Reorienting Toward U.S. Not the Only Solution for India's Problems

By M. M. Ali

Compared to the political carnival being played out in neighboring Pakistan, the changing socio-political environment in India appears relatively rational. However, both images are distorted. Not everything is wrong in one place and not everything is right in the other.

India constitutes a weight if not a force on the face of the earth. Its sheer mass must be factored into the blueprints of the new world order. The disintegration of the Soviet Union and the consequent strengthening of China both provide India a bolder image, which in turn is blurred by the country's overwhelming poverty.

Despite its relatively low population growth rate among Third World countries (1.95 percent), India adds an average of 17 million new mouths to feed each year. Its population is expected to pass the one billion mark by the year 2001. One-third of India's people now live in 23 cities, each with a million or more inhabitants. Three of those cities already have passed the eight million mark.

According to the Indian government, of the two-thirds of its population living in rural areas, 196 million fall below the poverty level. This is a frightening urban and rural scenario for any country, and more so for a poor nation that has to make some very difficult economic and political choices to be able to remain credible and afloat.

Social Anomalies

India's lingering traditions skew its 20th century modernity. Social injustice and inequality defy constitutional provisions promising democracy and fair play.

The Dalits and "scheduled castes" (otherwise known as untouchables) are not the only victims of continued prejudice. The situation of Indian women is equally insecure. Although thousands of Indian women, like the 12 who graduated in July from the Air Force Academy in Hyderabad, are equal partners in the fields of development and technology, there is another side to the story. Although the Hindu religion glorifies femininity, Hindu society treats women as reproduction machines.

In a graphic sequence of the CBS "60 Minutes" program on June 13, 1993, host Morley Safer observed: "With rare exceptions, to be a woman in India is to be less than a slave. . . Her purpose is to bear a treasured son." The program explained that one cause of remarkably low female birth rates in India in recent years is the use of sonograms, not to determine the health of unborn fetuses, but their sex. Tired of the burden of providing a dowry to marry off their daughters, families are aborting unborn females.

Ironically, 1993 also is "The Year of the Woman" in India and a vigorous literacy program, with a focus on women, has been launched. It is badly needed. Of 880 million Indians of both sexes, some 325 million are illiterate. Of these, 200 million are female. These formidable figures, provided by the Indian government, nevertheless represent a dramatic improvement. In 1951, literacy was only 18 percent, with 27 percent of the literates males and 9 percent females. In 1971, literacy increased to 34 percent (46 percent males and 22 percent females). The 1991 1iteracy rate was 52 percent (64 percent males and 40 percent females).

In absolute terms, however, this leaves staggering numbers of illiterates. The national profile indicates that literacy among both the sexes is much higher in the south than in the north. No country of India's size can hope to go far with one-half of its population unable to read or write.

The Economy

Outside the Warsaw Pact countries, India was the hardest hit by the collapse of the Soviet Union. For more than 40 years the U.S.S.R. had provided a market for Indian goods and a helping hand in industrial and military assistance. During the same period, Delhi presented itself as a socialistic planned economy. Switching suddenly in 1990 to a market economy has not yet produced the desired results.

The June 26, 1993 issue of the London Economist observed: "In 1988, Indian economic growth hit 10 percent a year. Now it is running at under 5 percent." The Economist added, "The growth of the 1980s was financed by a borrowing spree which led to a huge increase in foreign debt and record budget deficits. The party came to an end in 1990-91."

Since then, the Indian government has made the Indian rupee, which is 32 to the dollar, convertible for settling trade accounts. Customs duties on most imports have been drastically cut, quotas on imports in all but consumer goods have been abolished, and import duties have been dropped from 200 percent to a maximum of 85 percent. Foreign investors are now allowed to invest in the stock market, and many of the former public sector industries have opened up for private investors.

All this has elicited a degree of confidence from foreign investors. Such regulatory and market changes have also caused international monetary assistance agencies like the Consortium, the IMF and the World Bank to pledge more than $15 billion in the past two years to help India.

