Heart for Obama, Head for McCain

By T.P.Sreenivasan(Former Ambassador of India to the United Nations)

Asked recently as to how I would vote in November if I were an
American citizen, I said, "I shall vote for Obama with my heart, but
vote for McCain with my head." The reason is simple. Obama promises
change, he is charismatic; the world will be different with a black
President in the White House. McCain has solid experience, he is
predictable, he is likely to bring stability and he will be better for
India. At the moment, it appears that the Americans will vote with the
heart rather than the head because the economic turmoil has made
change imperative. If a majority of the Americans put the race issue
behind them, we may well have a black man with "Hussein" as his second
name as the President of an "antiIslamic" state.

Outside the United States, Obama has made a greater impact. "Obama has
stirred an excitement around the globe, unmatched by any American
politician in living memory', says 'the Guardian'. If November 4 were
a global ballot, Obama would win it handsomely. It goes on to say that
if the free world could choose its leader, it would be Barack
Obama.Obama may not be the best American President from the Indian
point of view because he is bound to depart from the Bush policies,
which have proved beneficial to IndoUS relations. Democrats have
romantic linkages with India and names like Kennedy and Clinton evoke
goodwill. But looking back at history, one can see that Republican
Presidents like Eisenhower, Regan and Bush have done more for India
than the Democrats. In the case of Bush, he cut the Gordian knot of
nonproliferation, which had defied solution even after the best
efforts of Clinton. In a clash between "relationists" and
"nonproliferationists", the latter had the upper hand during the
Clinton Administration. In the end, he decided to set aside the
nuclear issue and promote relations in other areas. India had accepted
three of the four benchmarks put forward by Clinton (cessation of
tests, fissile material cut off and export control), but he insisted
on the fourth (strategic restraint) and broke off the dialogue. Bush
found a way to move forward after acknowledging our minimum deterrent
and entering into civilian nuclear trade. Bush ended thirtyfour years
of technology denial through the nuclear deal and opened up new
vistas.

Obama voted for the deal in the Senate and said that he would not seek
any change in the arrangements if he became President, but his nuclear
policy spelt out in a document recently militates against some of the
positions resulting from the deal. First and foremost, he maintains
that the NPT regime should be strengthened and should be made
universal, while the key to the nuclear deal is the provision that the
Indian nuclear assets would be left untouched. More immediately, he
wants the US Senate to ratify the CTBT and bring it into force. The
truth of the matter is that the CTBT can come into force only if India
also signs it. After the elaborate debate on testing and its real and
imaginary consequences, India will find it difficult to sign the CTBT,
even though the Vajpayee Government had expressed readiness to sign
it. Obama will lose credibility if, as President, he does not pursue
his own nuclear agenda. It should not be forgotten that Obama had
moved killer amendments to the Hyde Act. He also has strong
reservations on allowing India to reprocess spent fuel.

McCain, on the other hand, is in the Bush mould, and sees India as a
balancing factor in Asia against Chinese power and influence. He will
implement the deal in good faith and strengthen the strategic
partnership with India. The conditions imposed by the US Congress will
be largely ignored by him. Obama, on the other hand, is likely to tilt
towards China.Obama has the image of the underdog, which will appeal
to the developing world. But as President, he will focus more on the
well being of the US citizens than on the developing world. His views
on outsourcing are strongly against the developing countries, which
have benefited from outsourcing. By denying tax concessions to
companies which outsource their business, he will dampen the expanding
outsourcing activities. He will also tighten the screws in the Doha
round of negotiations on account of his concern for the farmers.
McCain will focus on wealth generation and leave these areas alone to
the magic of the market.

Obama has no great link with India, though a good number of young
Indian Americans are dazzled by him and he has been playing along with
their sentiments by mourning the death of Field Marshal Manekshaw,
greeting the Indian Prime Minister and interrupting his campaign to
vote for the deal in the Senate. He also carries a small image of
Hanuman in his wallet. He knows Pakistan, but not India and the
developing countries he knows well are Kenya and Indonesia. He tends
to develop his theories on his knowledge of these countries and he may
well see India as a powerful country. This may bring in distortions in
the American world view. Obama's determination to end the Iraq war
will be a positive point, but he is equally determined to catch Obama
Bin Laden, even if it means going deep into Pakistan territory. If
Pakistan helps in this effort for tactical reasons, he is likely to
reward Pakistan by arms shipments and infusion of capital. The Bush
policy of giving primary importance to India and to treat Pakistan as
a failing state may get altered in the bargain.Obama's readiness to
talk to all leaders may bring in its own complications. There is
genuine fear that he may be carried away by idealism and get the US
into trouble. Talking to Iran and North Korea may be seen by the
allies of the US as rewarding terrorism. The Bush view of the world
will be sustained by McCain, giving a sense of stability in foreign
policy.

The presence of Joe Biden on the Obama ticket is a matter of
satisfaction for India as he is a known friend of India and he has
considerable experience in foreign policy. Sarah Palin on the McCain
ticket is a handicap for the Republicans. But in American elections,
the determining factor is the image of the Presidential candidate.
While Obama has an edge over his Republican rival at this point, the
election results are still uncertain.

-- 
T.P. Sreenivasan
Former Ambassador of India to the United Nations, Vienna,
Former Governor for India, IAEA, Vienna,
__,_._,___

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/thatha_patty?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to