Beg pardon, Massa

The reticence of the European Union (EU) on India's nuclear tests was too good to last. And when it came, the official response was bound to...

The reticence of the European Union (EU) on India’s nuclear tests was too good to last. And when it came, the official response was bound to be strong, despite the Indian government’s faith in the dissenting voice of France. Britain happens to hold the presidency of the Union — a rotating office — right now. It is in a position to steer policy-making and, going by its decision on the tests, it is determined to use time-tested routes — some dating from the days of resurgent Labour, some from fifty years ago. The former are understandable. Labour has to retain its appeal among the immigrants in Britain whom it first cultivated with an egregious initiative on the Kashmir issue two years ago. It is only natural for Britain — and by extension the EU — to share the concerns of Pakistan. Indians are very forgiving when it comes to political compulsions. A return to the methods of fifty years ago, however, is extremely exceptionable. Parts of the EU statement read as though it owes more to Winston Churchill thanto Tony Blair. It says, for instance, that India must now "contribute actively" and "without conditions" to the process that will bring the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and the Fissile Materials Cutoff Treaty into effect. Beg pardon, Massa, but it does sound like a juvenile court judge handing down a compulsory community service sentence to a particularly perverse delinquent. In comparison, the delay in World Bank loans to India feels like a mere slap on the wrist.

India has complete moral justification in rejecting the demands of the EU. Western Europe has lived for so long in the safety of the NATO nuclear umbrella that it can no longer appreciate alternate realities. Russia knows of them, though, which explains why the response of the G-8 was muted. But Europe cannot understand India’s position, hemmed in by powers with nuclear ambitions, with only the tattered remains of non-alignment for an umbrella. Anyway, it is in no position to take the moral high ground as far as peace initiatives are concerned.Seven of the top 15 conventional arms exporters in 1996 were Western European states. They included Belgium, where the headquarters of the Union is located. The proliferation of conventional weapons has a very direct link to the threat of holocaust.

Throughout the nineties, western threat projections anticipated that all-out war would give place to a rash of limited conflicts. The danger is that these may spread out of control and spark off a big-powers nuclear faceoff. Western Europe contributes substantially to this threat by arming the world conventionally, and it simply does not have the moral authority to hand down unconditional directives. However, these are misunderstandings that can be cleared up through diplomatic measures. It would not pay to forget, in the flush of national umbrage, that the European Union has been India’s biggest trading partner for some years. It would be a shame if this steady stream of commerce were to fall victim to the EU’s failure to appreciate ground realities in thesubcontinent. India should bear this in mind. So should the European Commission, when it reviews the Generalised System of Preferences in order to punish India.