A different kind of meltdown

It looks like the U.S.-India nuclear deal, that was greeted with such fanfare 2 years ago, is going to be put into cold storage until 2009, disappointing Americans who hoped for a new strategic partnership and demonstrating again that India is not ready for the world stage. PM Singh announced:

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India, even though he has forcefully staked his legacy on a landmark nuclear agreement with the United States, made it plain on Friday that his government would not invite early elections by confronting its Communist allies in Parliament over their opposition to the deal. “What we have done with the United States — it is an honorable deal, it is good for India, it is good for the world,” he said at a conference here. “I do attach importance in seeing this deal come through, but if it doesn’t come through that is not the end of life.”

Not ready for the world stage may seem a harsh assessment. After all, many critics of the deal pointed out that even if it did go through, the actual electricity generated would not meet India’s needs. Indian security experts (that were not reflexively anti-American) pointed out that they were uneasy about how involved America would be in setting Indian nuclear policy.

I do not dismiss those concerns out of hand, but the deal was something more – it was an acknowledgement of changing global realities. The. U.S. invested a lot into the deal, being criticized by the non-proliferation community as being reckless, by some paleo-cons as being too indulgent with India, etc. But it was, in a sense, a bet by the U.S. that India was going to take a bigger role on the world stage. America bet on the wrong horse.

By failing to get the Communists in line, PM Manmohan Singh has shown he is an incompetent who cannot get things done. Under his watch, there have been no major arrests in high profile terrorist attacks, such as the Bombay train blasts of 2006 or the recent blasts in Hyderabad. Naxalites have free reign over parts of rural India. In the immediate neighborhood – the Maoists are close to seizing control in Nepal, Bangladesh is under military rule, and Sri Lanka is looking to Pakistan for weapons to deal with the Tamil Tigers. Pakistan has been a better neighbor lately, but that may have to do with its preoccupation with internal matters than any new thinking on their part.

On the economic front, reforms have stalled. With millions of young workers entering the labor force every year, Singh has failed to enact labor market reforms that can make those jobs available. Instead, all Singh managed to do was threaten the private sector with caste quotas. All that will do is ensure that the private sector will be as wasteful and unproductive as India’s public sector.

On the education front, primary and secondary education are still woefully underfunded, with absentee teachers collecting money for classes that are not taught. Rather than deal with this, Singh offers to expand quotas at university level, and increase the acceptance rate – which is likely to lower standards.

By being adamant in their opposition to the deal, India’s Communists have blocked India from having access to Western technology that their paymasters in China already enjoy. Someone is popping champagne in Beijing, seeing their Indian puppets carry out their bidding with such effectiveness.

When Singh first became PM, it was thought that since he was not a career politician, he would not be as beholden to special interests. He’d handle the policy, and Sonia Gandhi would handle the politics. By not having any experience on how to keep parties in line, Singh was a poor choice for prime minister. Nitin Pai at The Acorn is calling for his resignation.

Am I over-reacting? I’d like some feedback from the India-based readers.

157 thoughts on “A different kind of meltdown

  1. Kush, you left out some very important reasons why India did not go “belly up” like Argentina, for instance. I think one of the most important reasons was that unlike the south american countries, there were significant capital controls in effect in india. for instance the rupee was never fully convertible (still isn’t) in contrast to many of the south american currencies.

  2. Chachaji, You have made some pretty good points. Man, are there a lot of downright US haters in here – its not just the CPM politicians who view the world through idealogical lenses alone but some people on this message board too.

    “While in India one can feel the bitterness towards the US. Can you blame some people for not wanting to partake in a watershed deal with a US regime that will be remembered by history as the biggest thuggery that ever was after WW2? I just never ever want to see our Prime Minster shaking hands with George Bush in a picture that would look like he was grateful to him.”

    It seems one can “feel the bitterness” towards the US – ahh yes, indeed. And the inferiortiy complex that many Indians have reveals itself in statements like Singh looking like he was “grateful to Bush”. Really ? Is ManMohan Singh going for the deal so that he can make Bush happy ?

    I can only shake my head with disappointment when i read comments like this – there are people here who have given reasons as to why there should be some questions about the deal. But this outright hatred for the US by people like Sandeep who some how have a pulse on how the entire Indian nation feels about the US is revealing of people who would prefer to live in a time warp with no consideration of what is going on in the world today.

    And yes, the communists are nothing more than Chinese agents – I will say that they are the biggest traitors of this country – they have held up all prospects of reform in retail, banking, financial sectors with no consideration of how badly Indian agriculture and Indian consumers need these reforms. Why?? Because these reforms are harmful to their thuggish trade unions and Indian business interests who have entrenched themselves in this sham socialist claptrap of a system.

    The communists do not want India and the US to get strategically closer as they can sense that this is trying to contain China. Can any one in this message board tell me as to why the commies are opposed to India contributing to the democracy initiative ?? Their hatred for the US is supposed to stop us from co-operating with them even when we have common interests.

    I hope that this Government falls – i want to see the Communists pull down this Government solely due to the US-India deal even though they have had their way with every major aspect of reforming the Indian economy.

    This will awaken people to how much important anti-US hatred is for the survival of communism in India – the idealogy has been so throughly debunked that these commie thugs have nothing more than blind anti Americanism to hang on to.

  3. It seems one can “feel the bitterness” towards the US – ahh yes, indeed. And the inferiortiy complex that many Indians have reveals itself in statements like Singh looking like he was “grateful to Bush”. Really ? Is ManMohan Singh going for the deal so that he can make Bush happy ? I can only shake my head with disappointment when i read comments like this – there are people here who have given reasons as to why there should be some questions about the deal. But this outright hatred for the US by people like Sandeep who some how have a pulse on how the entire Indian nation feels about the US is revealing of people who would prefer to live in a time warp with no consideration of what is going on in the world today.

    while i do agree that reflexive hatred of any idea is probably unwise, it is also erroneous to equate the leader of a particular state with its people, like you do above. hatred for bush or the u.s. government (while possibly wrong) cannot and should not be equated with disapproval of “the u.s.”, unless the term is defined more precisely. same with terms such as “anti-americanism”. pardon me, but what in heaven’s name is that supposed to connote? does is meant dislike of basketball or baseball or football? does it mean criticism of the apple pie, or sinclair lewis? does it mean disapproval of mark twain or william faulkner or orson welles’s movies? does it mean criticism of certain grammatical rules or spellings of american english? please clarify your terms.

  4. Man, are there a lot of downright US haters in here

    I love the US but her politics and corporate war machine is something questioned and criticised by even the most patriotic of citizens. For everything else though like it’s women’s rights culture and overall societal vibe, the live and let live attitude, I love it.

  5. Man, are there a lot of downright US haters in here – its not just the CPM politicians who view the world through idealogical lenses alone but some people on this message board too.

    What Tara said. I don’t hate the US, but I am critical of certain foreign policies and the nationalistic rhetoric that goes in the name of patriotism. But I also appreciate and like many other aspects of the US.

  6. Kush, you left out some very important reasons why India did not go “belly up” like Argentina, for instance.

    That is true, also, I must also partially correct myself, that as of today, Mexico, Argentina, and Turkey are doing very well.

    Turkey is considered a first world economy, and parts of Mexico too.

  7. “same with terms such as “anti-americanism”. pardon me, but what in heaven’s name is that supposed to connotedoes is meant dislike of basketball or baseball or football? does it mean criticism of the apple pie, or sinclair lewis? does it mean disapproval of mark twain or william faulkner or orson welles’s movies? does it mean criticism of certain grammatical rules or spellings of american english? please clarify your terms”

    Sigh, thanks for asking the question !! I dont know if you are from India or the United States (or any where else) but i will try to explain anti Americanism from an Indian context.

    It is equating the country to a capitalist nation state that is inherently, how do i put it… suspect in its motives and in many cases out right evil. Just take the Vietnam war for example. Any time you hear an anti US rant, it will be never complete with out a recall of this war. In fact it was only after coming here I realized how deeply conflicting this war was and is to American civil society. Or the fact that it was first started under JFK’s Presidency – you would nt know the context in which the war was started or how America lost its nerve in trying to combat communism. All that any one outside of here or even many people here think of is that the war is nothing more than an excuse for the military industrial complex which had to keep itself busy. Of course aided and abetted by American civilians who had a role in voting in these Governments.

    Here are some other aspects:

    1.Baseball is a stupid game where people simply hack at the ball – Football is nothing more than a sport that glorifies violence. Dont even remind people that basketball was invented by an American – you are better off not doing so. And yes, lets not even talk to Indian commies about American music/literature/arts etc – they are all nothing more than American “cultural imperialism” unless of course these very same works of art, music, literature reveal how bad America/American capitalism/corporate “war machine” is. It is no surprise that Bob Dylan , Paul Robeson Michael Moore are more recognized of being the authentic voices of America than any of their counterparts who may not hold the same views as them.

    How do people make such sweeping assertions about a sport or sports of which they have very little idea of the rules of the game, let alone its strategies/rivalries/traditions ? Very simple. They are all American in nature and there fore they cannot be anything more than representative of the mad and violent nature of the Yanks.

    All Americans are driven by greed and are after nothing more than getting themselves richer. Right. Unlike all other people who live in this world, who are driven by such altruism that they gave us such wonderful systems like communism, socialism and ever other ism which brought more human suffering than what the worst excesses of capitalism gave us ??

    2.They follow a capitalist system that fleeces the blood of poor workers while the rich industrialists get richer at their expense. As ridiculously one sided this comment is, i have come to realize that many people here in America believe pretty much the same thing !! And it is shared pretty widely in any country that has suffered from European imperialism.

    I have lived in this “capitalist system” for the last 7 years and i can honestly put my hand on my heart and say that this economic system for all its imperfections is more fair and more respectful of people what ever their professions may be and more free as compared to ANY OTHER socialist/communist/economic system. If i try making this argument to a communist in India now, i will be branded grossly naive of the “ways of America” at best and an American lackey at worst.

    Trust me on this one – the very fact that this deal will bring the US and India closer to each other than ever before is such a troubling aspect to communists and socialists and a few right wingers in India that they will pull out all stops to make sure that this deal is sabotaged in the end.

  8. …if you dig deep enough into nitin pai and his cohorts blogs, you will find various degrees of support and defense of the RSS, BJP, and especially the prima-fascist Narendra Modi…these guys are just a better articulated version of VHP thugs who were ripping off fetuses and burning pregnant women during the Gujarat riots….your referencing him is like quoting white supremacist blogs to criticize Howard Dean’s policies within the US, the idiotic Indian communists notwithstanding……KXB, pls be careful….those unfamilair with the Indian political scene should be wary of quoting these ppl, as there is a certain segment of upper class/caste India, who have a superficial familiarity with western ideas, just enough to be articulate in english but not enough to be liberal….and it is mostly this kind that populates the Indian blogosphere…they all have the telltale vocabulary: Islamofascism/minority appeasement/nationalism/historical revisionism, etcetera….just because they happen to be pro-US does not mean they share the essential liberal US values….to that extent, the Indian left is probably closer to mainstream US liberalism than these fascists, although they too have their own issues, not the least helped by the historical vagaries and hypocrisies of US foreign policy…..

  9. uuh, Check, Let me throw out a word to counter every thing you said about Nitin Pai and his “cohorts” – ad hominem. I have read the National Interest blog and it is not throwing out words like Islamofascism/minority appeasement meaninglessly. Nitin expresses views that he tries to back up with facts. If you dont agree with him show us how and where Nitin is wrong while he writes about murderous islamist fundamentalist terrorists, the minority appeasement which indeed happens in India every day due to Congress vote bank politics. If you can’t do that all you are doing is indulging in character assasination.

    You definitely sound like a leftist and your description of VHP/RSS seems to back it up. It is very easy to hide under a cloak that blames right wing Hindu groups for every thing that is wrong with India when you gladly overlook the atrocities that were commited with impunity on innocent Hindu civilians in Godhra or just about any where else where communal flare ups are frequent. Old Hyderabad would be a good example of this.

    No one seems to be bothered that we have a mountain range called “HinduKush” or how it came to have that name but show examples of minority appeasement and immediately you are labelled as an Aryan supremacist.

    Your view that Indian left is probably closer to mainstream US liberalism almost made me laugh, before it made me think. The Indian commies/leftists and people of their line of thinking are the biggest impediment to national economic progress and have no appreciation for the concept of individual freedom, liberty and personal responsibility or how free markets are the best way to prosperity.

    Todays mainstream US liberals who favor a ginormous Federal Government are pretty close to the Indian leftists now more than any time before.

  10. The vote bank politics, the regional parties, the religious and ethnic divide etc etc…all lead to a status quo quagmire in India. There will be no reform in India, labor or otherwise unless India is on verge of bankruptcy or is faced with any other critical national crisis.

    These are the same people who would trust national energy needs through a pipeline from Iran via Pakistan…rather than sign a nuclear deal. Its apparent to anyone with an IQ over 70 that any infrastructure dependent on that pipeline would be subject to economic blackmail by Iran and Pakistan. Just like a drug dealer, Iran and Pakistan will let India get dependent on the pipeline, build its economical engine around it, and then hold the nation hostage. Getting nuclear technology is a step towards self reliance in energy needs. Iraq and Afghanistan war for all its rhetoric would never have happened if there was no need to secure the future of the oil routes from these region (Afghanistan is needed to get Khazak route going). World is already fighting for oil, and rather than go towards self sufficiency, the future energy policy is rudderless….if there is a policy.

  11. Well I for one am disappointed. Being a greenie, I personally think that nuclear energy is the only effective large scale solution we have for dealing with global warming. There is enough science to back this up. Given India’s current and future energy demands, nuclear would have been a near-perfect solution. Unfortunately not anymore, and now we’ll have to resort to opening more gas plants and pumping out more CO in the atmosphere. ~sigh~

  12. 52,

    I do not hate the US, I live here. I hate the current regime. I never claimed to have a “pulse on the entire Indian nation”, you misquoted me. My exact words (#27) were, “Can you blame some people for not wanting to partake in a watershed deal with a US regime that will be remembered by history as the biggest thuggery that ever was after WW2?” Please be responsible and try not to lash out at people.

    I maintain, that if you visit India right now and spend some time in offices, bars and neighbourhood get-together’s in any major metropolis you will find most people saying that while they appreciate America as a nation (people like Al Gore exist here) they cannot stand Bush Jr and the current neo-cons. I suspect that you will hear this in many parts of the world – I hear this sentiment a lot when I travel.

    My point is simple — the image of the current regime in intertwined with the N-deal. Nuclear deal = thank you George Bush. That, a lot of people just cannot stomach. Unfortunately there were merits to this technology, merits of a very different sort than what the Manhattan Project created with it. The world is still smarting, wounded and horrified with the term ‘nuclear’. People cannot still separate this term from the destruction it indexes. Try to understand that these things need to happen in an atmosphere of trust which is just not there. Yet.

  13. , Singh is not a career politician,

    I dont understand why is this a good thing. Why is not being a politician good for holding a political office?? Politics is the art of conflict resolution.

    A real politician/statesman would know when to make a deal with the opposition and when to cut losses. This is a real life skill which is not what academicians are known for.

    I would rather have a tough politician lead a COMPLEX country like India (complex is understatement for India) than an academician. All those things aside Prime minister Singh has been OK for India so far.

  14. India’s installed power generation capacity is about 123,000MW (123GW) of which nuclear power’s share is only 3%. World-wide nuclear power’s share is about 16%. The 11th five-year plan envisages a capacity addition of 68,503MW of which nuclear power is only 3160MW. Check this link for more info. It doesn’t make strategic sense to barter our strategic autonomy for uranium and technology dependence on a few countries like US(Light Water Nuclear reactor supplier) and Australia (Uranium supplier) for a small share of our future installed electric generation capacity.

    The case being made here is not that India should not sign a nuclear deal with the US. Rather that India should sign on to the right deal that would preserve its strategic autonomy while giving it access to global nuclear trade.

    So says Raghotham in his article ‘What are these strategic compromises for, after all? Part II’ This guy’s and makes much sense to me.

  15. Sandeep, You are making sweeping statements about India – i dont know how you can make a decision that is of strategic importance based on the personal liking/disliking of the US President. I can go to any number of bars where people dont care a hoot about what Bush has done. I hope no one makes decisions of national interests based on personal opinons of a politician.

    In fact i would go so far as to say that there hasnt been a bigger friend of India than GW Bush. No, thats not a misprint. This started way before 9/11 or anything else – his appointment of Robert Blackwill as ambassador to India was the starting point. There is an entire community here that vehemently opposes the nuclear deal on principles of non proliferation. But Bush has proceeded to go to the extra distance that no US President would have dared to go to – give a country specific deal when the country is not a NPT signatory. Of course this coincides with US strategic interests in the region but this deal would have been NOWHERE but for Bush putting his personal stamp on this issue.

    India will have more access to civilian nuclear technology than before and as some one pointed out it would be way better than trying to get gas flowing through Iran and Pakistan, two fundamentally unstable states.

    This issue is NOT about Bush – he is gone in 2008 – what after that ? What exactly should the US do to gain the “trust” of India ?? Do you trust your own Prime Minister, first off ? Do you think he is not concerned about India as much as you or any other citizen does? Dont you think he has access to more facts about India’s energy situation than what we do ??

    “The world is still smarting, wounded and horrified with the term ‘nuclear’. People cannot still separate this term from the destruction it indexes.”

    If Indians were confused between peaceful uses of nuclear energy and the nuclear bomb ,they dont seem to be showing it.No body wants to shut down our reactors in Kalpakkam or anywhere else, do they ?

    There’s no point talking more about this – i think the deal is doomed for now. But KXB is right – India is not ready for the world stage and Bush did bet on the wrong horse.

  16. I maintain, that if you visit India right now and spend some time in offices, bars and neighbourhood get-together’s in any major metropolis you will find most people saying that while they appreciate America as a nation (people like Al Gore exist here) they cannot stand Bush Jr and the current neo-cons.

    Sandeep, this might depend on where these offices and bars are located. I don’t think Bangalore or Mumbai would have too many such places, though Kolkata might! 🙂 But the deal in any case is far too important to be decided by opinion polling addas, whether in Kolkata, Mumbai or Bangalore.

    I think it is extremely important that people, especially opinion leaders – in India (and elsewhere) conceptually separate the actions of the current US administration from the US as a country. Also, they ought to revise their view of India itself. It is no longer a weak postcolonial state, it is an emerging global player, and the whole world is emerging as its neighborhood, just like for the US. Without an appropriate self-conception, no deal, whatever its details can pass muster, because India will always see itself as inferior. This must stop anyway, but now, with the deal squarely in focus, is as good a time to goad the realization as any.

