Sunday, July 06, 2003
Re: India in Iraq
I am not at all arguing on ideological or moral grounds. Let me clarify this...
When I talked abt liberal arguments etc, what I was trying to convey was that this interventionist ideology will continue in some form in the coming admns too. It's not going to go with the current admn, because even if indeed, a liberal succeeds Bush, he could easily see the liberal basis of the arguments that call for interventions such as Iraq.
Regarding ur views... I find the points u have raised pretty important... few comments:
1. Regarding dual use technology - well, I think it is either tame or unrealistic (depending on what level of dual use u are talking abt) to demand that they lift dual use tech ban. In fact, what should be on table is outright defence technology that could give us credible deterrence vis-a-vis China. Approval of AWACs is an encouraging sign, but we need to push more.
2. $3B for Pakistan was not really what Mushy came here for. It was not even what Bhutto got when she came here as Pak PM. Starving Pak could only destabilize it. Diplomacy never works with sticks alone.
3. I certainly agree on that MacDonald report. But instead of giving in to our propensity to get hurt, we should push for more joint exercises that could lead to more understanding on both sides. The report, to me, was not just a vain act of provocation. Rather, we must see it as a symptom of an underlying problem, which must be dealt with.
4. Umm... I am still not sure abt the implications of we going there under allied command. It would be good if u can shed more light on ur objections to it - if it is more than just national pride stuff.
Comments: Post a Comment