
Prime Minister Vajpayee will address the UN General Assembly under the shadow of profound changes in the world situation during the past year. Iraq lies in a shambles, while Afghanistan’s reconstruction and stabilisation appears to be facing serious challenges. The WTO summit at Cancun has ended in disaster signalling the unwillingness of some developed states to move toward greater equitable trade relations. There is an emergent risk of armed conflict in Northeast Asia, where a former non-nuclear otherwise weak state has virtually declared itself as the ninth nuclear weapon state. Multilateralism has received serious blows not only from unilateralist strategies, but also from inadequate support for it from those who believe in it. The UN itself seems to be heading the way the League of Nations, slipping into obsolescence. The former paradigm of arms control and strategic stability stands altered almost irreversibly. Above all, the much-hyped global war against terrorism appears to have plateaued.
Much more can be added to this list. But the central issue is that in the third year of the third millennium, it is very clear that the world is far less aligned than it was even a year ago. And we have entered what can only be described as an Asian Century. This is the type of defining moment in history when statesmen, especially like the current prime minister of the world’s largest democracy, would have a lot to say to the international community. Vajpayee would no doubt be in his element while defining the vision of the new emerging world, well beyond mere national interests. India faces old and new challenges. But there are also new opportunities and new responsibilities on the country and its leadership in shaping the future.
At another level, the Vajpayee-Bush meeting would no doubt focus on bilateral issues, besides discussing the world situation. Trade, terrorism and Iraq are likely to be central to these talks. The Indian economy is on an upswing and this should encourage the US to open up greater opportunities for investments, trade and technology transfer for development purposes. After all, a market of one billion people cannot be easily overlooked. Unabated support and prosecution of politico-religious terrorism from across the border would undoubtedly require attention, especially since Washington had kept advocating restraint last year. But we must not limit our national policy agenda to this one issue. The Iraq situation, in particular, is crying out for the world to act wisely. Much would depend on the US willingness to step back and allow the UN its rightful role in managing Iraq and restoring Iraqi sovereignty at the earliest.