    Some version of a nuclear deal has been in discussion since Clinton was President, and certainly was being discussed when the BJP was in power in India. The realization that the US and India can be partners pre-dates 9/11. So opposing the deal because of the actions of the current administration neocons, however reprehensible those might be, is something much worse than cutting your nose to spite your face. It is foolish beyond appropriate descriptive metaphor.

    This deal is easily one of the biggest gambles the US has taken on the global stage in its entire history, and it is certainly one of the longest-term strategic initiatives that the Indian techno-econo-strategic-diplomatic elite has attempted. That governments of both parties in both countries could see it in their interest to proceed with it, both before and after 9/11 – which otherwise forced a lot of rethinking in the US, especially about its European allies – gives a sense of its perceived importance and potential, and its stress-worthiness. I would still argue that, even among the elite, its true import is nevertheless still underappreciated, especially in India, but even in the US.

    None of this means it should pass without critical examination, both on its strategic import and on its minutiae, but the debate does need to occur on the correct plane, and not through glasses ground in the last century.

  17. Sandeep,

    Chachaji is correct.

    Bush Jr is very appreciated (popular) in India – most Indians see him as pro-outsourcing, and that is very close to their economic well being. An average Indian does not care about neo-con, paleo-con, etc.

    Nuclear in India = bomb that Indians see as strategic weapon against their neighbors, so Indo-US deal is seen as interference to India’s national security, rather than other way around.

  18. It is foolish beyond appropriate descriptive metaphor.

    Awesome line.

    Chachaji and Kush, thanks for your very edifying perspectives on this topic. Chachaji, tussin tan Siddhartha Mitter di yaad davaa ditti (not saying he would agree or disagree with you, but similar excellent and clear writing style).

  19. 50 · Pot, Kettle Condescension? You of all people is accusing someone of that?

    Point taken–no hard feelings.

  20. I am based in India, and here is my perception of the ground situation:

    • A majority of the middle class is in favour of the nuclear deal – evidenced by newspaper opinion polls and popular sentiment on television
    • The communist parties’ opposition to the deal was perceived negatively
    • Popular opinion was with the government up till the point Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan Singh decided to cave in to the left’s pressure
    • The about face is being seen as a huge sign of weakness; the media is now asking the question, “if you can’t govern, why are you in office?”
  21. LikeThatOnly, interesting input, thanks. Hope to hear more from you, like that only! 🙂

    Amitabh, thanks for the high praise – Siddhartha, however, is a professional, while I’m barely an amateur!

  22. Being an Indian FOB (?!!) from one of the states that return the leftists to power every other election, I am compelled to state (my first time ever on this blog and second time ever in blogosphere, I am that miffed 🙂 that the CPI-M leaders are not as evil or as stupid as many of you seem to think. See below the observation made by Shashi Tharoor in his Times of India Column.

    “I hold no truck with those who have been accusing the Left leaders of peddling China’s interests in the name of anti-imperialism. I do not for a moment believe that the likes of Prakash Karat and Sitaram Yechury are agents of a foreign power. But reading of their crusade against the naval exercises with the Seventh Fleet this week leads me to think that their real problem is that they are prisoners of the past.”

  23. Being an Indian FOB (?!!) from one of the states that return the leftists to power every other election, I am compelled to state (my first time ever on this blog and second time ever in blogosphere, I am that miffed 🙂 that the CPI-M leaders are not as evil or as stupid as many of you seem to think. See below the observation made by Shashi Tharoor in his Times of India Column.

    “I hold no truck with those who have been accusing the Left leaders of peddling China’s interests in the name of anti-imperialism. I do not for a moment believe that the likes of Prakash Karat and Sitaram Yechury are agents of a foreign power. But reading of their crusade against the naval exercises with the Seventh Fleet this week leads me to think that their real problem is that they are prisoners of the past.”

    For the full article http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Opinion/Columnists/Shashi_Tharoor/123_deal_A_diplomatic_triumph_for_India/articleshow/2372932.cms

  24. India is blessed with plenty of sunshine. It makes sense for India to pursue solar energy in which it can be entirely self-sufficient, rather than make itself dependent or subservient to other nations. An indian-american professor is at the cutting edge of this technology:

    http://www.industryweek.com/ReadArticle.aspx?ArticleID=14932

    “Sept. 10, 2007 — Colorado State University’s method for manufacturing low-cost, high-efficiency solar panels is nearing mass production. AVA Solar Inc. will start production by the end of next year on the technology developed by mechanical engineering Professor W.S. Sampath at Colorado State.

    Produced at less than $1 per watt, the panels will dramatically reduce the cost of generating solar electricity and could power homes and businesses around the globe with clean energy for roughly the same cost as traditionally generated electricity.

    Sampath has developed a continuous, automated manufacturing process for solar panels using glass coating with a cadmium telluride thin film instead of the standard high-cost crystalline silicon. Because the process produces high efficiency devices (ranging from 11% to 13%) at a very high rate and yield, it can be done much more cheaply than with existing technologies. The cost to the consumer could be as low as $2 per watt, about half the current cost of solar panels. In addition, this solar technology need not be tied to a grid, so it can be affordably installed and operated in nearly any location.”

    The cost should be even lower than that if the solar panels are mass-produced in India with its vastly lower wages.

  25. It should come as no surprise that a blog which has historically held strong US nationalist positions should go in for alarmist statements like:

    By failing to get the Communists in line, PM Manmohan Singh has shown he is an incompetent who cannot get things done. Under his watch, there have been no major arrests in high profile terrorist attacks, such as the Bombay train blasts of 2006 or the recent blasts in Hyderabad. Naxalites have free reign over parts of rural India. In the immediate neighborhood – the Maoists are close to seizing control in Nepal, Bangladesh is under military rule, and Sri Lanka is looking to Pakistan for weapons to deal with the Tamil Tigers. Pakistan has been a better neighbor lately, but that may have to do with its preoccupation with internal matters than any new thinking on their part.

    Anyone who “dissapoints” the US is a loser and no-good piece of trash !!!!

    Giving the vagaries of US foreign policy and its dealings with client states like Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Israel, I think the indians did well to go slow. Instead, the indians have been focussing on energy security and outreach to China and Russia, both excellent moves.

    Manmohan Singh has doubled spending on primary education, the landmark Right-to-Information act was passed during his tenure and a massive rural employment scheme has been setup. The latter has many flaws, yet it is one of the biggest boosts to the rural economy. Slowly but surely the entire country is starting to have some minimal economic security, maybe for the first time in 400 or more years.

    But who cares for all this, right? The important thing is that the annoying indians have done it again (Henry Kissinger once said that swedes and indians were the two most annoying people in the world) – dissapointed the US military-industrial complex. How dare they! – this is the substance of this vapid blog posting.

  26. Anyone who “dissapoints” the US is a loser and no-good piece of trash !!!!

    No, but anyone who caves into a party that holds only 7% of parliamentary seats, when that party is not even an “official” part of the coalition may qualify.

    Instead, the indians have been focussing on energy security and outreach to China and Russia, both excellent moves.

    Right, cause China will soon abandon all its military aid to Pakistan just to get trade with India, and China will cease outbidding Indian companies for energy contracts in Africa and SE Asia out of a sense of hindi-chini bhai bhai.

    As for Russia, considering that they are pressuring New Delhi to buy more Russian aircraft, otherwise they will lean hard on Tajikistan to eject India from the one base India has outside its borders, they may not be the warm and fuzzy Russian bear of the Cold War. Which was an exagerrated repuation – in 1965, at the Treaty of Tashkent, the Russians pressured the Indians to give back some of the territory they seized during the ’65 war.

    Manmohan Singh has doubled spending on primary education, – thankfully, no auditing will be required. More absentee teachers.

    a massive rural employment scheme has been setup. – interestingly, its been most effective in states not run by the Congress or its allies. India Job Scheme Disappointing

    There is an interesting political sidelight to the scheme – early data is showing that three of the top performing states – Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh – in terms of generating employment are ruled by the opposition Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

    dissapointed the US military-industrial complex

    Hardly – India will still be in the market of Boeing jets, UAVs – but yes, nuclear-related businesses will be hampered. But as some opponents of the deal pointed out, nuclear energy would still not exceed 10% of India’s energies needs if the deal went through. Besides, the US military-industrial complex can already sell the same technology to China. The world’s largest communist state will continue to enjoy the benefits of this business while the world’s largest democracy will not. I’m sure the Politburo meeting this week in China will lament this sad state of affairs.

  27. BTW – I think Gujjubhai makes excellent points about the effects of the nuclear deal on India’s strategic independence. But I don’t think this is what the Communists had in mind in their opposition – for them, it was pure anti-Americanism.

  28. Al Beruni Giving the vagaries of US foreign policy and its dealings with client states like Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Israel, I think the indians did well to go slow. Instead, the indians have been focussing on energy security and outreach to China and Russia, both excellent moves.

    While the past should not be completely irrelevant for India in considering a deal, especially a nuclear deal, with the US (given all the the misunderstandings over Tarapur, and the sanctions following both the 1974 and the 1998 tests, among other things) – I think it is worth emphasizing again, that this deal is not merely a commercial deal involving nuclear reactors, as Tarapur was.

    This time, the commercial aspect of the deal is underpinned by a deeper strategic partnership based on shared threat perceptions, and a broader convergence in political, social and economic value systems. I would argue that the nuclear deal has ramifications for everything India wants across the board – from H-1B visas to changes in WTO rules to permanent membership in the Security Council. But at the most basic level, by providing a basis for non-fossil based electric power – it positively impacts the socio-economic well-being and life possibilities of the ordinary Indian. In its spillover impacts, I would suggest, there are implications also for such things as the status of Indians (South Asians more generally) abroad, including in North America.

    Jeopardizing it by taking only a short-term, backward-looking, or fragmented perspective is not just crazy, it is crazier than anything I can imagine. I think if the deal fell through at the present juncture, not only will it be difficult to restart with whichever government(s) return in both India and the US in 2009 – but a number of these other things will also be adversely impacted, some of them more immediately.

    Solar and Wind are being suggested as alternatives to nuclear, and research on them should continue, both in the US and in India. Indeed it will continue, even if the nuclear deal goes forward. But not only do they suffer from efficiency and intermittency problems already, and so, not only are they unsuitable for widespread deployment even as things stand, their usefulness will also be impacted further by climate change induced variability – areas that are currently windy or sunny could become less so in the future (more cloudy, less windy). That is why counting on solar or wind exclusive of nuclear is not a good bet.

    But again, since the deal is about much more than just India’s energy needs, even if solar and wind were today comparable to nuclear (and they aren’t, not by a long shot) – I would argue, it would still be in India’s interest to go in for the deal, because it formalizes the creation of a more secure strategic space in which India can pursue its development goals, apart from beneficially impacting a number of other things that India wants from the world economic and strategic system.

  29. I do not dismiss those concerns out of hand, but the deal was something more – it was an acknowledgement of changing global realities. The. U.S. invested a lot into the deal, being criticized by the non-proliferation community as being reckless, by some paleo-cons as being too indulgent with India, etc. But it was, in a sense, a bet by the U.S. that India was going to take a bigger role on the world stage. America bet on the wrong horse.

    Why the assumption that this was the US administration alone that was ‘reaching out’ to India and taking significant risks ? The Indian govt. took many risks too, and just as the Indian govt. backed out of the agreement since it was apparent that there was just not enough support in the Indian parliament for this agreement, the American govt. would back out too, if there was no support for the agreement in the US congress.

    Lastly, get over your high moral(?) horse of insinuating that somehow the US was doing this for altruistic purposes. There were significant American interests involved in this agreement. By rejecting this, India has declared the following:~

    1) We are a nuclear weapons state, and aspire for the high place in strategic affairs that has so far been occupied by the P-5. No halfway homes for us. 2) This deal you put forward was not good enough. We’ll talk 5-10 years later when our economy is bigger, our domestic industrial base much larger and our science much more capable.

  30. KXB, Do you really think the Communists in India are controlled by China? I mean, as opposed to messed up, anti-American, etc., so acting here in a fashion such that they might as well be controlled by China? And, if they are so controlled, is it ideological loyalty (hard to see how any kind of “real” communist could be loyal ideologically to the Chi-Coms, who are letting entrepreneurs rip in China), or are they on the take financially? I love your “Someone is popping champagne in Beijing” point (that is just so correct!), but I have a bit of a hard time really believing that the Chi-Coms are the “paymasters.” I guess it’s possible though, as someone pointed out above, there were politicians on the KGB payroll back in the Cold War.

  31. @74, the real surprise in the article is that shashi tharoor, for once, makes sense 🙂 i agree that their problem is that they are stuck in an antiquated mode of operation, but it is not unique to them. you can see this kind of thinking even in the columns of the hindu, which is a prominent english newspaper in the south.

    also, why is nobody talking about gobar gas as the salvation of india? will nobody think of the cows?

  32. KXB,

    It is not as simple as holding 7% of the seats, their outside support is solely for the purpose of such tactics and no one can afford an election this year. I agree with others who have pointed out that the delay may help work the deal out. I am not sure I agree with the assertion of Left bowing down to their Chinese masters

  33. Lastly, get over your high moral(?) horse of insinuating that somehow the US was doing this for altruistic purposes.

    Uh, read my earlier comment #5

    To answer your first question – no one, not even the Indian proponents of the deal, believed the Americans were behaving out of altruism.
  34. there were politicians on the KGB payroll back in the Cold War

    Funny how you all ignore the indian politicians who have been on the CIA payroll, including Prime Minister Morarji Desai the urine drinker who commited acts of treachery for which he was awarded Pakistan’s highest civilian award.

  35. Rob,

    I do not know whether Karat is on Chinese payroll. Probably not, and Shashi Tharoor is more accurate.

    However, communist parties in India at times (not always and definitely not all of them) have had real murky past, notwithstanding they do have very strong base in parts of India. Here are some example:

    A serious rift within the party surfaced in 1962. One reason was the Sino-Indian War, where a faction of the Indian communists backed the position of the Indian government, while other sections of the party claimed that it was a conflict between a socialist and a capitalist state, and thus took a pro-Chinese position. There were three factions in the party – internationalists, centrists, and nationalists. Internationalists supported the Chinese stand where as the Nationalists backed India. Centrists took a neutral view. Prominent leaders including S.A. Dange, A. K. Gopalan, and E. M. S. Namboodiripad were in the nationalist faction. B. T. Ranadive, Sundarayya, P. C. Joshi, Basavapunniah, Jyoti Basu, and Harkishan Singh Surjeet are among those supported China. Ajoy Ghosh was the prominent person in the centrist faction. In general, most of Bangal communist leaders supported China and most others supported India [1]. Hundreds of CPI leaders, accused of being pro-Chinese were imprisoned. Some of the nationalists were also imprisoned, as they used to express their opinion only in party forums, and CPI’s official stand was pro-China.

    Another example:

    1. CPI(M) heavyweight HK Surjeet influenced by Russia to setup an underground organization
    2. CPI(M) did proceed to recruit a secret organization within the Indian Army.
    3. The Peoples Republic of China and Soviet Russia both insisted that the CPI(M) must develop a standby apparatus capable of armed resistance, while intensifying penetration of Indian Military forces.
    4. With the PLA now present along the Indian Border the Indian Party had a channel of support for Armed Operations and a potential liberator in the event of mass uprisings – 13 Sept 1959
    5. 4 powerful radio sets had been installed in the office of the China Review in Calcutta to listen to broadcasts from Peking
    6. Chinese Financial Subsidies to sections of the CPI particularly the left faction strongholds in West Bengal
    7. A foreign supply base was now available for the underground organizations with Chinese occupation of Tibet and other frontier areas.
    8. Letter asking for collaboration in Indian underground organization work aimed at an eventual revolution, because China has a border with India and can provide arms and supplies
    9. Also Jaipal Singh, head of the illegal organization within the Indian Army decided to reactivate his organization in May 1961 following the hard left faction gaining control of the party.

    Also,

    Another heavy blow to the movement was the Liberation War of Bangladesh in 1971 when China more or less asked the Indian naxalites to support the side of Pakistan (which was a political suicide in India at the time). On this issue Majumdar’s line had some differentiation from that of the CPC. He gave emphasis to supporting the armed struggle of the East Pakistan Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist), which fought against both Pakistan and the Bangladeshi national liberation movement. Majumdar’s line and the Chinese line caused conflict in CPI(ML) and produced splits, such as that of Ashim Chatterjee.

    PS: I must admit some of these charges are probably baloney but openly speaking for China during 1962 is either stupidity or too much drunk on ideology.

  36. There is definitely an aura of spinelessness around Manmohan Singh.

    Its also hard to respect someone who still praises the brits for their “good governance” of India. Like a true servile macaulayite he thanks the british for bestowing the english language, english medium schools and cricket to India!

    Its a shame that India hasnt had a decent leader much less a great leader in all the 60 years since “independence”.

  37. Chachaji wrote:

    Among other things, the present imbroglio also highlights the fact that India’s present system of democratic governance is becoming increasingly unworkable,

    Y’know, I know a guy, Pervez, who might be out of a job soon and really knows how to fix “unworkable” democratic governments. He’s just the ‘turn-around’ expert you need, and he’s even a Delhi-born Person-of-Indian-Origin. Should I ask him to send over a C.V.?

  38. 2) This deal you put forward was not good enough. We’ll talk 5-10 years later when our economy is bigger, our domestic industrial base much larger and our science much more capable.

    No half-way homes for us? Like the outhouse better? Because that is where India is right now. If this ‘rejection’ is actually the finger-in-the-eye you are implying (and I don’t think it is, not yet), why assume the rest of the world, the US in particular, will take it lying down?

    Why take for a given that the economy will grow for the next decade? If in fact the deal gets shot down because of what the ‘left parties’ thought, I can easily see how foreign direct investment could slow or dry up for other ventures, because of the veto that they appear to exercise. Energy is in any case a critical requirement for growth, and without it again investment could dry up. And what if H-1B visas were curtailed as a tit-for-tat? What if, in the interim, Eastern Europe developed as an alternative destination, for ‘outsourcing’? What about the opportunity cost of not getting in on the global nuclear renaissance when it is getting going, as it is right now? Waiting for ten years, for example, could mean global nuclear building capacity is all tied up, because all others will grab it with both hands, and will be much more expensive to boot.

    Jingoistic ultranationalism and a false sense of injured pride is one more thing, along with a 20th century ideological mindset that we do not need. Really. Taking a ‘good-enough-for-now’ deal and, using the economic and strategic space that it opens up, to develop the economy and become stronger, like both China and Japan did, makes much better sense than hoping for a tomorrow that might never come.

    BTW, Optional pointed out upthread how small a contribution nuclear currently makes to India’s energy mix, and how small it will still remain for the next decade or so, even if the deal goes through. While the short term gain from the deal is modest, it is huge for the medium term. By 2050 India plans to have 300 GWe worth of nuclear capacity in a total of 1400 GWe. (Currently the numbers are 140 GWe (total) and 4 GWe nuclear.) Wind, solar, hydro, clean coal, will contribute the rest of the 1100 GWe.

    The additional nuclear capacity of 296 GWe must be compared to the total worldwide nuclear capacity right now of 372 GWe. There is no hope of adding this without significant and ongoing external investment, for which the deal is the first step. Even if the FDI and technology comes in at breakneck speed, it will be a phenomenal challenge to get to that goal.

    And when you think about renegotiating 5-10 years later, remember that the deal has been in negotiation for about 8 years already. India’s negotiating power probably did increase, but very marginally, however the opportunity cost of not having had a deal in place years ago is certainly much larger. This cost can only rise if the issue is revisited later, given the larger Indian economy and the greater criticality of energy in sustaining growth, and that is if anyone cares to negotiate ten years later at all.

  39. Re: solar energy, I wish I worked in the field and had first-hand knowledge, but from all I’ve read, I do think that if the government in India and other organizations/businesses actually spend more money + willpower on it, solar could be one major solution to India’s energy needs. Hey, if it works in Maine, it can probably work in India – most of which gets more sunlight than Maine. In Europe, they harvest solar energy using panels along the highway and Oregon is testing the same.

  40. Its also hard to respect someone who still praises the brits for their “good governance” of India. Like a true servile macaulayite he thanks the british for bestowing the english language, english medium schools and cricket to India!

    I was really REALLY amazed when Manmohan Singh made the above statement in the UK, essentially thanking the British to rule India. I dont think he realizes that he is not in a university anymore. Leader of a Billion people need to act like a leader.

    Anyways, I almost forgive MMS for giving India the “right to Information act”. “Right to information” act is one of the most important acts creating environment of accountability from government. It is huge step in the direction of maturity of Indian democracy. Thats why, I almost (not quite completely) forgive him for making that stupid statement in London.

    Among other things, the present imbroglio also highlights the fact that India’s present system of democratic governance is becoming increasingly unworkable,
    Y’know, I know a guy, Pervez, who might be out of a job soon and really knows how to fix “unworkable” democratic governments. He’s just the ‘turn-around’ expert you need, and he’s even a Delhi-born Person-of-Indian-Origin.

    But can he win “election”s ??

  41. Among other things, the present imbroglio also highlights the fact that India’s present system of democratic governance is becoming increasingly unworkable,
    Y’know, I know a guy, Pervez, who might be out of a job soon and really knows how to fix “unworkable” democratic governments. He’s just the ‘turn-around’ expert you need, and he’s even a Delhi-born Person-of-Indian-Origin.
    But can he win “election”s ??

    Ikram, come on. I see the humor in excising it, but still, the rest of what I wrote in the same sentence was:

    though reforming it to ensure increased represenativeness as well as workability is currently on nobody’s agenda.

    The Westminster system was a poor fit for a country like India, and that’s even when the Congress was winning huge majorities. But for the last 40 years, its deficiencies in the Indian context have been obvious – and for the last 18, they have been glaring. When the Mother of all Parliaments has seriously considered electoral reform, and has also devolved so many of its powers, and when, for example, another of its daughters, the New Zealand parliament, is now voted on a mixed member proportional representation basis, and when there is much other movement toward reform elsewhere, for example, in Canada, of both electoral and governance structures, there is a real need for India as well, to say nothing of Pakistan, to consider such reform seriously. But as far as I can see, it is on nobody’s agenda.

    RC, if you’re implying that Manmohan Singh is winning elections while Musharraf is rigging them – I would point out that in his latest election, PM Manmohan Singh was (i) elected unopposed (ii) from an indirect constituency (iii) in Assam, – so you have at least three violations of the spirit of Westminster right there. At least Musharraf had two other serious challengers. (And BTW, Justice Wajihuddin, the only other candidate who actually got some votes in that election, is also Delhi-born.)

  42. in his latest election, PM Manmohan Singh was (i) elected unopposed (ii) from an indirect constituency

    Chachaji, I put my “win election” comment EXACTLY because MMS has not really won election the regular way and in that he shares a little something with Musharraf. That is why I also wrote comment # 78 where I raise my concern about MMS not being a “politician” and holding a political office. Since MMS is a academician, he made that statement in London which is completely unfit for a political leader.

    I also agree somewhat with your original argument, but I think the way for India is to organically strengthen states rights. I think that might even be happening now already as the big national parties no longer have leaders that resonate with people across India, which requires the national parties to align with local parties. As local parties (regional) play more significan role in elections, regions will start demanding and getting more real power, thus resulting in stronger states.

  43. RC, I am with you in all your points! Thanks for clarifying. I agree especially that greater decentralization is necessary, and that it may also happen organically, just from having strong Chief Ministers, for example, and weak central governments because of electoral and structural weaknesses in the system. I will not use the ‘f-word’ I have used in other threads to describe a pro-active version of the process 🙂

  44. Sudeep (#80) vs Chachaji (#89) is really the crux of the argument. Should India go for a half-assed deal (Brahma Chellaney explains in detail the many ways this deal is constricting India’s strategic options in becoming a full-fledged NWS) today or take a bet on waiting for a better deal later?

    The whole energy issue is a smokescreen – really, this is about the future of India’s nuclear weapons program through access to foreign uranium vs a sort of indirect imposition of NPT and FMCT backed by the threat of US fuel controlling the production of 50,000 MW or so of India’s power grid in a couple of decades. For one, India’s electricity sector problems are not fuel source or technology, it’s economics, regulatory regime, investment in transmission infrastructure and so on. Well-administered states such as Gujarat are, in fact, doing very well on the energy front through privatization etc. For another, India has plenty of fuel choices such as the enormous reserves of natural gas discovered recently. It’s no secret that the KG Basin is one of the least explored region that has ginornmous natural gas reserves. World market for liquefied natural gas (LNG) too is exploding and India can easily put in another couple of hundred GWs of gas fired power plants. Nor is India hurting for technology – the Indian nuclear establishment has done a pretty good job.

