As the countdown for United States President Bill Clinton's proposed visit to the subcontinent begins, a host of security and South Asia experts from the US are expected to visit India. After Stimson Centre President Michael Krepon earlier this week, it's the turn of Stephen P. Cohen, senior fellow at the Brookings Institute and author of landmark books on the Pakistani army and non-proliferation in South Asia. Cohen has lived in India for several spells and was on the policy planning staff of the US State Department for ten years. In a chat with ARATI R. JERATH, he expresses the hope that India and the US will learn to look beyond the contentious nuclear issue to forge a relationship befitting two democratic giants. How have the nuclear tests and the recent Kargil conflict changed international perceptions of the region?The way in which the United States got itself involved in Kargil reflects a more authentic post-Cold War view of the region. America is finally beginning toimplement what it has always said it wants to do but never did, that is, take an objective view of South Asia and treat each issue and each country on merit. It is a shame that the US concern, even obsession, with nonproliferation has resulted in an unbalanced view of South Asia in the past in the sense of this one issue against all others. The State Department has of course been emphasising that the US has no intention of mediating on Kashmir. But isn't the kind of involvement we saw over Kargil the first step towards third-party intervention?I would take them at their word. I don't think the US has thought through a long-term strategy for South Asia which would involve active interest, let alone mediation. Yet there is an unusual, many feel unnecessary, amount of interest in the region, not only by the US but by other countries as well.Kargil was alarming in terms of regional developments. And when there is a nuclear dimension, it becomes a matter of legitimate concern forall. You can't expect other countries to watch the bilateral process between India and Pakistan going from depths to heights to depths again. You can't avoid other countries taking a deep interest in regional developments when both sides have nuclear capabilities. Nuclear weapons are not ordinary weapons.The irony is that the nuclear tests which were supposed to strengthen India's international position have brought in welcome and unwelcome interest. India is getting a lot of attention because of its nuclear programme. A resolution to the Kashmir dispute and the non-proliferation issue must be high on the US agenda for the Clinton visit. The US would surely like to show success on both fronts. What are the kind of negotiations that are on?What they'd like and what they'll get may be different. What's interesting is that they have two months in which to negotiate. So if they have to work out something, they have to do it soon.I wouldn't rule it out but I'm skeptical about the ability ofthe two countries to reach an agreement, especially on Kashmir. And when you throw Pakistan in, it complicates matters further.There may be movement on the CTBT though, which is important for the Clinton Administration. Is Clinton's visit linked to India and Pakistan signing the Treaty?There are people in Washington who want a linkage. There are others who would be happy with qualified adherence. It's not clear which view will prevail. My hope is that both countries will look beyond the nuclear issue to other more important things.My advice to Clinton would be to bring a jumbo jet full of American business executives. The real national security crisis for India is the massive bulge of poverty. The security of the lives of 400 million people should be right up on top for any government. And I would like to see Americans put that at the top of their contribution to the progress of this country. What is your view on the draft nuclear doctrine released by the VajpayeeGovernment?I see it as a wish list which projects India 10 to 20 years in the future. India may not go down that road very far. It is many years and many billions of dollars away from implementing even half of the force levels the doctrine talks about.It's really a political document, not a serious statement of strategic purpose or goals. India hopes to ultimately be accepted as a nuclear weapon state. Do you see this happening?I see that India is a nuclear weapon state when it tests nuclear weapons. It is silly of the US not to see that reality. It can't legally be a member of the NPT (Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty) but it can be a halfway member by agreeing to fulfill the obligations. It's an opportunity for bargaining by both sides - the CTBT and provisions of the NPT in return for technology exchanges.India should also be brought into a whole range of nuclear and missile agreements. It's in India's (and America's) interest to see that nuclear weapons do not proliferate inthe neighbourhood. Do you agree that the road to non-proliferation is through Kashmir?I don't take the alarmist view that Kashmir will spark off a nuclear war. It is possible that India and Pakistan can drift along for several decades with Kashmir as it is. But it would be foolish not to resolve the dispute in some way.Politicians in both countries should decide that this is a political issue to be resolved by them, not bureaucrats. It is a shared responsibility. But as a larger, more stable democracy, India should be looking for ways to help the process along. The Kashmir policy till now has clearly been a flawed one.
