NEW DELHI: George Bush has scrupulously stayed away from commenting on US strategy or politics after he quit office. But on Saturday, in what was a unique intervention, Bush used an Indian platform to weigh in on a crucial Obama administration decision, by hoping the US would not lose its nerve and ‘‘abandon’’ Afghanistan.
As president, George Bush much preferred to give India the nuclear deal than a place in the UN Security Council. But in India on his first major trip abroad after he retired, Bush made a strong pitch for India to be in the UN Security Council, while acknowledging that the path would not be smooth, because of ‘‘global’’ politics.
On India, Bush was unwavering. Describing the nuclear deal as ‘‘historic’’ Bush said, ‘‘[By signing the deal] the US recognized India’s nuclear weapon’s programme. It is India’s passport to the world.’’ But he also revealed a deeper strategy behind the deal. It would help India, he said, to move away from an overwhelming dependence on oil from unstable countries.
‘‘We must see the possibility of a seat for India in the United Nations Security Council. India has arrived as a strong democratic country in the world. It is a tolerant, peaceful and multi-religious democracy.’’
Addressing the the Hindustan Times Leadership Summit, Bush said, ‘‘The mission in Afghanistan has been long and difficult and costly, but I believe it is necessary for stability and peace...If the Taliban, al-Qaida and their extremist allies were allowed to take over Afghanistan again, they would have a safe haven and the Afghan people, particularly Afghan women, would face a return to a brutal tyranny. This region and the world would face serious threats.’’
But he refused to give ‘‘advice’’ to Obama, merely observing that the work was ‘‘hard’’.
Bush’s remarks are significant, coming when Obama administration is wringing its hands on a review of Af-Pak policy, appearing to be leaning towards a growing clamour in Washington to reduce US footprint in Afghanistan. Bush received the kind of admiration and adulation in India that is normally reserved for stars. Bill Clinton gets star billing here as well, but he has a personal charm that is missing in Bush.
Stressing that US and India would have to partner together against terrorism and extremism, he said, 9/11 (September 11, 2001) in US and 26/11 (November 26, 2008) in India were both moments of ‘‘clarity’’, impelling the two nations to tackle such acts of terror. ‘‘The extremists hate our vision of human rights, prosperity and peace,’’ he added. ‘‘Both our nations are engaged in an ideological struggle.’’
As president, George Bush much preferred to give India the nuclear deal than a place in the UN Security Council. But in India on his first major trip abroad after he retired, Bush made a strong pitch for India to be in the UN Security Council, while acknowledging that the path would not be smooth, because of ‘‘global’’ politics.
On India, Bush was unwavering. Describing the nuclear deal as ‘‘historic’’ Bush said, ‘‘[By signing the deal] the US recognized India’s nuclear weapon’s programme. It is India’s passport to the world.’’ But he also revealed a deeper strategy behind the deal. It would help India, he said, to move away from an overwhelming dependence on oil from unstable countries.
‘‘We must see the possibility of a seat for India in the United Nations Security Council. India has arrived as a strong democratic country in the world. It is a tolerant, peaceful and multi-religious democracy.’’
Addressing the the Hindustan Times Leadership Summit, Bush said, ‘‘The mission in Afghanistan has been long and difficult and costly, but I believe it is necessary for stability and peace...If the Taliban, al-Qaida and their extremist allies were allowed to take over Afghanistan again, they would have a safe haven and the Afghan people, particularly Afghan women, would face a return to a brutal tyranny. This region and the world would face serious threats.’’
But he refused to give ‘‘advice’’ to Obama, merely observing that the work was ‘‘hard’’.
Bush’s remarks are significant, coming when Obama administration is wringing its hands on a review of Af-Pak policy, appearing to be leaning towards a growing clamour in Washington to reduce US footprint in Afghanistan. Bush received the kind of admiration and adulation in India that is normally reserved for stars. Bill Clinton gets star billing here as well, but he has a personal charm that is missing in Bush.
Stressing that US and India would have to partner together against terrorism and extremism, he said, 9/11 (September 11, 2001) in US and 26/11 (November 26, 2008) in India were both moments of ‘‘clarity’’, impelling the two nations to tackle such acts of terror. ‘‘The extremists hate our vision of human rights, prosperity and peace,’’ he added. ‘‘Both our nations are engaged in an ideological struggle.’’
No comments:
Post a Comment