Search This Blog

16 December, 2007

India Joins the Club of Neo-imperialists

India’s vote against Iran at IAEA shows not only the fact that New Delhi has buckled under American pressure but it also signals that henceforth it would espouse the neo-imperialist agenda of the West. Under IAEA’s rules Iran has the right to enrich and procure uranium for peaceful and civilian purposes. The US has, however, always maintained that Iran is seeking to develop nuclear bomb, which Tehran has always denied. The choice was who to believe, Iran or the US. New Delhi has gone with Washington despite its track record of false propaganda and poor intelligence. How can we forget that American intelligence about Iraq’s WMDs was a cruel hoax as a result of which that country is bleeding today. The US failure of intelligence about Iraq’s WMDs is so fresh and yet New Delhi has preferred to side with America’s neo-imperialism.

For some time a particular lobby in New Delhi was working over time to impress upon the policy-makers in the Ministry of External Affairs that India would gain enormously if it dumps Iran. A misinformation campaign was launched that Pakistan, a Muslim country, has already dumped Iran, and the gas pipeline that India, Pakistan and Tehran want to build to bring Iranian gas to India was in jeopardy. In such a situation, the pro-America lobby advanced the argument that New Delhi must protect its recent nuclear deal with USA by supporting it on the Iran issue. By so doing India has not only relied on the most unreliable world power but has also exhibited an intellectually bankrupt understanding of the Middle East.

There is a widespread apprehension in the Muslim world, especially in the Middle East, that USA and Western Europe, in collaboration with China, Russia and India want to surround it for its continuous exploitation. Many Indian intellectuals, whose pro-American leanings or anti-Muslim biases are well known, are of the opinion that the US, Western Europe, India, China and Russia should join hands to “better manage” the world. The opinion hardly leaves anything for imagination that which parts of the world they want to “better manage”? Surely it is the mineraly rich Muslim world from Central Asia to Middle East and North Africa.

For sometimes some well-meaning people in India have been trying to impress upon one and all that our good relationship with Pakistan would ultimately lead to Asian renaissance which will benefit India immensely. India, via Pakistan and Iran, can become a neighbouring country of Central Asia and the Middle East through land routes. The proposed laying down of a gas pipeline from Iran to India via Pakistan would be right step in that direction. After 9/11 there is a large-scale thinking in the oil-rich Persian/Arabian Gulf countries that they would be better-placed, and stand to gain immensely, if they invest their surplus money in India’s fast growing economy. Men who matter in Delhi are aware of this new Middle Eastern thinking, and yet they have preferred to join the US-led West.

Above all, what we have to keep in mind is that Iran is not Iraq. Tehran would not commit the mistake that Saddam committed by cooperating with the UNO. He is in jail today, and the men who came to Iraq on “American tanks” are leading the profusely bleeding Iraq. Tehran has realized well that being weak is a crime in the American-dominated world order. From all available indications and indicators, it is clear that neither sanctions nor brazen invasions can stop Iran from going nuclear now. The way the Americans built a false case against Saddam’s Iraq using the United Nations has convinced Tehran that what matters today is economic and military power. And the best easy way to become militarily powerful is to go nuclear. The US-led West could not stop a poor country like Pakistan from becoming a nuclear power, and would surely fail in its attempt to stop Iran. And perhaps sooner than later we will regret our decision to join the evil club of the neo-imperialists. New Delhi’s explanation that by voting with the West, it has bought time for Tehran is simply unconvincing.

[September, 2005]

No comments: