145;We must keep quiet146;

India has nothing to gain by backing Saddam. On the other hand, keeping shut now could reap benefits later, say The Indian Express readers....

India has nothing to gain by backing Saddam. On the other hand, keeping shut now could reap benefits later, say The Indian Express readers.

8226; Your article, 8216;8216;The new great game8217;8217;, reveals the tone and tenor of Machiavellian thought 8212; cold, callous and calculating. One may argue that foreign policies need to be precisely that in order to succeed. But the analysis ignores the domestic angle. One wonders whether the Indian establishment has grown wiser overnight or the domestic and foreign strategic interests have converged. Does the studied silence over an issue concerning an Islamic country not suit a government heading for elections riding a Hindutva wave? Are the mounting tensions with another Islamic country to our east just coincidental? You have coined the term 8216;8216;political Islam8217;8217; apparently in order to differentiate between the liberal faith and its sinister practitioners. We may even be talking about a 8216;8216;political Hinduism8217;8217; a few years from now. By framing self-serving and unethical policies, we may lose all clout in international relations. To watch silently from the sidelines as Iraq is destroyed, allegedly for possessing weapons of mass-destruction, by states whose own stockpile of such weapons is an admitted fact is not a policy but convenience. It is naive to assume that the American race towards universal hegemony will stop on India8217;s western frontiers. We too are nuclear and have been targeted by American policymakers in the past. The possibility that the Americans may 8216;8216;defang8217;8217; the militant Islam step-by-step sounds Utopian. Wasn8217;t the rogue face of a liberal faith raised primarily by their urge to contain communism and partly fuelled by their desire to protect Zionism? The harsh fact is that the monsters you raise ultimately maul you. And India will be no exception while the game is played on.
8212; J.M. Manchanda

8226; Saddam is a rogue and needs no sympathy. The people who will suffer are the Iraqis. But if the anti-US groups really want to help them, then why not take up the issue with him? Why don8217;t all these 8216;8216;peace-loving8217;8217; nations say in one firm resounding tone, 8216;Saddam, we don8217;t want to see you hiding in your bunker when Iraqis are bombed. Hand over your weapons to the UN instead of playing this cat-and-mouse game8217;. They won8217;t do it because they know Saddam won8217;t listen. And yet they don8217;t want the US to attack. As you pointed out, we definitely benefit from this. It puts Pakistan on the backfoot. The best thing India can do is keep quiet.
8212; Nagarajan Sivakumar

8226; Instead of making passionate anti-Islamic remarks, you should talk about racism in India against low-caste people and tortures against Muslim.
8212; Mohammed Arman

8226; We have one more concern that we should not overlook. India8217;s economy is now going through a very critical phase. We have a large expatriate population in the Gulf and other Muslim-dominated countries who contribute a sizeable chunk to our economy. A positive tone siding with Muslim nations but having an internal understanding with the US may be a better strategy.
8212; Shekhar Shukla

8226; Iraq has the second largest oil reserve in the Middle East. Even during these years of sanction, some Iraqi oil found its way into the US. Now, if the US can control the flow of Iraqi oil, they can afford to be less reliant on Saudi oil. If the Saudis could not sell their oil to the American market, what would they do? If US controls Iraqi oil, they can make the Saudis dance to Uncle Sam8217;s tunes much better. It may also lead to less money to Wahabbi missions in other parts of the world.
8212; Avram Sprinzl

8226; The only problem is the post-war make-up of the Iraqi regime. Would America really help create the first truly democratic government in the Middle East? All the indications point towards that scenario though there are bureaucrats and decision makers in the administration who tend to think that democracy is not going to work, and all they need is a pro-American government in place.
8212; Prakash Hosalli

Story continues below this ad

8226; On principle, no war is welcome, much less so when in reality Saddam, though he deserves to be ousted for the good of the Iraqi people, poses no realistic threat to the US or the West. However, you have rightly pointed out that this is a step in setting the Islamic states right. Of course, you cannot discount the oil advantage. But I do agree that India needs to keep its mouth shut.
8212; Mahesh Vasavada

8226; As I lived in Saudi Arabia for six years before shifting to the US, I can understand your views about political Islam very well. Even though going for a war with Iraq is immoral and illegal from the common man8217;s perspective, it will benefit everyone. As the US and the rest of world is more dependant on oil, Saudi Arabia exploits this situation for promoting fundamentalist Islam. The only way to contain Saudi Arabia is to get control over the second largest oil reserve 8212; Iraq. The US is taking the real risk. Anyway, India will not get any economical or political benefit by supporting Saddam.
8212; Krishnan