Obama and India: A Small Step In the Right Direction
For years there has been talk of providing a UN Security Council—its composition a hold-over from the postwar victorious allies— seat for a Australia, Brazil, India, Germany, or Japan, based on population, or economic or strategic clout. India has the best case—given its reformed and booming economy, its new prominence, a 1-billion-person population, and its wary relationship with China. But while Presidents like to make such gestures abroad, they should first decide whether the Council itself a zero-sum game or not; i.e., why is France on the Security Council, given that the EU has two seats when Britain is counted, and neither its population, strategic profile, or economy seal the case. I don't think a council of, say, ten permanent members is going to quite work.
Politically, Obama's call for India to be made a permanent member of the Security Council made good sense as a sort of mea culpa offering. Obama has come under criticism for not appreciating the key role of English-speaking, democratic, pro-Western India, and his talk of protectionism and outsourcing, along with nonchalance about traditional notions of deterrence and balance of power, and naiveté about the connection between radical Islam and terrorism, has worried Indians.
Then, fairly or not, there is a sense, here and abroad, that the President goes out of his way to use deferential language about our enemies (cf. his characterizations of Iran, his word-slicing about jihad, his soft-gloves approaches to Russia, etc.) not accorded to either our friends overseas (cf. the treatment of Britain, Israel, or, yes, India) or fellow Americans at home (the rich who junket to Vegas and the superbowl, the limb-lopping doctors, the "enemies" who oppose illegal immigration and want to lock up those on their way to "ice cream", the fearful who opposed the Ground Zero mosque, and the stupidly acting, stereotyping police, etc.). That is a bad habit the President must work on, and it either reflects a Pavlovian reductionist idea of 'Bush's friends suspect, his enemies misunderstood' or sort of ossified 'oppression studies' dogmas that were in vogue at places like Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard during Obama's sojourns there. India, for example, got a more critical lecture about its human rights record toward Burma than did Ahmadinejad, when one-million protestors were sent scurrying from the streets after a fixed election.
Obama was right about Burma, but we need to see the same sort of hectoring accorded to Cuba, Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria, Venezuela, etc. Otherwise, how can you promote human rights abroad through criticism of our allies, but not extend even sterner lecturers to our rivals and enemies? This is a surreal reversion of American foreign policy of the last half-century when the liberal critique was that we gave passes on human rights abuses to our allies and harped on the abuses of our enemies. I never imagined a President would reverse the protocol. But Obama somehow has.
Given all that, yes, please extend to India an offer of help with a Security Council seat.
- Comment (8)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Sep '10
Re: Obama and India: A Small Step In the Right Direction
Not to be too flip, but, how about we just withdraw from the UN completely and let India take our place? Can anyone tell me any good the United States gets out of bring in this dictator's back scratching club?
May '10
Re: Obama and India: A Small Step In the Right Direction
What is India's military like these days? Politically and militarily, might we be able to count on them in then near future to aid us against groups like Al Qaeda or even nations like Iran?
Oct '10
Re: Obama and India: A Small Step In the Right Direction
"This is a surreal reversion of American foreign policy of the last half-century when the liberal critique was that we gave passes on human rights abuses to our allies and harped on the abuses of our enemies. I never imagined a President would reverse the protocol. But Obama somehow has."
It's simply easier and safer to harp on your allies than it is to harp on your enemies and semi-belligerent nuetrals. (You can call your brother a "pinhead" all you want, but you've got a fight on your hands if you use that term with a stranger.) This "safety factor" has two advantages to Obama:
May '10
Re: Obama and India: A Small Step In the Right Direction
Aaron, India has a "diplomatic" (to say the least) relation with Iran. We buy their oil, but we're also friends with Israel and no fans of a shiite bomb.
There's a strong leftist anti-american, isolationist sentiment in the country. They famously refused to allow Bush to address the Indian parliament in 2005. The most you can expect is sharing of intelligence regarding terrorism. I seriously doubt Indian troops will ever set foot in the middle east.
Re: Obama and India: A Small Step In the Right Direction
Twenty months after taking office, Obama finally makes a foreign policy move that not only makes sense, but advances American interests.
India is the world's most populous democracy. It's a necessary ally of the United States, both to balance China's emerging power and as a front-line warrior in the war against the Islamofascism which is gradually finding a permanent home in Pakistan.
Victor is absolutely right, though: Obama has shown a reflexive and insulting distrust of our allies -- the UK, Poland, Israel -- and a credulous, naive appeasement of our, well, not-so-allies. So this move should be applauded.
But not too loudly. If Obama thinks that India's an American ally, he might change his mind.
Jun '10
Re: Obama and India: A Small Step In the Right Direction
I'm all for closer and more amicable relations with India, but I stand with those who question the value of the UN in this day and age. What are we getting for our money other than bureaucracy, corruption, mismanagement and a forum for tyranny? The only thing I can say for this organization is that the name is entirely appropriate: UN . . . as in UN-elected, UN-principled and UN-accountable.
May '10
Re: Obama and India: A Small Step In the Right Direction
As Amb. John Bolton has remarked numerous times, it's almost as impossible to get out of the UN as it is to get a new permanent member on the UNSC. Its too much of a hassle.
Oct '10
Re: Obama and India: A Small Step In the Right Direction
Ok, but why does it have to be in New York? (Actually, it's not hard to get out at all . . . you stop shipping it money (we cover some 20% of the budget) and don’t RSVP the receptions.) I say move UN headquarters to Bujumbura and listen to the pampered Diplocrats squeal! There would be far fewer useless Conferences to attend. The whole UN ‘project’ would eventually dry up and blow away once the globalistas had only Burundi for shopping.