July 8, 2003	Tuesday	Jumadi-ul-Awwal 7,1424

NEW DELHI: The Indian government, still deciding whether or not to send troops to Iraq as part of a stabilization force, is facing strong opposition from political parties, civil liberty groups, anti-war activists and ordinary citizens.

The United States has asked India to send at least 17,000 soldiers to Iraq. The issue was on top of the agenda during an unscheduled meeting between US President George W. Bush and Indian Deputy Prime Minister L.K. Advani at the White House last month.

Too many questions remain unanswered when it comes to the deployment of Indian troops to Iraq, critics say, and the government has been unable to come up with adequate answers to the satisfaction of its own allies, opposition parties and the public.

“There is no question of sending Indian troops,” says Sheshadri Chari of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh party, the ideological parent of Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

“The Americans entered Iraq on their own. They have not found weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Now the United Nations should set a time limit for them to find the WMD, failing which they should leave Iraq.”

A high-level Pentagon team recently visited New Delhi and US officials tried to allay India’s concerns about sending in troops to an increasingly hostile situation. Since Bush declared fighting had ended on May 1, 28 US troops have been killed in hostile action. The death toll continues to rise almost daily.

India’s Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) has met twice to discuss the deployment issue, but failed to arrive at any decision. At a June 21 meeting, the CCS said the final decision would be left to Vajpayee.

Indian Foreign Secretary Kanwal Sibal — who met senior US leaders like National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice and Deputy Secretary of Defence Paul Wolfowitz in Washington last week — admitted several “grey areas remain” in the decision process, such as who will command India’s troops, and who will foot the bill.

Sibal adds there would have been no problem had a United Nations resolution on troop deployment to Iraq been passed before the war was launched.

Former foreign secretary J.N. Dixit said, “India has raised several specific questions, like the command structure under which its troops would function, the likelihood of a legitimate government coming into being in Iraq, and the role of the UN in overseeing activities carried out to restore peace.

“There are several reasons not to send troops. Most Iraqis resent the American military presence ... (and) no major power, apart from the US, is sending troops for peacekeeping operations,” says Dixit.

Indian columnist Praful Bidwai points out if India does send 17,000 troops, they would become the second-largest force in Iraq, greater than even Britain’s military presence.

Bidwai says Italy has agreed to send 3,000 soldiers, while Spain and Poland have decided to deploy 2,300 each.

Critics say the US invasion is more reminiscent of colonialism than liberation, and India’s participation should avoided. After all, India knows what it means to be occupied by a foreign power.

“India will undermine itself and destroy all its political capital and goodwill in the Arab world by shooting and mowing down Iraqis who are fighting against their occupation through an increasingly organised resistance,” Bidwai wrote in a recent Hindustan Times column.

Political analyst Atul Bharadwaj notes, “The empire building game is once again in full swing. An empire needs a huge military force to establish its authority in far-flung areas.”

Last month, Vajpayee met Congress Party leader Sonia Gandhi to seek consensus on the issue. Most political parties, apart from the BJP, have vehemently opposed troop deployment.

Chairman of the Congress Party’s foreign policy team, K. Natwar Singh, said there was “no scope” to change India’s earlier stand. Parliament passed a unanimous resolution opposing the US-led attack on Iraq before the war.

“We will not agree to Indian troops going under anybody’s command,” Singh says.

Strong opposition has also come from the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M). Left parliamentarian Hannan Mollah asked, “Who will bear the cost of transporting our soldiers to Iraq and maintaining them there?

“Our forces, which are highly respected as peacekeepers in various parts of the world, would no longer enjoy that image. It would also tarnish our image in the eyes of the common Iraqi people.”

After returning from Washington, Advani told the Aaj Tak channel, “We cannot not send troops to Iraq only because of the strident criticism by the opposition parties. They have done so without even weighing the merits of the case. Eventually the decision will hinge on national interest.”

Another issue is the US’ friendship with Pakistan, which blossomed after the 2001 “war on terrorism” was launched in Afghanistan.

“Is the government gullible enough to think the US would support India against Pakistan on the Kashmir issue if we send troops before Pakistan does?” asks another CPI-M leader.

According to the government, relations with the US would not be tarnished if India takes a pass on offering its troops.

“A negative decision by India would not adversely impact its relations with the US because relations between the two countries are multi-faceted,” says Foreign Secretary Sibal.

If vociferous demonstrations in many cities are anything to go by, public opinion is a resounding “no” to troop deployment.

University professors in New Delhi issued a joint statement saying sending Indian soldiers to Iraq would send “a terribly wrong message” to the people, and “would do immense violence to all the values India had cherished since the freedom struggle.

“We cannot be identified as an occupying imperialist force. It will be a mission for war-making, not peace-keeping.”

A public campaign called “No Indian Troops for Iraq” was recently launched, and is receiving strong support from doctors, students, film-makers, teachers and businessmen.

“Can a country that suffered colonial subjugation for 190 years, and fought for 62 years to free itself, suddenly turn into a colonial power?” asks columnist Prem Shankar Jha in the weekly Outlook magazine.—dpa