India-Iran ties: The Myth of a 'Strategic' Partnership
Despite all the talk of an emerging “strategic partnership” between India and Iran in Washington’s policy-making circles, two recent developments underscore the tenuous nature of India-Iran ties. Tehran has taken up with the Indian government the issue of India launching an Israeli satellite, TECSAR, that many in Israel have suggested would be used to spy on Iran’s nuclear program. More significant, perhaps, is the Indian decision not to attend the proposed trilateral talks in Tehran later this month for finalizing the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline deal, given the non-resolution of the transit fee issue between India and Pakistan.
Ever since the United States and India started to transform their ties by changing the global nuclear order to accommodate India, Iran has emerged as a litmus test that India has had to pass from time to time to the satisfaction of US policy makers. India’s traditionally close ties with Iran have become a factor influencing a US-India partnership. India-Iran ties have been termed variously as an “axis.” a “strategic partnership,” and even an “alliance.” Some in the US strategic community believe that a “Tehran-New Delhi Axis” has been emerging over the past few years that could be significant for the US because of its potentially damaging impact on US interests in Southwest Asia and the Middle East.
Given the recent obsession of US policy makers with Iran, India has been asked to prove its loyalty by backing Washington on Iran’s nuclear program. The Bush Administration stated that if India voted against the US motion on Iran at the International Atomic Energy Agency, the US Congress would likely not approve the US-India nuclear agreement. Congressman Tom Lantos (D-CA) threatened that India “will pay a heavy price for a disregard of US concerns vis-à-vis Iran.” India finally voted in February 2006 to refer Iran to the United Nations' Security Council. This was the second time India voted with the West on the issue. Despite this, many members of Congress continued to demand that the nuclear deal be conditional on New Delhi’s ending all military relations with Tehran.
The Bush Administration insisted that it would oppose any amendment to the nuclear pact that would condition cooperation upon India’s policies towards Iran. However, the US-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act (better known as the Hyde Act) of 2006 contains a 'Statement of Policy' section which explicates a few riders ensuring India’s support for US policy toward the Iranian nuclear issue, in particular “to dissuade, isolate, and if necessary, sanction and contain Iran for its efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction, including a nuclear weapons capability and the capability to enrich uranium or reprocess nuclear fuel and the means to deliver weapons of mass destruction.” While this has generated considerable opposition in India, President Bush emphasized that his Administration would interpret this as merely “advisory” While the Bush Administration itself has expressed concern about India-Iran ties, it has refused to make them central to the nuclear deal.
However, the American focus on India-Iran ties has been highly disproportionate to the realities of this relationship, a result more of the exigencies of domestic politics than of regional political realities.
Interestingly, the Indian Left has also made Iran an issue emblematic of India’s 'strategic autonomy' and has used it to coerce the Indian Government into following an ideological foreign policy. However, a close examination of the India-Iran relationship reveals an underdeveloped relationship.
selengkapnya baca sumbe: http://casi.ssc.upenn.edu/node/130
Posts
