Opinion - Leader Page Articles   

On to the world stage via the Commonwealth

In the next weeks, the Commonwealth will elect a new Secretary-General to replace Don McKinnon whose term ends in March 2008, and for the first time India is in with a chance to head this 53-nation body of former British colonies in what could mark its debut as a serious player on the world stage. With the non-aligned movement, effectively, in limbo and early prospects of winning a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council still elusive, a place on the top tabl e in the Commonwealth offers the best — and a comparatively easy — chance for New Delhi to play a more visible political role in international affairs in keeping with its new profile as an emerging economic power.

Kamalesh Sharma, India’s High Commissioner to Britain and New Delhi’s official candidate for the top Commonwealth job, has emerged as a strong contender after the Malaysian nominee, Rais Yatim, withdrew making it virtually a two-horse race between him and Malta’s Foreign Minister Michael Frendo.

The third contender, Mohan Kaul, Secretary-General of the Commonwealth Business Council (CBC), is regarded as a bit of an outsider though he claims that a number of countries have already “committed” support to him. A common perception is that he is contesting simply to raise his profile with an eye on the future but his supporters say — and this is also acknowledged by independent observers — that as head of the CBC he has played an important role in bringing foreign investment to a number of smaller countries, especially in Africa and the Caribbean. And that might stand him in good stead when he goes out to seek their vote. “He has done a lot of work and has strong support in the Caribbean,” an observer familiar with his work said.

There is some resentment in the official Indian camp that Dr. Kaul, though a British citizen, is promoting himself as an Indian candidate. This is causing confusion as the impression has gone round that there are two Indian candidates and that a vote for either of them would be a vote for India. Apparently, on occasions, Mr. Sharma has been forced to clarify that there is only one official Indian candidate — and that’s him. But the perception that an Indian is an Indian, whether or not he has a “sarkari” tag, persists.

However, the real threat to Mr. Sharma is not from another Indian but from Mr. Frendo who is appealing to other small island nations on grounds that their interests and concerns are similar to those of Malta’s.

The election is scheduled to be held at the three-day Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) in Kampala, Uganda which starts on November 23. But in the coming weeks, efforts are likely to be made to build a consensus around one of the two main candidates rather than force an election to avoid divisions. The argument is that whoever is chosen must be seen as having the confidence of the full membership of the organisation instead of being seen as a factional candidate.

The big question, of course, is who will be sacrificed at the altar of consensus. The assumption in pro-India circles is that, given India’s stature and the momentum of its campaign, the axe will fall on Malta which will be persuaded to withdraw. But, equally, India can find itself at the wrong end of a consensus if Malta comes up trumps in the numbers game. Some believe that a “consensus” would be seen as a fudge to ensure an Indian victory and is likely to undermine the smaller nations’ faith in the Commonwealth. A more fundamental objection to an opaque consensus is that it is undemocratic. It is argued that the head of the Commonwealth should not only be elected democratically but also seen to be elected democratically.

Inevitably, there will be behind-the-scenes manoeuvring nearer the time of the election but with two months to go it is still early days for deal-making. On current reading, India appears to have an edge and one highly-placed Indian source described the mood in New Delhi as one of “guarded optimism.” Certainly, it would not be for want of trying in case Mr. Sharma is not able to make it. He has led a strong campaign and already visited close to 20 Commonwealth capitals to lobby support, earning enough air miles to last him a lifetime.

The government, too, is going flat out to avert another humiliating Tharoor “moment” when the Indian support for Shashi Tharoor failed to win him the top job at the U.N. The Indian campaign has impressed Commonwealth watchers, one of whom described it as the “best of the lot.”

Wan Saiful Wan Jan, Director General of the independent “Malaysia Think Tank London,” said India had run a very effective campaign. “From what I hear, India has been working to get the backing of SAARC countries in the Commonwealth as well as of Commonwealth African countries via NEPAD (New Partnership for Africa’s Development),” he said criticising his own country’s approach which eventually led it to withdraw from the contest altogether.

Why exactly Malaysia withdrew is not clear. One explanation is that the government is in the midst of celebrating the 50th anniversary of the country’s independence and Mr. Rais, who is Culture Minister, has his hands full. The gossip, however, is that he was deterred by the amount of travelling that the Commonwealth job demands. One Malaysian source dismissed it as “absolute nonsense.”

But there is a great deal of disappointment in Malaysian circles as Kuala Lumpur is seen to have missed an important opportunity to play a more proactive role in world affairs. Mr. Jan said after the “shambolic” Malaysian campaign, he was not surprised that Mr. Rais had withdrawn. But he was deeply disappointed.

“It is disappointing because this was perhaps the best chance we had to take a leading role in such a major world body. This is Asia’s turn to lead the organisation and many in the Commonwealth had been expecting Malaysia to field a strong campaign. If we had done that, we would have been the favourites to win. But we came into the race very late and our lacklustre attitude forced us to play catch-up rather than lead the campaign. At times, it made me ask whether we were really serious about it,” he said.

Now that Malaysia itself is not in the race, would it back India?

“I hope so. It is Asia’s turn and since we have missed the bus ourselves, we should make sure that India gets in. Moreover, Mr. Sharma is a well-known figure and will make a good Secretary-General,” he said.

India’s own campaign is also built around the argument that it is Asia’s turn to lead the Commonwealth and that the Indian record on democracy and “good governance” (a claim which many dispute) makes it eminently suitable to run the organisation. Indian supporters also point to its growing engagement with the Commonwealth. The fact that today it is one of the fourth largest contributors to the Commonwealth is cited as a “proof” of its commitment to its goals.

Critics, though, dismiss it as a “self-serving” argument and see the Indian candidacy as essentially aimed at using the Commonwealth as a stepping stone. A senior Commonwealth official pointed out that for years, India’s attitude towards the Commonwealth was one of benign neglect and there was a time when it did not even care to send its head of state to CHOGM. But he welcomed India’s desire to take a more proactive interest in the Commonwealth. Better late than ever, even if the reasons may be entirely self-serving. More importantly, at a time when the Commonwealth often appears divided along racial lines the fact that India enjoys goodwill across the white/non-white divide should help.

So, how do the numbers stack up?

Besides a host of African countries and, at least, Britain among the Big Four white nations, India is relying heavily on the support of SAARC countries, including Pakistan, though hawks in Islamabad would not have forgotten that New Delhi supported its suspension from the Commonwealth in 1999 after Pervez Musharraf seized power in a military coup. But Pakistan appears to be in a forgiving mood and is understood to have informally assured India: “hum aap ke saath hain (we’re with you)”.

So far so good. But ultimately, it is the smaller countries that hold the key. There are as many as 32 of them — united by a common distrust of big powers such as India. And if they decide to go with the fellow “small” Malta, they can yet upset India’s calculations. Small may be beautiful but if they get together they can wreck the party.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

From heir apparent to heir manifest
A weak-kneed surrogate
On to the world stage via the Commonwealth
Corrections and clarifications
Africa’s new rolling news channel
Reality check
Judicial intolerance
Dangerous escalation
“India has been impressive in applying space technology to development”

Copyright © 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu