India’s diplomacy
Routine ceremonial warmth and hugs in international capitals were mistaken for growing international stature of the country and its leader. Domestically, they were held up as special relationships crafted by a dynamic new dispensation. Basic conflicts of interest were sought to be dissolved in personal relationships. Deteriorating ties with China and Pakistan have clearly exposed the futility of this superficial approach and the need for anchoring policies based on stark geopolitical realities. Closer identification with an unpredictable U.S. President has definitely been counter-productive. A foreign Minister with consummate diplomatic skills appears to be neutralised by an overbearing PMO. It is time to shed the illusion of grandeur and go back to drawing board (Editorial page, “Needed, a map for India’s foreign policy”, July 28).
Manohar Alembath,
Kannur, Kerala
I have had to re-think my supportive outlook on the moves on the Citizenship (Amendment) Act and on Article 370. Though from a nationalistic point of view both decisions seem bold and much needed, when it comes to the strategic aspect, especially with reference to our foreign policy, perhaps there is a need to reconsider the steps taken. That said, there may be two ways of looking at this. Too much of multilateralism by previous governments may have led ‘nationalistic’ citizens to develop a mindset of ‘enough is enough’ and look for strong unilateral policy by the government. This explains the instant popularity of both the measures mentioned above. But then such bold decisions need to be backed by the strong foundation of our economy, at least as long as we remain a rising power. Nations such as China only respect strength. Though it may be necessary and also emotionally satisfying to say that we care two hoots about some of our neighbours, and that we are in command, it might be worthwhile to analyse whether we have the back up to handle their hostility.
Krishnaraj Kenadath,
Guruvayoor, Kerala
Current foreign policy with frequent informal summits does not seem to work and we appear to have problems with every country with whom we share a common border. The Nehru-Gandhian policy was based on “one world” and when Nehru spoke “tryst with destiny”, he did not blame the British but looked at broader issues. In contrast, the current government seems to blame the previous government for all its problems. Let us not forget that India provided leadership as the voice of the voiceless.
James Arputharaj Williams,
Bengaluru
EIA notification
It is shocking to know that the Environment Ministry is trying to bulldoze through the new Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification (Editorial, July 28). A brute majority in Parliament is not a licence to do away with meaningful dialogue. Any damage done to India’s natural wealth is irreversible. The checks and balances built in the existing notifications should not be altered for short-term gains.
B. Ramadoss,
Chennai
