"Engaging India" is a book that many might overlook in browsing Amazon, considering it a dry read as it deals with the intensive rounds of dialogues that were held between the Clinton administration, India and Pakistan respectively after India surprised the world with the nuclear test. Being a pre-9/11 book it might seem irrelevant except to those interested in the political dynamics of the sub-continent.
Strobe Talbott’s book, however, is a must read for those interested in knowing what US strategy might be towards hindering Iran from developing a bomb (i.e. if they don’t have one already.) especially in the midst of the unique socio-political dynamics of the country .These dynamics may well be the reasons why it might not come as a big surprise that the Iranian regime might thumb their nose at incentives offered by America/ Europe and despite international condemnation go ahead with the nuclear program anyways as did Pakistan.
Pakistan desperately needed the money. Its economy was in terrible shape. The government was on the edge of default; foreign and domestic investments had all but dried up; unemployment was rising. On top of these troubles, Pakistan had been living for years under the Pressler sanctions that the US Congress had imposed in the early 1990s because of it's nuclear program. ....Clinton telephoned Nawaz Sharif, the Pakistani Prime Minister to whet his appetite for the planes [F-16s], huge amounts of financial aid, and a prize certain to appeal to Sharif - an invitation for him to make an official visit to Washington.
Sharif was not swayed. "You can almost hear the guy wringing his hands and sweating," Clinton said after hanging up. The lure of money, praise, and gratitude from the world, with a few long-in-the-tooth warplanes thrown in for good measure, was far less powerful than the Pakistani fears of what had happened just across their border. India in their view, had just racheted up its fifty-year-old campaign to humiliate, intimidate, and perhaps even eradicate their country.
The pressures that led Pakistan to test the Bomb were not only the fear of economically richer India or the fragile tolerance of democracy by the aristocratic military but most importantly by the public opinion. Pakistani identity has always been defined by national pride and Fear of the Other, than any long-term desire for sustainable development.
And it was public opinion again that led the Indian government to resist global pressure into signing the CTBT till it died an unsightly death under the Bush Administration anyway.
Article comments
1 - Eric Olsen
excellent job on an interesting and underappreciated subject - clearly both India and Pakistan are vital to our national interests - thanks and welcome SW!
2 - Aaman
A matter after my own heart - Allah be praised! :)Does nuclear non-proliferation matter anymore, when so many nations are possessed of this vile science?
3 - DrPat
Nuclear weapons are a genie already escaped from the bottle. Non-proliferation, on the other hand, is a wider topic, one I'm glad we're addressing across the world.
Thanks, swingingpuss, for the review - I certainly would not have chosen this book on my own!
4 - swingingpuss
I sincerely hope the genie's masters don't make the dreaded death wish. Thanks for reading and posting.
5 - SFC SKI
I have to admit a great level of ignorance regarding the Indo-Pak theater, but it is amazing that one people of colonial India could gain independence, and almost immediately begin a bloody civil war resulting in a fracturing of Colonial India into several smaller nations. I doubt a lot of Americans can really relate to it.
I won't say that the Indian and Pakistani peoples hate each other, but the events ocurred less than 60 years ago and memories are long.
Nuclear non-proliferation is a worthy goal that will require a long term commitment.
Good article.
6 - Aaman
SFC, the British partitioned the country pre-independence. The nationalist leaders opposed the partition.
And where are the several smaller nations you refer to? India is a united country, Pakistan another. Bangaladesh was earlier West Pakistan. Sri Lanka and Nepal were always independent - outside the British empire.
7 - SFC SKI
I did say I was ignorant, thanks for the update.
Last thing first; wasn't India one large colony under the British until shortly before independence? Didn't Bangladesh later break off from PAkistan after Pakistan was its own nation? That is what I meant by smaller nations, maybe not many.
I was not really aware that the boundaries had been set prior to independence, but I do think that the mass movement of Hindus to India and Muslims to Pakistan, if that is correct, was pretty unprecedented, and was hastened, if not precipitated by the violence between the 2.
Also, Pakistan is not the only adversary that worries India, the Chinese to the North weigh very heavily on the minds of those in Delhi. I do believe that China and India had some hefty border skirmishes in the late 1940's and early 1950's.
I am fascinated by the Indian subcontinent, I'd love to go there someday, but my focus on the ME tales up a lot of my time so I don't know as much as I would like to know.
8 - swingingpuss
SFC, I'm glad you liked my book review.
I agree with you that the schisms run deep in the psyche of the two countries and yet they love each others movies, music, food not to mention they share a grand passion for cricket.
Furthermore the younger generations doesnt seem share the same animosity haboured by their parents.
With regards to China, there are some serious border issues between the two countries which need to be addressed but China remains an enigmatic dragon whose mind is difficult to fathom resulting in the feelings of xenophobia and insecurity in the minds of the Indian policy makers.