Tough postures lurk behind Clinton visit

By M.V. Balaji

NEW DELHI (DPA): U.S. President Bill Clinton and his host, Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee, described the American leader's visit in a jointly signed document as "a day of new beginnings".

"We have before us for the first time in 50 years the possibility to realize the full potential of our relationship," the leaders of the world's two biggest democracies said in their so-called Vision Statement.

The document not only expressed the determination of both the countries to strengthen their ties but also reflected the overall mood in the country that prevailed during the five-day visit ending Saturday.

The Indian government laid out a welcome for Clinton that few heads of state have received before. His plane was escorted to New Delhi airport last Sunday by Indian air force jets flying in formation.

Last Tuesday, when he began his official visit, he was ceremonially escorted to the forecourt of Indian president's house for a formal reception by a group of the president's bodyguards on horseback.

Clintonmania swept not only New Delhi but other parts of India like Agra, the western city of Jaipur, southern Hyderabad and India's business capital of Bombay as the cities were scrubbed clean, painted and their bumpy roads repaired.

In Hyderabad, one of India's major computer software centers, beggars were locked up to give a good impression to Clinton, the first U.S. president to come to India since Jimmy Carter's visit in 1978.

The speeches by both sides were not merely polite but gushing with enthusiastic expressions of friendship and goodwill.

In his address to the Indian parliament, Clinton was lavish in his praise of India's democracy and its achievements in many fields like economy, health care and empowerment of women.

Clinton appeared moderate even on the issue of country developing a nuclear arsenal when he said that it was for India to determine whether it would benefit from expanding its nuclear capability if its neighbors like Pakistan did so.

But at the same time, he warned that India's nuclear policies would have consequences beyond its borders. He urged New Delhi to move towards disarmament and sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT).

Indian government officials said while differences persisted, the two sides had a greater understanding now of each other's viewpoints on disarmament.

The U.S. maintained a tough line on the lifting of sanctions imposed following India's nuclear tests in May 1998. U.S. Commerce Secretary William Daley ruled out their withdrawal unless India signed the CTBT.

The Indian government also refused to budge on the issue of nuclear weapons. National Security Adviser Brajesh Mishra said there was no question of rolling back India's weapons and missiles programs.

The only promises Clinton got from Vajpayee were the reiteration of the earlier Indian stand that it would maintain a moratorium on nuclear testing, that it would not be the first to use nuclear weapons and would work to check the proliferation of fissile material.

The two sides, however, agreed to continue their dialogue on strategy and disarmament and to hold regular summit meetings to thrash out differences.

On the Kashmir dispute between India and Pakistan, Clinton appeared to put the ball in the Indian court.

While saying it was tough being a democracy when one's neighbor did not believe in democratic values, Clinton urged India to open lines of communication with Islamabad "as democracy is about dialogue. It is about building relationships among those who differ".

The U.S. stand on Kashmir has caused considerable heartburn in New Delhi. Clinton's remark before coming to Delhi that the Indian subcontinent was the most dangerous place on earth, with Kashmir as a nuclear flashpoint, attracted protests.

While Vajpayee was diplomatic in contradicting Clinton, the real attack came from Indian President K.R. Narayanan.

In his speech at the official banquet for Clinton, Narayanan described Clinton's remark as an "alarmist description" which would only encourage those who wanted to break peace in the region and indulge in terrorism and violence.

Narayanan also clearly rejected the idea of a unipolar world under the leadership of one major power by declaring that the world is a global village but this does not mean it will be run by one village headman.

While reports indicated that the Indian government was embarrassed by Narayanan's remarks, observers said the president's tough talk could have been an attempt to drive home a hard message without actually sounding unduly harsh.

Remarks by a mostly ceremonial head of state would have much less impact than if they had been made by Clinton's main discussion partner, Vajpayee.

Analysts said that while the main political differences remained unresolved, the real gains of the visit would be on the economic front. They said it would lead to considerable growth in trade between the two countries and investments from the United States.