India launched a major offensive for NSG membership, with the PM going planet hopping and making an all out bid for the elusive membership. The incumbent government went so far as to risk its face in case of failure and probably has gone in slumber over the issue after the outcome has been decided. Should the government not gone in for such high profile campaign? Should it have been more defensive and less confident of India's chances? Has the NSG outcome distanced India from Permanent Seat at UNSC?
Could India have skipped NSG all together?
- India has long aspired to permanent seat in UNSC, and NSG membership could become a major step forward in the direction. NSG membership will be another stamp on India's non-proliferation credentials and India's nuclear capabilities - necessary bullet points for future UNSC offensive.
- In order to live up to the commitments made on Paris Climate Accord, India needs nuclear technology at much faster pace than being outside NSG allows her to acquire.
- it's a power position, indispensable asset in international diplomacy. Didn't China just enjoy the power of position by blunting India's efforts.
Should India have opted for more modest bid than the high decibel campaign led from front by the PM?
- Before answering his question, let's consider the situation. India is not the member of NSG, and thus India must get other countries to vouch for her entry to the cartel. While our Foreign Minister is highly competent, the PM does wield much greater influence today in international polity, and only he could have secured support of leading powers - so much so that, more than 30 countries actively demanded discussion on India's entry to the high table.
- It was Modi-Obama joint statement, by dropping the mention of South China Sea, that ensured that China's opposition was not hardened. Modi's meeting with Xi, on sidelines of SCO, also helped in the moderation of China's nerves, if not their stand. Unlikely any other leader could have achieved half the distance traveled.
Has India failed miserably in her campaign?
- Yes, in the eye of Indian public, India has; for the campaign conveyed a sense that Seoul was the goalpost to be reached and not a milestone to be passed by. We forgot that Seoul was the first step to mount the offensive, and step that should help India chart out future course with better clarity and greater conviction. But then, does our opinion on matters we understand least count?
- No, the primary objectives of the Seoul plenary have been achieved.
What has Seoul offensive achieved for India?
- Seoul plenary of NSG has brought opponents and opposition to table. Till before Seoul meet, opposition to India's NSG bid was muted and concealed, no one quite aware of the posts that each of 48 member countries held. The major offensive by India ensured that opponents were out and the opposition - issues raised - became clearer. The credit for this goes to China as much as it does to India, as other countries opposing India's bid could rally behind China.
- To India's credit, India could bring the opponents and opposition to table without hardening their stance - a BIG achievement given China's concerns.
- Also, India could get her supporters more vocal and more decisive in speaking on behalf of India. India and her supporters are today in much better position to plan future course than they have ever been.
Are we today farther from UNSC permanent seat than before?
- NSG outcome would not directly impact UNSC aspiration - it would only help build the momentum. Let's wait till the final word on NSG before passing verdict on UNSC.
Agreed while India has many pressing problems at home to attend to, but there as no choice to be made between the two - It as not like problems at home were ignored for NSG bid, it's never one for the other! Government did take many important policy decisions during the last week when NSG was all hyped up!
