As several hundred thousand Egyptian demonstrators marched through Cairo today to redeem their faith in democracy and oust President Hosni Mubarak, who has ruled that country for 30 years, India finally stopped sitting on the fence and described the staggering protests as an “articulation of the aspirations of the Egyptian people for reform”.
The statement superceded the indifferent comments by External Affairs Minister S M Krishna this morning, who had described the Egyptian uprising as an “internal affair” of that country, even if it tiptoed around the Mubarak name and didn’t refer to him at all.
The fact that the Arab street was exploding in a mass of rage across the region — in the wake of the Tunisian change of leadership last week and the ongoing Egyptian protest, the Jordanian king sacked its prime minister today and Yemen, which is run by a autocratic regime, declared its own “day of rage” protests would take place on Thursday — finally shook Delhi out of its self-imposed reticence and take note of the cataclysmic changes unfolding in West Asia.
Senior government officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, conceded Mubarak had “reached a point of no return, and he would have to go, very soon.” But India, conscious that it had never publicly criticised another country — the last time around it did so was during the Bangladesh crisis in 1971 — seemed to be cautiously preparing for a change of guard in Cairo.
The man most likely to take charge, even if it’s a transitional regime, is Mohammed El-Baradei, a former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, with whom Delhi had worked closely during the whirligig of the Indo-US nuclear deal.
It is debatable whether the ministry’s comments have rescued Delhi from being completely marginalised in that region, especially as India’s economic stakes are indifferent at best, with petroleum and petroleum products worth $1 billion accounting for its annual import bill of $1.7 billion from Egypt last year. The remaining items are coking coal, raw cotton, rock phosphate and marble.
More From This Section
In fact, officials said there was little to be concerned about even on the oil front, as India’s largest oil imports came from Saudi Arabia, which amounted to $12 billion or 18 per cent, out of a total oil bill of $150 billion, while imports from Iran came second at $10 billion, or 14 per cent of the total.
Exports amounted to a lowly $1.4 billion yearly, while officials admitted some Indian investments could be at stake. On top of the list are a carbon black plant by Grasim, an acrylic fibre plant by Aditya Birla, as well as projects by Asian Paints, HDFC, IIFC, Dabur, Tata Motors and Ranbaxy.
Dabur and Marico said they had shut their factories for the duration of the protest.
Government officials conceded the impact of the crisis on trade was minimal, while the Indian business community in Egypt was a small one. In fact, the government seems quite upset with tourists who took advantage of the special Air India flight sent to Cairo on a special request from the Indian community there, because they are refusing to pay their air fare.
Analysts pointed to how the Indian world-view had changed in the last half-century, from the time Jawaharlal Nehru and Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser were founding members of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) in 1961 — and when Israel, egged on by Britain and France, attacked Egypt over the Suez Canal crisis in 1956, Nehru came to Nasser’s support and described the Suez crisis as a “collapse of the world’s conscience” — to the present moment, in which the government was spending much more nervous energy herding a handful of Indian citizens out of Egypt.
The analysts admitted the flash forward was a “rather unfair comparison”, as the world had significantly changed since 1956, NAM had become rather toothless even if it was still around, and that Delhi had become a “far more pragmatic power”.
But with the Arab world going up in flames and the price of oil touching $100 a barrel today, sparking concern of a second Suez crisis which would force ships to take the 6,000-km-longer route around the Cape of Good Hope, India’s top analysts prodded the government to speak up and protect its reputation as a democratic nation.
Chinmaya Gharekhan, a former diplomat and West Asian expert, told Business Standard it was clear from the gathering crowds in Cairo and Alexandria that the “present dispensation cannot last, or even if Mubarak survives, he can’t be the same again, but will be a much diminished figure”. “If in their moment of triumph, if India joins its voice to the political empowerment of the people of Egypt, they will remember,” he said.
Another analyst who sought anonymity pointed out that India needn’t be unduly concerned about offending Mubarak, especially since he had refused to show up in India for 12 long years to accept the Jawaharlal Nehru Prize for International Understanding. Mubarak had been named recipient for the award as long ago as 1995, but failed to find time to come until three years ago, in 2008.
“Clearly, Mubarak had other things to do in his time…why should India be so concerned about a despot like him, when they should be supportive of the Arab street?” the analyst asked.
But Zikrur Rahman, director of the India-Arab centre at the Jamia Millia Islamia University in the capital and a former Indian representative in the Palestinian territories, pointed out that India’s “hands-off” approach to the mounting Egyptian crisis was correct, because although nobody knew who was motivating the demonstrators, there was only one disciplined organisation that had the capacity to do so.
“Is it the Muslim Brotherhood? If it is, and the demonstrators succeed in making Mubarak go, then it stands to reason that the Islamists will come to power. Certainly, a dictatorship is not in the interest of the people of the Egypt, but the question is, who is going to fill that void?” asked Rahman.
With protests also simmering in Yemen, located at the mouth of the Suez, analysts warned that if Islamists took the place vacated by dictators in the region, they could exercise greater control over the Suez Canal.
But Zafarul Islam, the editor of the English-language Milli Gazette, which describes itself as a leading newspaper of the Indian Muslim, felt that as a leader of the region, India should definitely have a view on the crisis.
“To say that we are concerned, but don’t want to get involved, is not enough,” said Islam, adding, “after all, the people are clamouring for their political rights and India, as the largest democracy in the world, should respect that”.
Islam felt India’s influence in West Asia had waned considerably since the days when Nehru and Nasser were friends and India’s name was a moral force in the world. “We may buy about 30 per cent of our petroleum needs from Saudi Arabia and Iran, one a Sunni state and another a Shia country, as many as 3.5 million Indians work in the Arab world, we know that every Arab state is a police state, but we don’t say anything about injustice because nobody listens to us anymore,” he added.
Islam pointed out that Egypt, with 82 million people, was a force of modernity in the Arab world and with the Arab street finally exploding, India would have to either get involved — or remain permanently marginalised.
“The Egyptians are an extremely patient people. They will suffer years of indignity and oppression, but once they are moved and come out on the streets, they will protest until they get justice…India should support Egypt in its hour of need,” Islam added.