According to the deal with India, India will get access to U.S. civil nuclear technology and open some of its nuclear facilities to inspection. But not all. This means that India's nuclear weapons program may proceed without interference. The deal has upset many, especially Representative Edward Markey:
"With one simple move the president has blown a hole in the nuclear rules that the entire world has been playing by and broken his own word to assure that we will not ship nuclear technology to India without the proper safeguards."
This is the way I felt at first, too. We have kept nuclear proliferation in check for many years. Now, all that effort is going down the drain. How on earth could we ask Iran and others to forego nuclear weapons when we not only allow but encourage India with its weapons program? A big mistake.
But then I thought that Bush had already ruined the non-proliferation regime when he mildly accepted India and Pakistan as nuclear powers. True, they had not signed the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. But they did make the world more dangerous through their actions. Besides, we in America, are building more nuclear weapons.
I think this infatuation with nuclear weapons is wrong. However, I'm sure Bush could not be budged on this.
But at least Bush is trying diplomacy. India is a democracy and Bush wants the biggest democracy in the world to be on our side. Some say India would be great balast against China. Probably so. But the important thing is that Bush is following up on his State-of-the-Union statements about spreading democracy. Too bad he stressed military matters over economic matters. On the whole, however, it is good that he puffed up India.
Many complain that Bush should have done the same for Pakistan. No way! Pakistan is not a democracy. Maybe it's an ally, but I'm not sure of that either. In addition, we must remember that a guy named Kahn, a hero to Pakistanis, sold nuclear secrets to Iran and North Korea. We dare not sell Pakistan nuclear components. And I relaxed when I found out Bush made no nuclear deal with Pakistan.
Bush was so focused on military might that he disregarded something that is more important nowadays - economic might. In India, he said this about outsourcing:
It's painful for those who lose jobs. But the fundamental question is, how does a government or society react to that. And it's basically one of two ways. One is to say, losing jobs is painful, therefore, let's throw up protectionist walls. And the other is to say, losing jobs is painful, so let's make sure people are educated so they can find fill the jobs of the 21st century.
Wrong. Yes, we want India to prosper. Yes, as a democracy, U.S. should help India prosper. But not at America's expense. Outsourcing helps India, but hurts U.S. Education will not have any effect on outsourcing. I'll write more on this in a future article.
On his first diplomatic foray abroad Bush did some good and some bad. On balance, his effort was good because he bound democratic India closer to democratic America.
Comment here.
