Home >> South Asia >> India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Nepal

     Email   Print 

Why Obama shouldn’t wait for India’s permanent UNSC seat

Vishal Arora - 12/2/2010

For the United States, India is indispensable in ensuring a stable balance of power in Asia in the wake of China’s rise to global power. Therefore, US President Barack Obama, who was on a three-day visit to India earlier this week, assured Washington’s support for India’s bid for a permanent seat at the UN Security Council. But he chose to remain ambiguous on when that may happen.

The United States would do well to empower India against China’s robust economy and political clout in the region sooner than later.

China is not only far ahead in exerting its influence in Asia, it also challenges India’s pre-eminence in South Asia thanks to the state-controlled capitalism that fuels its economy and veto powers at the Security Council which gives it an edge over New Delhi. India, though the de facto leader of South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), will obviously fail to counter the fast growing Chinese influence in the region.

Look at China in Bangladesh. Although gigantic India falls between their boundaries, China has become Bangladesh’s largest trade partner. And now, Beijing wants to link its Yunnan province with Bangladesh by road. China has a similar plan in Pakistan – construction of a road linking western China with the port of Gwadar in north-western Pakistan. Even in Nepal, China wants to build a railway line from the Tibetan capital of Lhasa to Kathmandu.

In Afghanistan, China is developing the world’s largest copper field in Aynak in Logar province. The People’s Republic of China is also the Maldives’ fastest growing tourist source country which sends over 40,000 visitors a year. Also, a Chinese company now runs cash withdrawal services in almost all ATMs in the archipelago.

In Sri Lanka, China is constructing a $1-billion deepwater port in the southern town of Hambantota, an international airport in the south, and the country’s railway network. Tiny Bhutan is the only neighbour that has remained faithful to India.

“China has more influence in South Asia because of its veto power,” said South Asian affairs analyst from Delhi Indranil Banerjie. “Also, China’s munificence and vigorous pursuit of economic goals in the region has found favour with regional governments who desperately need to boost their faltering economies,” he added.

Islamic nations find affinity with China because Beijing votes with them at UN bodies – such as resolutions against defamation of religions – and is their shield against UN sanctions. Therefore, China finds it easier to engage Afghanistan, Bangladesh, the Maldives and Pakistan – South Asia’s four Muslim nations. Besides, engagement with Beijing is convenient because it does not ask a nation to curb Islamist extremism or improve its human rights record, barring in border regions to prevent influx of refugees.

Non-Islamic nations also find veto-holder China’s clout at the UN attractive. For example, the Sri Lankan government, which was accused of killing thousands of civilians in its war against the separatist Tamil Tigers, was protected by Beijing when Western nations introduced a resolution condemning violation of human rights by its armed forces.

In Nepal – a buffer between India and China – former Maoist rebels are the gateway to the Chinese. What connects Maoists to Beijing is not the communist ideology – Maoists see the Chinese regime as “revisionists” – but China’s indifference to democratic rights and anti-India agenda. Though no longer in power, the Maoists form the largest party in Nepal.

India’s unequal footing with China is partly due to democracy and the rights of workers in India which slows a nation down economically. But India can still make a slower but steady progress. But in international standing, India can hope to compete with China if it gets a permanent seat at the UN Security Council. India deserves it.

A recent report by Center for a New American Security said that for the distribution of power and to recognise India’s rise to global power status “the United States should commit, publicly and explicitly, to work with India in support of its permanent membership in an enlarged U.N. Security Council.” It was authored by former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and former Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs R Nicholas Burns.

India’s struggle to keep up with China should be of concern to the United States especially because political Islam poses a challenge to its power. “While the United States will remain a global super power for many decades to come, the decline in its relative power suggests that it needs a string of alliances and arrangements around the globe to maintain the current world order, which is being challenged by various forces,” Banerjie said.

Also, if the rise of a one-party authoritarian state is not challenged by a democracy in Asia, it will hinder the growth of peace and security in the region in the long run, which is integral to the success of the US global war on terror.

Banerjie added that while China wants to be part of the global power structure, and not destroy it “like some proponents of political Islam,” Beijing is trying to dominate it and sees India as the most serious long-term challenge to its “hegemony.” Therefore, the United States should help empower India otherwise “it is at best being conservative and at worst foolish.”

It is not easy for President Obama to pave the way for India’s permanent UNSC seat, which is a multilateral issue and being opposed by the revived “Coffee Club.” But it may be more difficult for him to tackle the consequences of failing to help India catch up with China’s fast moves.