
The Israelis are considered past masters at politicking in America. Although the Jewish vote in the US is thought to be of a predominantly Democratic disposition, Tel Aviv likes to play both sides. As a result, and no matter which party 8212; Democratic or Republican 8212; comes to power, the Israelis always have a sympathetic ear in the White House and the Congress.
Given the large Jewish population in the US 8212; New York is said to have more Jews than all of Israel 8212; the Jewish vote is as important to the American politicians as the US political process is to Israel. Indians in the US now number over 1.5 million. This isn8217;t anywhere close to the strength of the Jewish community and is electorally insignificant. But the rapid growth and influence of Indian-Americans is beginning to earn them the sobriquet quot;New Jewsquot;. Not only are the Indians among the fastest expanding immigrant groups, they are also becoming an economic powerhouse. Some of this is already beginning to reflect in the political process. In New York State, where Indians number more than 200,000, First Lady and Senate aspirant Hillary Clinton is cognizant of this ethnic vote as evident in her sudden interest in Indian community gatherings. On the West Coast, California politicians, always conscious of the immigrant vote, pay special attention to the growing Indian clout with frequent appearances atcommunity events.
It seems entirely appropriate then that Prime Minister Vajpayee should be visiting the US at a time when the Indian community is finding its political feet. For New Delhi the question is not whether it will pay less or more taxes, but which dispensation 8212; Democratic or Republican 8212; will be more appreciative of its aspirations and difficulties. Thus far, the Vajpayee government has kept a prudent equi-distance from both parties in the electoral heat. It has sought and accepted luncheon meeting with Democratic nominee Al Gore, an engagement that is bound to be more purposeful than the one he would have in any case had as the vice-president. It is also awaiting word from the Bush camp for a meeting with the Republican nominee.
Conventional wisdom is that Indian governments have been more at ease with a Democratic White House than Republican administrations. Some scholars point to the Kennedy and Carter eras as being one of positive sentiments, although whether the deeds matched the comfort level is doubtful. Despite the heightening of the Cold War, both Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi shared a reasonably congenial relationship with the Reagan Administration, although the follies of the regime were to visit the subcontinent many years later. Even the Bush Administration that saw the climax of the Cold War and the eruption of the Gulf War, sardonically maintained an even keel with New Delhi despite the turmoil in India successive coalition governments combined with a forgettable lack of clarity in policy.
The Clinton Years were marked largely by indifference in the early part 1993-1994, growing interest in the middle part 1995-1997, tension and recrimination in 1998 because of the nuclear tests, and remarkable ardour in the final years 1999-2000. Washington gradually came to terms with, and even came to appreciate, India8217;s existential dilemma and security concerns. There is still some distance in perception between Washington and New Delhi, but it is nothing like the chasm that existed through the seventies and eighties, and became an abyss in May 1998. The Clinton visit this year substantially bridged the rift. Vajpayee8217;s task is to strengthen it further.
Al Gore was an active part of Clinton8217;s foreign policy think-tank and it is reasonable to assume that an administration led by him will continue to maintain course. But unlike Clinton, who saw non-proliferation as a political objective, Gore is likely to pursue it as an end in itself. Gore is also likely to be tougher on themes like environmental standards and child labour, issues Indians are notoriously and needlessly thin-skinned about. A Bush Administration, on the other hand, will have a foreign policy that will be more security-driven. A complex security matrix in which it sees China as an emerging threat may well benefit India.
Are these reasons enough to be edgy about a Gore Administration and hope for a Bush win? Nyah. For all the over-wrought peroration on security and China as an emerging threat, the Bush foreign policy team does not inspire confidence that it will offer a cogent worldview. Gore, his reputation as a hectoring eco-bully notwithstanding, clearly has a more coherent vision of the world. Especially in matters of nuclear proliferation, a nuanced status quo that could lead to gradual disarmament is a better deal than the unraveling of the whole edifice that could lead to unforeseeable consequences. So while the minuscule but energetic Indian-American community wrestles with its choice, New Delhi8217;s interest lies clearly in Goredom. Besides, as the hi-tech profile of India and Indian-Americans grows, it is a better hand to play against a nerdy Gore dispensation than a macho Bush Administration.
While the minuscule but energetic Indian-American community wrestles with its choice, New Delhi8217;s interest lies clearly in Goredom