[Prev][Next][Index]
India Post Editorial
INDIA POST, Editorial, March 24, 1995
By Narayan Keshvan
Two California lawmakers, both Democrats, and two different
shifts in attitude. One coming into the Indian American family
more perhaps one would hope in penance soon after calling a lady
colleague from Connecticut a "whore." And the other, who was far
long perceived as a friend of the community appears to be poised
to be taking a lead role in Senate moves that could help Pakistan
gets it much-coveted F-16 fighter jets.
We are talking here about Rep. Pete Stark and Sen. Dianne
Feinstein respectively. As reported on Page One of this section,
Pete Stark has joined the Congressional Caucus on India and
Indian Americans. His joining the grouping after such a long and
clear record of anti-India voting --- especially in support of
that enfant terrible from Indiana, Dan Burton, whom even many a
Republican snigger at and despise privately --- is something akin
to the repentant going to Benares for a dip in the Holy Ganges to
wash away the past sins and book a slot in Heaven.
Despite his voting record, which surely irritated the Indian
American community, Pete Stark deserves a second chance
essentially because our culture teaches us that when someone
reaches out, we must reciprocate. Moreover, the political
dynamics, especially congressional politics, has dramatically
changed. More than most, a smart lawmaker such as Pete Stark
realizes the new reality of electoral politics and appears to be
making a sincere, albeit tentative, effort in trying to
understand and appreciate our community's concerns. Indian
Americans should match this gesture by applauding his move to
join the Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans.
Bravo Pete.
On the other hand, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who barely managed
to squeak through in the November elections, appears to be
changing her colors and this should be of grave concern to our
community. For what she is upto is nothing short of endangering
the national security of our homeland. The first indication that
Feinstein --- who is the ranking minority member on the
subcommittee on Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs of the
powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee --- was favoring
either the repeal or changing of the Pressler Amendment to
directly help Pakistan came at two days of hearings earlier this
month in the Senate. Her line of questioning the government
witnesses testifying on South Asia was leading.
After the hearing, according to sources in Washington, D.C.,
it appears that Feinstein has plunged into trying to hammer out
an acceptable method to undo much what the Pressler Amendment
does. The Pressler law prohibits any aid or assistance to
Pakistan so long as the President is unable to certify that
Islamabad is indeed not pursuing its nuclear ambitions. Because
the Pressler law in effect at the moment, Washington is unable to
give arms assistance to the Benazir Bhutto regime.
The Clinton Administration has attempted several methods
previously to accommodate or sidestep the Pressler law in a bid
to revive the arms and economic relationship between our country
and Pakistan. But such attempts have failed because the concern
over nuclear proliferation among lawmakers was very high. Because
of the Pressler law some 28 F-16 fighter planes, for which
Islamabad has already paid, remain parked at a Arizona facility.
Feinstein, it appears, may not be fully aware of the terrible
consequences any dilution of the Pressler law will wreck not only
in South Asia, but in the overall U.S. policy on nuclear non-
proliferation. It is even more surprising that the California
Senator would try to undermine the one single piece of American
legislation that has been most effective in sending a message to
rogue nations that seek to go nuclear. Moreover, any attempt to
dilute the Pressler law at this juncture, just weeks before the
monumental debate at the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
Extension and Review Conference set for next month, is to say the
least a reckless maneuver. This is no time for the Clinton
Administration or the lawmakers on the Hill to act irresponsibly
on non-proliferation issues simply because we have to accommodate
visiting Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto in early April.
Any move on the Senate side to water down the Pressler law
will be against our own national security interests for such a
move clearly contradicts our larger policy goals for a nuclear
weapons free world.
Then there is the whole issue of how India would react. The
warm economic diplomacy that is being nurtured will be
unnecessarily jeopardized. Indian public opinion will react
vehemently and our credibility in the worlds largest democracy
will be in shreds. And more importantly, any such move will
trigger a huge and costly arms race in the Indian subcontinent.
New Delhi, for sure, will respond by deploying the Prithvi
missile on the Indo-Pakistani theater swiftly.
We hope Sen. Feinstein will not act hastily without getting
all the facts on this very vital issue. The Indian-American
community should clearly express its concerns and apprehensions
to the lawmaker. There is much at stake here.