However, the road to recovery is neither straight nor level. The large bureaucracy does not view deregulation and privatization with any great relish.

Red tape has delayed the changes. Old labor laws make retrenchments in losing industries almost impossible. Companies in such situations prefer to close down rather than trim operations. Foreign investors remain nervous about exit laws that do not allow an easy pullout in case of failures. Civil strife and political uncertainty have also kept many of the potential international investors away.

Nor can all official projections be trusted. The government predicted an economic growth rate of more than six per cent this year. However, the Bombay-based Center for Monitoring the Indian Economy reports that, despite good monsoons and increased agricultural output, "the growth rate is projected to improve only marginally to 4.5 percent."

Moreover, the trade deficit is expected to jump from $5.5 billion last year to $7.25 billion this year. Obviously an economy the size of India's cannot change direction in a matter of months. Nor can economic wizardry function in an unfriendly political and social environment.

The Politics

The post-Cold War world seems to have fallen into the hands of functionaries, not visionaries, and nowhere more so than in India. Under the Nehru dynasty, the Indian National Congress was a powerful political machine that preserved a democracy that is increasingly imperiled today. India's age of national heroes has been replaced by an era of regional leaders with limited visions and narrower goals.

Pulled out of retirement as a temporary replacement after the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi, Prime Minister Narasimha Rao has faced widespread communal unrest between Muslims and Hindus, largely fomented by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)—a growing right-wing Hindu organization. Rao's troubles have crested with a charge of bribery leveled against him by Harshad Mehta, a stockbroker facing charges arising from a $1.6 billion bank securities scandal. Mehta claims to have paid the prime minister Rs. 10 million ($390,000) to gain political favors. (The long-running Bofors scandal that plagued the late Rajiv Gandhi only compounds Rao's troubles.)

Although corruption is not a new phenomenon in Indian politics, the present case is taking on a life of its own, with accusations arising against Rao even from within his own Congress party. With November elections scheduled in Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh and Rajasthan provinces this year, the polarizing RJP is a dismayingly strong contender in all four states.

International Relations

With the demise of its former Soviet ally, India is faced with rebuilding relations with the United States. As a first bold step, India has established diplomatic relations with Israel, among other reasons to obtain the backing in Washington of Israel's powerful lobby there. India also supported President Bill Clinton's decision to attack Baghdad, a move not favored by many Third World countries.

India is an old hand at such games, but now the players are different, the choices are limited and the stakes are very high. Successful economic realignment is just one necessary move.

Washington reminds India that its record on human rights leaves much to be desired, as do its policies toward its smaller neighbors. The Kashmir dispute remains a major irritant in the region, and the Clinton administration is unhappy with New Delhi's unwillingness to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and its latest attempt to acquire nuclear missile technology from Russia.

What was said behind closed doors for years is now being spelled out by Washington in open meetings. The recently concluded Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearings on the confirmation of Robin Raphel as the new U.S. assistant secretary of state for South Asian affairs placed the U.S. cards on the table for all to see.

Explaining the guidelines for her new job, Raphel said: "We view the whole of Kashmir as a disputed territory and therefore its final status has yet to be resolved. . . What we believe is that any resolution to the question, in order for it to be stable, realistic and long-lasting, has to be accepted by the government of India, the government of Pakistan and the people of Kashmir. "

On nuclear proliferation, Raphel said she would seek aggressively to persuade India and Pakistan to "cap, roll back and finally eliminate their nuclear weapons programs." Stating the Clinton administration's regional approach to issues, Raphel said: "We want to move in a multilateral dialogue" for the area, keeping in mind the nuclear capability of the Central Asian republics. She also expressed American concern for the Missiles Control Technologies Regime, which has caused added problems in Indo-U.S.-Russian relations.

M M Ali is a professor at the University of the District of Columbia.