    The way I see it, Americans sensed an opportunity in clipping India’s wings before it became too powerful. They saw a week, ineffective leader who happens to be an economic liberal and therefore pro-America with a limited tenure who could be easily lured by visions of grandeur and legacy. Throw in some good ol’ American marketing on “strategic partnership” and you have a nuclear deal that basically creates tremendous economic leverage over India by controlling the fuel source for huge power generation capacity, and puts severe constraints on India’s weaponization capabilities. Of course, the proof is in the pudding and what is hyped as “strategic partnership” has really presented India with a deal that is much worse than the one that Americans signed with everyone else, including even the Chinese – whose might India is supposed to check as a US ally! Ummm…run that by me again – wouldn’t the Americans want Indians to have fully unconstrained nuclear weaponization capabilities if they really wanted Indians to become powerful enough to check the Chinese?

    If you separate the hype from the reality, there’s really nothing in this deal that serves India’s interests. Rejecting the deal has pretty well no downside at this juncture – even if, as chachaji frets, India’s economic boom falters then it’d just lead to more reforms because a population that has got used to 8%-10% economic growth is going to be pretty impatient with any politicians who can’t deliver it for a few quarters. The Indian system is so bloody screwed up that India can keep growing for a couple of decades just by slowly chipping away are the colossally screwed up Nehruvian legacy. If, on the other hand, if India does continue to become economically stronger than it won’t be too long before the western companies themselves are paying off their politicians to sell their stuff into a big, juicy market. India’s growth is not export-oriented, nor is it FDI-led : it’s all domestic consumption and investments. India has been a coiled spring for way too long, all the policy makers need to do is calibrate its unwinding at a measured pace. Both the NDA and MMS government have done a reasonably decent job of managing this.

    Not only that, American power itself is on the decline. Over the next little while, it’s not going to be a very good place to be an American. America’s economic power is on the wane, its reputation lies in tatters, its moral authority is bankrupt and its media is no longer effective at propagandizing. America’s popularity is at an all-time low, the dollar is falling and it’s turning into Saudi Christianistan which will, in the long run, make it even less popular in the middle east.

    India just did not negotiate this deal from a position of strength, while Americans negotiated from a position as strong as they are going to be in the foreseeable future. The Indian PM is weak, his party is weak, the government has pretty well lurched from one crisis to another. This is not a good time to negotiate anything as critical as the nuclear deal with an outsider. In a world where Al Jazeera is winning against CNN, it only makes sense for India to make itself more powerful, watch America stew in its own mess and wait for the time when Americnas will be even more desperate for friends. That’s the right time for India to strike the deal, not now.

  45. BTW – I think Gujjubhai makes excellent points about the effects of the nuclear deal on India’s strategic independence. But I don’t think this is what the Communists had in mind in their opposition – for them, it was pure anti-Americanism.

    Yeah-so what?

    If the Indian Communists are in the pay of the Chinese then the British / Australian pollies are in the pay of the CIA. The deal benefits USA way more than it benefits India. Good stuff ‘sagavey’.

    India’s growth is not export-oriented, nor is it FDI-led : it’s all domestic consumption and investments.

    Mostly true. OECD needs India not vice versa.

  46. Gujjubhai, ” For one, India’s electricity sector problems are not fuel source or technology, it’s economics, regulatory regime, investment in transmission infrastructure and so on. Well-administered states such as Gujarat are, in fact, doing very well on the energy front through privatization etc” Gujarat is one of the few states that is well managed. Besides you seem to sweep the issues of regulation and investment in infrastructure as though they could be corrected with the snap of a finger. They are’nt going to be – for one Gujarat, I can point out any number of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar like states.

    “Americans sensed an opportunity in clipping India’s wings before it became too powerful. They saw a week, ineffective leader who happens to be an economic liberal and therefore pro-America with a limited tenure who could be easily lured by visions of grandeur and legacy. Throw in some good ol’ American marketing on “strategic partnership” and you have a nuclear deal that basically creates tremendous economic leverage over India by controlling the fuel source for huge power generation capacity, and puts severe constraints on India’s weaponization capabilities.”

    • Before it became too powerful ?? I am sorry but when you have close to 600 million people living in conditions that are too terrible to even speak of, with a society which is basically collectivist and has very little appreciation for individual liberty or free market enterprise, Governments which are so ingrained in socialism that even baby steps towards a capitalist economy is met with intense opposition from every marxist moron, it is terribly hard to believe that the US is concerned about India being powerful !!

    What exactly is the US afraid of ? That India would be an all powerful state that would threaten American supremacy ?? Or gang up with China to counter its influence ?? Give me a break !!!

    “Not only that, American power itself is on the decline. Over the next little while, it’s not going to be a very good place to be an American. America’s economic power is on the wane, its reputation lies in tatters, its moral authority is bankrupt and its media is no longer effective at propagandizing. America’s popularity is at an all-time low, the dollar is falling and it’s turning into Saudi Christianistan which will, in the long run, make it even less popular in the middle east.”

    Really ? What is your evidence for this decline in power ?? America’s economic power is in wane ?? What evidence do you have to back that up? If a falling dollar is the best example you can think of, you probably have not heard of the recent economic problems like the sub prime mess. And even worse, you are taking a short term trend to make a sweeping statement about the nature of the US economy over a long time.

    For all its frailites the United States is the economic engine that drives the world and will continue to be for quite some time to come- tell the Chinese that the US economy is failing and i would love to hear back what they think about it.

    Manmohan Singh may be a weak Prime Minister, but he is fundamentally an economist and most definitely no idiot – he is smart and informed enough to know where India is in its path to greater growth and is capable of doing a cost benefit analysis of the situation.

    India being a super duper nuclear weapon state is going to give it more strategic depth against China but nothing more. In fact China is stronger today than before not because of its nuclear weapons program but because of the fact that it is the factory for the world. All the nuclear weapons in the world is not going to turn you into an economic power.

    We should be more worried as to how the hell we are going to sustain economic growth, how we are going to provide opportunites to millions of people joining the workforce EVERY YEAR – all this while trying to break free of the shackles of the Indian bureaucracy that is such a monstrous behemoth working against us.