The why and what of this faux pas
DR. S. AUSAF SAIED VASFI reads a method in this madness and feels the reality behind this high decibel spat lies elsewhere.
The latest from Washington is that the State Department has rejected New Delhi’s demand to withdraw the alleged visa fraud charges against Ms Devyani Khobragade and tender an unqualified apology for mistreating her. On the other hand, the External Affairs Minister, Mr. Salman Khurshid struck a conciliatory note by saying Indo-US bilateral relations are valuable for the country.
We have a hunch that the reality behind the recent strain is elsewhere. The alleged misconduct of the Indian Deputy Consul at New York is not the real issue. Factors behind the high decibel spat appear to be different. But the curtain has yet to be raised. It may take time. The following curtain-raiser, however, may help the readers in somewhat understanding the United States of America.
MODEL HYPOCRITE
If you intend to arrive at right conclusions on matters related to the ‘constable-in-chief’, i.e. America, remember that it has the oft-repeated two faces, two tongues and two approaches – one for America and the other for non-America. This unipolar Frankenstein is a model hypocrite. Behind the smokescreen of makeup, Washington has a hideous face. It is with none. It is only with itself. It is with its own insatiable, mercantile interests and targets. For the sake of decency, the US usually calls those interests as ‘strategic’. For its interests and objectives, America shows no respect for international covenants, pacts and agreements. To evade accountability, it also refuses to enter into agreements.
India does not happen to be on the priority list of the United States. It is perhaps India that needs the United States; Washington does not need New Delhi.
ARGUMENT
In the context of the Devyani Khobragade case, the strongest argument of Bharat against the US is it has flouted the provisions of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, adopted by the US in 1963. The US has interpreted this Convention selectively at home and liberally abroad. This duplicity helps the United States with freeing its spies and contractors.
As the international order is not rule-based, world security remains on nine pins. It is fair to recall that the late lamented, the League of Nations could not succeed simply because financially strong nations did or could not punish the flouters of the international law.
SOME QUESTIONS
Can the United States convince the world why it has not signed the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the 1997 UN Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Criminal Court Statue and the Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of the Water Resources?
Add to it the US invasions on Iraq, Afghanistan and the ever continuing drone attacks on Afghanistan and Pakistan territories.
The circle would remain incomplete without referring to regime change in the Sudan, in Algeria and more recently in Egypt. Syria escaped this perfidy by the skin of the teeth. But Libya was not that fortunate.
Cyber warfare and mass surveillance rather bugging of nation’s important offices is in the blood of America. Not long ago, the United States bugged through cyber technology the Indian Mission in the United States. Is it legal? Is it moral? Has it UN sanction? We are at a loss to understand the logic behind this head-strung US attitude. The civilized world rather the world-minus-America is not prepared to believe that the United States is above law.
US MEDIA
The media in the United States, and regretfully so, did not care for the plight of Ms Khobragade. No paper gave editorial importance to her misery. Not many papers carried the story that had not the honour of double-column treatment. The New York Times said: “It is not unusual in India for domestic staff to be paid poorly and be required to work more than 60 hours a week; they are sometimes treated abominably. Reports of maids being imprisoned or abused by their employers are frequent,” said Gardiner Harris in his NYT report adding, “The idea of a middle class woman being arrested or ordered to disrobe is seen as shocking.”
Getting down to brass tacks: Before fretting and fuming over the horrendous mistreatment of the Indian Deputy Consul at New York on November 12, let us also be cocksure that her case is sound and can withstand legal scrutiny. We are afraid the elegant lady has erred somewhere. According to the reports, the US State Department had alerted in writing the embassy over there in September this year that there were allegations against the diplomat concerning underpayment of minimum wages and non-compliance and that action could be imminent under the US laws.
Ms Khobragade’s alleged maltreatment is not the lone case. Earlier too such incidents have taken place. According to a press report, Ms Neena Malhotra, in 2012 was charged by the United States with paying less than the stipulated salary to her help. The result was she was asked to pay a $1 million-plus restitution to the domestic assistant.
GRAVE CHARGES
It goes without saying that the charge levelled by India’s Foreign Minister is quite grave. It is so loaded that it may turn the tables in Washington. Mr Salman Khurshid has said confidently that the US has virtually “colluded” with Sangeeta Richard to help her and her family’s migration to America. The Minister also accused the US of “fraud” by granting her family visas.
Ms Devyani had been “trapped” in a “conspiracy”, said Mr Salman, who obviously cannot make an irresponsible statement in public.
The talking point of all this is a telephone that the Deputy Consul received saying: Settle the matter with Ms Richard by paying her compensation running into thousands of dollars and also steps to facilitate her permanent stay in the US. This telephone came after the diplomat reported to the police that her maid had absconded in June this year.
What Mr Khurshid added is equally obnoxious. He said: “A charade is going on behind our backs to fully facilitate and enable the illegal immigration of the entire family.”
This is the attitude of the United States. What has been India’s attitude towards the United States? New Delhi consistently kept America in the loop about Ms Richard.
INTRIGUING
Also intriguing is the US police role which refused to register a complaint of extortion by the victim. What is the why and what of this faux pas?
The truth is that the United States cares a fig for Indian dignitaries. It looks as if disrespect, disregard and calculated insults run into the blood of the security forces of the United States. India’s former Head of the State, Dr. Abdul Kalam fell their victim. Other personalities including George Fernandes, Azam Khan, Kamal Haasan, Shah Rukh Khan, Amir Khan and John Abraham were frisked and humiliated at the U.S. airports. This attitude has a method. And we read a method in this madness.
We see a glimpse of madness in the behaviour of those who dealt with Ms Divyani, who was subjected to utter humiliation. We are inclined to believe that it was deliberate and motivated. We fail to appreciate the rationale of handcuffing her, strip-searching her, cavity-searching her, DNA-swabbing her, locking her up in jail allegedly meant by prostitutes and drug traffickers.
This is the country, infatuation of which compelled the revered and respected Dr. Manmohan Singh, our Prime Minister, to virtually mortgage our sovereignty over a more-than-a-billion strong Bharat to the United States on the nuclear issue.