Ambassador Siddhartha Shankar Ray thinks he's living in the '70s. He must realise it is now 1995," said an official considered to be close to External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee. The message sought to be conveyed by this comment was that in the post-Cold War era, when the US has emerged as the sole superpower, mere threats do not work. There is no Soviet Union to counterbalance the US power and a threat should not be held out unless it can be followed up.
As soon as the Brown Amendment – which sanctioned the delivery of arms worth $368 million to Islamabad – was cleared by the US House-Senate conference committee on October 25, it exposed the chinks in India's foreign policy. While Ray issued a statement in Washington warning that Indo-US economic relations would be affected Mukherjee, while expressing strong reservations about the supply of arms to Pakistan, made no mention of its adverse impact on Indo-US economic ties.
A similar statement was also issued by the spokesman of the foreign office in Delhi. Things may have ended there, had not Ray issued a clarification claiming that there was no contradiction between the two statements. "The two statements, taken together, remain the on-record and authoritative statements of the views of the Government of India in this matter," said the Indian Embassy in Washington.
Mukherjee was at pains to emphasise that the approach of both governments has been to strengthen cooperation to the fullest extent possible, and not to allow differences to come in the way of cooperation in areas of mutual benefit. Subsequently, he spoke selectively to the press and reiterated that Indo-US economic relations would not be affected.
Officials in South Block were deeply embarrassed that the differences between the external affairs minister and the Indian ambassador had come out in the open at a time when the Government was on the defensive because of its perceived failure to prevent the supply of arms to Pakistan. And this perception in the public mind is doubly damaging for the Government in view of the ensuing elections.
Apparently, Ray was sufficiently miffed by this controversy and sought an appointment with the prime minister. Sources in the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) said he wanted to meet the Prime Minister soon to explain matters and clear the picture over the economic threats, but he was told not to do so right away since Rao would be away for 10 days in the first half of November. There is also speculation that hew ants to leave his ambassadorial post to re-enter politics, especially in view of the general elections next year. However, the PMO refused to confirm this possibility. But Mukherjee himself did not miss the opportunity to make a political point. Asked if Ray was planning to resign or whether he was being recalled, Mukherjee went on record saying that while he was not being recalled, if hew anted to quit and force the issue, it was up to him. He left no one in doubt that if Ray chose to step down, he would not be stopped.
Though Ray has a year left in Washington, it is a fact that the tenures of political appointees are generally coterminus with the government in power. At the same time, he may find it difficult to enter politics because neither Mukherjee, a Bengali like him, nor several other West Bengal Congress leaders want him in the state. A Mukherjee aide said: "Ray does not know how to retire gracefully from politics." Interestingly, it was Ray who had inducted Mukherjee into the Congress in the late 1960s.
It is accepted now that differences between the foreign office and Ray had been building up for some time. In fact, Ray had his first run in with the External Affairs Ministry when, in a secret telegram, he complained to the Prime Minister against foreign secretary Salman Haider for not taking a tough enough stand on the Brown Amendment, when he himself was doing so. An official explained that political appointees like Ray tend to bypass the foreign office and go straight to the prime minister. The foreign office has no choice but to live with it.
What aggravated the situation this time were the political differences between Ray and Mukherjee. These were indirectly reflected in the public spat the two had. Till the time Dinesh Singh was foreign minister, Ray had no problems. But Mukherjee is a more hands-on minister and, at the moment, is riding high in the Congress. Besides, not only does he have greater access to the Prime Minister, the latter also has more confidence in Mukherjee.
Ray's strong reaction to the amendment was understandable. For, he had been forcefully pushing India's case. In fact, there are two clearly demarcated schools of though in Washington over Ray's handling of Indo-US relations during the past three years of his tenure. Some observers feel that his aggressive head-on approach has reaped dividends in the past, like his success in stalling the delivery of advanced F-16 fighters to Pakistan by the US. But long time embassy-watchers, both Indians and senior US administration officials, felt that Ray may have overplayed his hand over the latest transfer of arms of Pakistan.
When the US Senate approved the Brown Amendment in mid-September, the Indian Embassy had registered its protest. But in the months preceding the vote, while lobbying hard against it, Ray is also believed to have written to all US legislators, besides meeting each one personally, to warn them that India would shop around for weapons if the amendment went through. He is also said to have implied that the transfer would pull the plug on the burgeoning Indo-US trade relations and threaten US business opportunity in the Indian market. This threat was perceived by US officials then as "ham-handed diplomacy" and an attempt to twist the arm of the US. The perception continues.
What do the Americans think of Ray's threat? Len Scensny, State Department spokesman, said: "We have absolutely no reaction to Ambassador Ray's statement. Obviously, we're pleased that the Brown Amendment was passed. It will benefit US-Pakistan relations and also improve overall security in the South Asian region. It is definitely not going to affect trade relations." The spokespersons in the US Department of Commerce refrained from commenting. According to the statistics provided by them, the US sees India as the dominant economy in South Asia and attributes the 27-per cent increase in US exports to South Asia in 1993 largely to a 44- per cent rise in exports to India.
Over 40 per cent of the foreign direct investment of $1.1 billion approved by the Indian Government in the financial year 1993-94, for example, was from the US, which was also by far India's largest trading partner, with about $8 billion in bilateral trade in 1994.
It may sound unbelievable, but judging by the spontaneous reactions of persons other than those responsible for Indian affairs in the US Department of Commerce, most officials do not even seem to be aware of either the Brown Amendment or Ray's threat that Indo-US trade ties were likely to be affected with its passage.
Tags