The Hindu Business Line : US Presidential sweepstakes

It can be expected that whoever dons the presidential mantle will do nothing that detracts from the healthy respect the US has for India's democratic credentials and economic achievements.

NON-INTERFERENCE in the internal affairs of other countries as an abstract tenet of international relations is all very well, but it cannot stop governments and the people having their own views or forming their own judgments on the developments in other countries. Internet, SMS, e-mail, chatting and video conferencing facility across continents, e-business, e-commerce, e-banking, and the invitations in government Web sites to browsers to record their opinions have truly made the world seamless and borderless, giving people instant access to news of events all over the world. They, the civil society and the media, freely take public positions commending or criticising policies and actions which affect their interests and susceptibilities or jeopardise the well-being of the community. In short, as per the current aphorism graphically encapsulating these trends, a butterfly batting its wings in Brazil may cause an avalanche in the Himalayas!

Jitters, anticipation

If so, is it not reasonable to presume that the outcome of any happening anywhere may cause, if not an avalanche, at least a reconfiguration of political and economic relations everywhere? Especially if the happening is in a country such as the US, which, as every schoolboy knows, is militarily the most powerful, technologically the most advanced, and economically the most affluent, and where the Republican and Democratic candidates are now battling for the topmost slot — the presidency, no less.

For many countries, whoever gets the plum prize of the White House may well impact, directly or indirectly, on the content and course of their domestic agenda and external concerns. For some, like Pakistan, the Philippines, Taiwan or South Korea, their very stability, progress and standing in the world may crucially depend on their continuing to be in the good books of the political leadership in Washington. Conversely, those who have had a raw deal from the present Administration may look forward to a change in the incumbency as the only hope for a favourable turn of events.

It is not to be wondered, then, if nations, big and small, are asking themselves the question, "After November 2, what?" or are in a state of suppressed jitters or eager anticipation. Pakistan would certainly wish for the success of Mr George Bush with whom its President, Gen Pervez Musharraf, has unconditionally thrown in his lot and whose strong financial and political support has been critical for his survival. A change of guard in Washington may, for that very reason, imperil his position and throw Pakistan into turmoil. That explains the pro-Musharraf Pakistan lobby in the US working furiously to drum up electoral and financial support for Mr Bush. It appears from media reports that, contrary to the widely held view that the bonds of the British Government with the neo-cons in the US and the "special relationship the Prime Minister, Mr Tony Blair, had forged with Mr Bush are unbreakable, the Leader of the House of Commons, Mr Peter Hain, has signalled to the supporters of the Democratic Party candidate, Senator John Kerry, that Downing Street would prefer his victory over his Republican rival. The Guardian, in a report headlined "No 10's silent support for Kerry," reveals that Mr Hain, on a recent private visit to the US, met Labour supporters in New York, as well as members of the Kerry team as part of a "diplomatic ground-covering in the event of a Kerry victory," although there is also a gnawing doubt in the minds of many that Mr Kerry does not have what it takes to defeat Mr Bush.

Whatever that be, the group of MPs owing allegiance to Mr Blair, known as "Blairites," is scathing in its attack on Mr Bush's record, while the group's journal in an editorial is quoted by The Guardian to have made this trenchant observation: "By his manner, his rhetoric and sometimes his actions, George Bush has presented to the world an image of America that its friends know is not its true face. That is why those who recognise that American leadership is vital and a force for good in an uncertain world will wish John Kerry well."

In India, too, outward maintenance of a detached or neutral stance, need not mean that the political and governing classes, the academia, the media and those with a penchant for public affairs, do not have their predilections for one party/candidate or the other. It will be hypocritical if they pretended otherwise.

This is nothing to be ashamed or feel guilty about; it is, after all, human nature to wish for the maximum benefits for oneself or one's country in any given situation or context.

I have heard it said that, during the election to the Lok Sabha this year, there was a strong current of opinion favouring the National Democratic Alliance's (NDA) return to power among the US establishment, business interests and India-watchers knowledgeable in India's political and economic background. No need to be surprised at this in view of the rapport existing between the US Administration dating back to the time of Mr Bill Clinton and the NDA leaders, particularly the Prime Minister, Mr Atal Bihari Vajpayee, who had won American hearts by describing India and the US as "natural allies".

Indian Diaspora's role

It is not uncommon for countries which are in a position to do so to seek in a variety of sneaky and cheeky ways to influence the poll outcome to suit their interests and to get rid of the successor government by ruses, stratagems and spoils, if it does not kowtow to them.

The US, with the Central Intelligence Agency as its punchy cat's paw, has long ago established itself as an adept in this game of political snake-and-ladders. India is nowhere in that kind of a club, nor does it, we may presume, have the stomach for resorting to unsavoury means to effect a "regime change".

Of course, the numerical, financial and political clout of the Indian Diaspora can, and, in the US, does, play a significant role, independent of, or in aid of, the dispensation in the mother country, in tilting the scales one way or the other. The Indian Americans have impressed both the parties in the fray, with both candidates reaching out to them to enlist their support. Mr Bush praises them for having "taken their place in the American mainstream and made themselves part of the fabric of this country through their hard work, their patriotism, and their contributions."

For the first time, the Democratic National Committee has a young ethnic Indian-American, Mr Ro Khanna, as a high profile office-bearer at the party headquarters in Washington, to mobilise the votes of 2.5 million Indian-Americans. There was a strong contingent of 40 Indian-American delegates at the Democratic party convention. Exults an observer: "Rich Indians rubbed shoulders with rich Pakistanis in the greater cause of defeating President George W. Bush this November."

General reflections apart, does India have a stake in the US presidential election? The answer cannot but be an emphatic affirmative. True, India is not like Pakistan subsisting on US favours, and has the stamina to withstand pressures and sanctions. It can be expected that whoever dons the presidential mantle will do nothing that detracts from the healthy respect the US has for India's democratic credentials and economic achievements. The incoming Administration, whether symbolised by the Elephant or the Donkey, can also be depended upon for taking care to refrain from meddling in India's management of its own problems, except, perhaps, for some public statements of an exhortatory nature from time to time.

Doubtless, behind the scenes, in private talks and through exchanges of official communications and diplomatic demarches, plenty more by way of straight-from-the-shoulder advice and uninhibited expression of views will flow in both directions. This is a perfectly normal pursuit of give-and-take in international relations and not something to which exception can be taken.

(To be concluded)

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Private sector reservation

A new edge to gilt trading

Making an issue of the foreign hand

Saving the steel frame

Are inflation expectations overdone?

US Presidential sweepstakes — India's interest in outcome

Index funds can bond with bonds

Packaging an idea into a tourist destination

RBI's dilemma

Civil service promotions