Twilight in liberal America

Looking at this from a purely Indian viewpoint, I would always have been happier at the prospect of continuity in the White House. For one thing, President Bush is a lightning-rod for several thousand terrorists who act under the cover of Islam; a hefty proportion of those murderous thugs would be looking speculatively at India if they were not being pinned down in Iraq and Afghanistan by American power. Second, President Bush8217;s free trade instincts offer more hope to India than would John Kerry8217;s pandering to his protectionist constituency.

That said, I think that the 8220;liberals8221; across the globe were pinning a little too much hope in a Kerry victory. This was indeed a battle between ideologies but in practical terms there was little chance of John Kerry actually reversing a foreign policy initiated by George Bush. The Republicans and the Democrats were divided by a chasm on abortion rights, homosexual marriage, stem-cell research, health-care policy, and tax reform but the differences were tactical rather than strategic when it came to Iraq. Kerry8217;s view seemed to be that Bush had not committed enough force.

Coming to South Asia specifically, it makes little difference on the ground whether a Bush or a Kerry is in office. The United States scarcely cares whether Pakistan remains a military dictatorship or evolves into a democracy. The Americans want two things from Islamabad: permission to use Pakistan as a staging area for operations in Afghanistan, and a commitment that nuclear weapons will not fall into the hands of Islamic fundamentalists. Both aims are best served by having General Musharraf in office; he is both pliant and predictable.

These are actually areas where Indian interests coincide with those of the United States. The opportunity to deny Pakistan any nuclear weaponry passed for good in the 1970s; the best we can hope for today is that someone as practical relatively speaking as General Musharraf keeps his finger on the button rather than some radical democratically elected or not. Nor do we want our beloved neighbour to play host to half the wild-eyed fundamentalists out in the world 8212; a view in which the Americans and the Chinese, come to that concur.

In fact, Osama bin Laden probably did us a favour when he tried to influence the US elections by pulling off an 8220;October surprise8221;. The American public probably did not pay much attention to the fact that the famous video-tape was delivered to Al Jazeera8217;s offices in Islamabad, but you can be sure that the American military and intelligence machinery noted its significance. General Musharraf will now come under renewed pressure to intensify action against the terrorists in his country. These are men who draw upon the same funds, the same arms and training and the same ideological wellsprings whether they operate in the mountains of Afghanistan or the Kashmir Valley. It is not possible for Al-Qaeda to come under attack without weakening the alphabet soup of terrorist groups murdering innocents in India.

I have one more point I should like to make. Irrespective of whether it is Bush or Kerry who recites the oath of office come January 20, 2005, isn8217;t everyone suffering a touch of 8220;Maharaja Flu8221;?

Step back to 1971, the year of President Nixon8217;s infamous 8220;tilt8221; toward Pakistan and the beginning of the myth that Republican administrations are more inimical to India. The point that everyone forgets today is that all the power of the White House could not enforce that 8220;tilt8221;; both Houses of Congress, the media, and even sections of the State Department were effective in their support of India. It is easy to assume that the president alone can enforce policy, but that has never been true. The Senate defied President Wilson on joining the League of Nations to name one famous instance.

So the question remains: how much effort has Indian diplomacy expended in cultivating the legislative wing of the American government, the media, American business, and even academia? Don8217;t forget that the so-called 8220;neo-conservative revolution8221; began in the think-tanks. The Chinese 8212; who should be our benchmark, not Pakistan 8212; spend time and money in cultivating these constituencies. The Maharaja in the Oval Office is undoubtedly the most important piece on the American chessboard but even Bishops 8212; as these polls demonstrate 8212; have a role to play.

As another night of electoral uncertainty descends on America, I am left with one thought: a Bush victory is probably better on balance for India but do keep an eye on the Senate and the House of Representatives as well.