington. You may not call it mediation but facilitation of
mediators. Kargil has given gains that Siachen never acquired,” he adds.
Karl Inderfurth made two significant statements in an interview to
Washington Post in the aftermath of Kargil. He said that Vajpayee had said
recently “we want to permanently resolve the Kashmir problem”. Inderfurth
added, “we hope at appropriate time India will sign CTBT because India has
determined it is in its national interest to do so”.-------------- Inder
Malhotra, a leading political analyst says that US wants a quid pro quo for
better relations most probably in nuclear field especialy in the form of
signature on CTBT.
US has been persuing its agenda on Kashmir and CTBT, irrespctive of Indian
interests. It has sent Joan Rohlfing, senior advisor for national security
to US energy secretary on a six month deputation to its embassy in Delhi
with effect from September 1. She has been working on non-proliferation
issues for the last twelve years. She will be supporting Ambassador Celeste
on non-proliferation issues and her first step on non-proliferation is to
get India sign CTBT. She comes to India, a month before the important
Vieanna Conference on CTBT. The indications from US are that its second step
after CTBT would be to force India and Pakistan to reach a settlement on
Kashmir in accordance with Shimla accord and UN resolutions. This is US’s
real gameplan while playing a supportive stance on Kargil. For Indian
policy-makers it is important to bear in mind that US will not allow
Pakistan to collapse or even come under the shadow of a military dominant
India. Thus any US mediatory role will likely seek to safeguard Pakistani
interests vis-a-vis India. For the sake of India it is not going to armtwist
it to accept a Kashmir settlement on Indian terms. Despite its blatant
aggression, US administration showed its readiness to bail out Pakistan
economy by offering it the IMF loan and make extra political effort to lift
US sanctions against India.
Source: Kashmir
Sentinel
|