OBAMA: The Price is NAM

I can say today -- in years ahead, I look forward to a reformed UN Security Council that includes India as a permanent member
 - President Barack Obama (9th Nov 2010) - address to the Indian Parliament

What they won't tell you was that this statement took everyone present in the parliament completely by surprise. Just a week before his arrival Obama had gone on record to state that a permanent seat for India would be difficult given the status quo in the UN. Then on the final day of his visit he plays this superb masterstroke and leaves the audience totally spellbound. 

The price to be paid was strategically mentioned right after this endorsement. It was India's support for the US's sanctions against Iran and a rap on India's knuckles for her silence on the continued Myanmar oppression. Look harder and you would find that both these nations are part of the Non-Aligned movement (NAM). 

When NAM was originally formed, we were in a bipolar world and nations rushed to huddle themselves together to ensure that they were not accidentally trampled upon by some mighty superpower. During the cold war, it did make some sense since the political demography was a lot different than it is today. 

The question one needs to ask is - "How relevant is India's association with NAM today"?

Firstly, in today's unipolar world, the threats hail mainly from non-state actors. Global terrorism has no boundaries though it may have the backing of certain regimes. The USSR has fallen and has now rightfully taken its place among the Emerging markets (BRIC) of the world. The risk of a nuclear war today is higher between India and Pakistan, China and Taiwan and to some extent the Koreas. The very notion of a nuclear war between the US and Russia is considered rather far fetched. 

Secondly, over the years NAM has been reduced to forum for US bashing. When leaders like Venezuela's Hugo Chavez and Iran's Mahmoud Ahmenijad use every opportunity they get to lambast American foreign policy, the importance and relevance of such forums diminish. 

What should India's stand on the issue be? For one, India should still engage with NAM, as she was one of her founders, but a 2 pronged approach could be applied here. A few of these nations in NAM (Iran, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, etc) have petro-dictators holding vast qualtities of mineral resources at their disposal. Some of them have managed to pass on the wealth to their peoples, while other nations (African subcontinent) have seen the army generals become rich while the masses suffer.

India's dealings with prosperous nations such as Iran, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia etc.. could be straightforward and in line with its own energy interests. With impoverished nations such as Congo, Sudan etc .. India could probably use its skills with diplomacy to influence political reform. 

Iran however is a tricky picture. The presence of an internationally known provocative head of state who engages in unnecessary posturing makes the job of engagement even more difficult. The Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline is probably not going to happen!! Indeed it is true that India's energy needs will grow with the 13th 5-year Plan, but that in itself is not a justification for the unmitigated risk of laying pipelines through a failed state that has categorically refused to guarantee the safety of the pipeline. 

India could however increase trade with Iran in areas that do NOT contribute to its weaponizing such as agrarian products, FMCG, manufacturing and even natural resources. Trade in such categories would actually go a long way to ensure that the people of Iran are not held hostage to the policies of their government. 

Myanmar however was a completely new species pulled out of Uncle Sams hat!! India would need to deal with that at some point of time although it is really not a pressing issue presently.

NAM as a movement has more or less outlived its political agenda. The only agenda it seems to be having now by its most vocal members is trade, linked together by a common thread of anti-Americanism. As the global village continues to expand and the children of the next generation walk into this village, they will eventually come to view these political blocks as archaic and out of touch with present day reality.