Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
Jan Egeland, a Norwegian politician and a former senior UN official, has been even more
blunt. 'You can't be a superpower in the Security Council in the morning and a poor devel-
the Security Council and then behave like a chicken.' Egeland's view reflects frustration
that India expects to win a permanent seat on the Security Council but is not prepared to
play a role - a euphemism for taking sides - on major issues such as Syria with its human
rights abuses and Iran's nuclear ambitions. Such critics argue that Nehru understandably
wanted to stay neutral in the Cold War while tilting towards the Soviet Union, but India
should behave differently now that the NAM justification for inaction no longer exists. In-
dia sees it differently and, as Menon said, wants to pursue its domestic goals 'without dis-
traction or external entanglement'.
While its critics complain that it does not pull its weight in the Security Council and
other international forums, Indian diplomats say they have a coherent policy at the UN -
for example, pushing development as a leading priority, calling for a global anti-terrorism
campaign, pushing human rights issues and humanitarian operations, plus individual con-
cerns like the Middle East (where it backs Palestine). It has also had a leading role in UN
peacekeeping since the 1950s, having taken part in 46 operations with a total of 130,000
troops, the third largest number among the countries involved.
India is perhaps more comfortable playing an international role in economic affairs,
though its domestic-oriented agenda inevitably means that it does not line up with the West
on issues such as trade negotiations and climate change - both areas where it has played an
opposition role. There has also been frustration that, while refusing to break off relations
with Iran, India neither developed a diplomatic strategy for dealing with the country, nor
tried to lead an international attempt at compromise which, many diplomats say, it has been
uniquely positioned to do. This often goes back to a basic criticism that India finds it easier
to block initiatives than lead constructive coalitions - suggesting that as a country, and like
its people, it is not basically a consistent team player.
Many Indian diplomats, especially younger ones, think that India should be more robust,
especially in the UN, and less proselytizing, as do various pundits. 'It is time for us to give
up moralistic pretensions assuming we have a monopoly of wisdom,' says a retired top dip-
lomat. C.Raja Mohan, a leading foreign affairs analyst and journalist, argues that it is time
for India to stop behaving like a weak power and 'learn to be the regionally active - not
war-mongering but showing strength.'
33
The biggest external pressure on India to shake off its current approach is coming from
the US, which sees it primarily as a counterweight, and maybe one day an ally, against
China's growing power, so wants to edge it into a wider role. Obama aired the frustration
during his 2010 visit, though he showed little sensitivity for India's priorities, calling for it
to be tougher on Iran without acknowledging India's historic links and need for Iranian oil.
