What's new

India not joining line of west : Grave concern for the west

BJP*

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Mar 19, 2011
Messages
877
Reaction score
0
I found this article in western media, intresting though


With Libya, is India confused or just too clever by half?
Mar 21, 2011 09:52 EDT



India abstained last week from a U.N. vote on the no-fly zone in Libya that also authorised military action, but since then it has been more vocal in its rejection of airstrikes, joining China and Russia in criticising the coalition of Western powers and the Arab league and its actions against the Libyan government.

“We regret the air strikes that are taking place in Libya. We are viewing ongoing violence with grave concern,” Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna told reporters on Monday, in comments carried by NDTV television channel. It echoed an official comment on Sunday.

India’s declarations signal that New Delhi will not step in line with the West despite its growing ties with the United States and Europe — highlighted by a string of visits last year, including President Barack Obama’s and the leaders of France and the United Kingdom.

This is not new. India for years has gone against U.S. interests in a string of geo-political issues, including Myanmar. But it has counted on the fact that it is now economically too important to be sidelined by any Western power due to any criticism of the West.

India, especially the ruling Congress party, still has deep roots in the Non-Aligned Movement. And domestically, it plays well with voters often skeptical of Western intentions.

Why then did India abstain in the U.N. vote? While China’s veto would have stopped the no-fly zone given Beijing’s status as a permanent member of the Security Council, India’s would have been a symbolic move.

China did not want to be seen blocking what is perceived by many as being a humanitarian mission. India would have just been a noted protest at the United Nations.

So again, there is a disparity between what India votes and what it says. Is India still unclear about where it stands globally? Or has it played a clever political game — a game that it has played for decades as a “non-aligned” power — that will pan out if the military airstrikes end in a stalemate?
 
I did a bit of reading on this "non aligned policy". I must say i am surprised by its genius.
 
Well done in staying true to the non-aligned policy. India would have gained little by supporting the no-fly zone.
 
I did a bit of reading on this "non aligned policy". I must say i am surprised by its genius.

Well, the non-aligned policy serves a purpose. It ensures that India makes no unnecessary enemies while at the same opening the door to making a diverse set of friends. The only disadvantage is that it means that India also has little chance of forming "alliances"; as such but at the same time she can also count on a few important voices to back her up when the time comes.
 
India says no place for external powers in Libya
India says no place for external powers in Libya | News by Country | Reuters

NEW DELHI, March 22 (Reuters) - The U.S.-led international coalition has no right to interfere in Libya's affairs, India said on Tuesday, stepping up its condemnation of the military strikes on Muammar Gaddafi's forces to establish a no-fly zone.

India, which abstained from a U.N. security council vote to authorise military action, followed fellow BRIC countries China and Russia in condemning the air strikes led by the U.S., U.K. and France that have severely weakened Libya's air defences.

"What is happening in a country, within their internal affairs, no external powers should interfere in it," Pranab Mukherjee, India's finance minister and leader of the lower house of parliament, told lawmakers on Tuesday.

China and Russia also abstained from the resolution.

"Nobody, not a couple of countries, can take that decision to change a particular regime," Mukherjee said. "Whether a regime will change or not will depend on the people of that particular country, not by any external forces."

India's Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna called for the "cessation of armed conflict" on Monday, a day after his ministry issued a statement expressing "regret" over the air strikes.

Asia's third-largest economy, which has followed a foreign policy of non-alignment, took its seat as a non-permanent member of the security council in January.

Local media on Tuesday criticised New Delhi for appearing "confused" and "naive" in its condemnation of military action after abstaining from the vote.

India said the right thing !
 
So, in a choice between dictators v/s democracy, India is "non aligned".

Good to know. :coffee:
 
So, in a choice between dictators v/s democracy, India is "non aligned".

Good to know. :coffee:

at least our country rejected air strikes and condemned it. care to tell wat ur govt said abt it. i saw BBC and CNN that day, there were no comment from u r foreign office.

i guess u r leaders dont look much beyond india/china/usa.
 
"non aligned policy" is far more better than slapping democracy on someone or dictatorship.....

This policy has always worked for us and will be doing so ...we must never step down from such policy , to join ALLIANCES created by west , china and russia....
 
at least our country rejected air strikes and condemned it. care to tell wat ur govt said abt it. i saw BBC and CNN that day, there were no comment from u r foreign office.

i guess u r leaders dont look much beyond india/china/usa.

This thread is about India. Please stay focussed.

"non aligned policy" is far more better than slapping democracy on someone or dictatorship.....

It's about principle.
Either you support people's right to democracy, or it's just empty slogans -- to be dispensed with at inopportune moments.
 
It's about principle.
Either you support people's right to democracy, or it's just empty slogans -- to be dispensed with at inopportune moments.

I think GoI has been pretty clear on that. Even MMS made a statement that they welcome more democratic regimes in the Arab world, but this has to be an internal process and something that can't be forced externally.

You can call it empty slogans, but principle of soverignity is a conerstone of International Relations, you don't want to be seen as interfering in other countries in the name of democracy.
 
This thread is about India. Please stay focussed.



It's about principle.
Either you support people's right to democracy, or it's just empty slogans -- to be dispensed with at inopportune moments.


all right. agreed. i will also remind u same thing in some other thread later.
 
Back
Top Bottom