Unscrambling history

But then the global subservience the US commanded proved illusory. It took 40 years of mutually reinforcing paranoia to discover the logic of ideological co-existence. The prestige factor was subjective and only the madman irrationality justified strategic deterrence. I have long disagreed that China will repeat 1962 but even while trade complementation has improved spectacularly, diplomatic attrition and economic competition continue.

Nehru8217;s aversion to nuclear weapons and testing was prophetic, but it got vitiated by Partition and Cold War. In 1963, he would have authorised the signing the Partial Test Ban if it had been comprehensive and, in my view, along with non-nuclear states, he might have crusaded against built-in apartheid of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. India did not anticipate the Russian premier Kosygin saying, 8220;It was unthinkable that India would not sign NPT.8221; It was the first international problem where India asserted exceptionalism.

The claim that the 1974 explosion was peaceful and 1998 gave weapon status, did not frighten even the neighbours. The Kargil invasion 1999 was not deterred nor did nuclear Pakistan refuse to withdraw the freedom fighters from Kashmir. One wonders if Nawaz Sharif had refrained from matching Pakistan explosions, whether the present Indo-US agreement might have fructified. While 8 nations retain their weapon reactors, six others including Pakistan assisted Libya have accepted international safeguards and feel no more insecure.

History cannot, of course, be unscrambled but 2006 agreement corrects many false perspectives. It recognises India8217;s nuclear weapon status but rewards it for desisting from horizontal proliferation and pledging future restraint. With 300 million Indians affording consumer durables, stimulating stock market booms and attracting foreign investments, India8217;s prestige has got enhanced by mastering knowledge dynamics and steady 8 per cent annual economic growth. What the world ignores is that 700 million people remain marginalised 8212; almost half below the poverty line. As many as 175 districts 8212; over one fourth of India 8212; are overwhelmed by Naxalites. The economic opportunity costs 8212; of guns versus more equitable spread of butter 8212; is at the heart of the national dilemma. Easing poverty requires multiple inputs but, above all, greater availability of energy.

President Bush has his own calculus. After 60 years, India is being held up as a contributor to world stability. The Bush-Manmohan agreements offer cooperation to promote economic dynamism, research in agriculture, space and clean fuel, environmental rectification, infrastructural improvement and cooperation in anti-terrorism but, notably it pledges easier nuclear energy fuel in perpetuity. Superceding earlier postures, only two-thirds of the reactors are to be under IAEA safeguards. I recall after Prime Minister Desai defiantly refused to sign the discriminating treaty President Carter8217;s whisper to Cyrus Vance, picked up by a sensitive microphone and automatically disseminated, 8220;We must write him a cold and blunt letter.8221; Jody Powell on behalf of Carter and I for India sought to moderate the angry reactions of the press.

Much of the world today is descending into irrationalities like Islam-phobia and anti-Americanism, but India with democratic transparency is rediscovering its civilisational strength in plurality. Economic development with distributional equity has the highest priority to arrest and reverse societal violence.

In the 20th century, most eminent political leaders have had fatal flaws. FDR saved Europe and Asia militarily, but authorised the Manhattan bomb project; Winston Churchill opposed decolonisation; Stalin made-believe Communist ideology would smother nationalisms; Mao caused 30 million deaths in starvation and a whole generation was punished by the Cultural Revolution. Deng Xiaoping through economic liberalisation made a farsighted correction, but China8217;s progress will remain fragile if dissent is denied.

Statesmanship demands political courage in facing changing realities and effecting correctives for people8217;s welfare. Outdated calculus of the possible dangers must be rejected and ameliorative probables clutched. The late McGoerge Bundy with the experience of the nearest nuclear war scenario during the Cuban Missile crisis 1962, in 8216;Danger and Survival8217;, prophesied that in the first decade of the 21st century, the chances of a nuclear war were one in 800.

Manmohan Singh, after evaluating competitive parochial arguments may qualify as a statesman for giving higher priority to development. Despite fundamental disagreements, the compromise hammered the two leaders is proof of a refreshing contemporaneous vision. It happens to be in line with Nehru8217;s original concept that real security must blend defence, development and democracy. It is plausibly safe and the quickest traverse to superpowerdom.

The writer is a former foreign secretary