ELECTIONS '98
COMMENTARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ARCHIVES

Sex, Lies and Videotape

I had the dubious pleasure of being in the US during the airing of the Clinton Grand Jury testimony videotapes -- and it was amazing how much my American colleagues and friends focused on this sordid affair. It is clearly in the same category as the OJ Simpson trial in terms of US public interest. Personally, while I am sorry that the man has brought disgrace and dishonour to the office of the US president, I am also entertained by his verbal callisthenics.

For he was the one who originated the infamous "I smoked, but I did not inhale" defence -- an early warning of a not-so-charming economy with the truth? Now his protestations that he, technically speaking, did not have sexual intercourse with Monica Lewinsky, are quite hilarious. Gives new meaning to the term 'deconstruction' -- sex, like beauty, is in the eyes of the beholder.

As the famed 'Comeback Kid', Clinton may yet bounce back. I wish he would, instead, go "gentle into that good night," sparing his family and his nation the humiliation. Alas, I doubt he will, for it is neither in his nature nor indeed in his best selfish interests. He wants to finish out the two more years of his term, and walk off into the sunset secure in the knowledge that there will be a Clinton Presidential Library, a Clinton Presidential pension, etc.

Clinton's chutzpah is admirable, but in this instance, he should let the interests of his country override his personal selfish interests. For, given his increasing preoccupation with fighting for survival, foreign policy will get no attention. And Madeleine Albright, US secretary of state, has been an absolute disaster -- no progress in West Asia, the Irish 'Troubles' still worrisome, collapsing peace in the Balkans, Clinton's pet Non-Proliferation in tatters.

Yes, Clinton should resign for the sake of the US presidency. But it is also amusing to consider the peccadilloes of some of his most strident opponents, those self-proclaimed upholders of 'values' -- for example, Dan Burton, Helen Chenoweth and Henry Hyde. It was wonderful to watch these worthies squirm as their own ignoble sexual histories were laid bare in the full glare of the public spotlight, and they had to eat their words of sanctimoniousness.

The spectacle of Dan Burton wriggling was especially sweet, in my opinion, because this Indiana Republican has been the king of India-baiters on Capitol Hill. For reasons that are not entirely clear, Burton has been the darling of Pakistanis, 'Khalistani' and Kashmiri secessionists. And he has been rolling out, year after year, his pet anti-India amendment that he would attach to some Appropriations Bill in the US Congress. And get thrashed roundly.

For several years, I have been unhappy about Burton and his stance against India. This year, I thought Burton might have received a boost from the general anti-Pokhran sentiment in the US. However, it appears as though Burton has given up -- perhaps as the result of his own troubles, he has decided not to do go through with his annual ritual of India-bashing. So I suppose in some oblique way, Clinton's troubles have helped India's cause.

So that is the sex and videotape part; of course the lies are at the heart of the matter, as in Steve Soderbergh's movie Sex, Lies and Videotape which caused such a sensation a few years ago, winning the La Palme d'Or at Cannes and introducing the sultry Laura San Giacomo and the soulful Andie McDowell (although, in hindsight, the film is rather forgettable). The lies part, it turns out, come not only from Clinton, but from his good friends the Chinese as well.

The new Chinese ambassador to India came a-calling to present his credentials; he made the usual noises about how his country wants world peace and wishes to end world hunger and all that good stuff. But then he suggested with an air of injured innocence that India has not been 'nice' to China; whereas China of course has done everything possible to be nice to India.

Why, for instance, quoth he, we are even prepared to recognise Sikkim as a part of India! Better late than never, I suppose -- it's been only, what, some twenty-five years? I personally feel totally overwhelmed with gratitude that the to-be-Great-Power-in-the-neighborhood has deigned to note the little fact that Sikkim acceded peacefully to India.

I think India should return the favour, in the interests of good neighborliness. Let's see -- now what can India recognise? How about Hong Kong? Yes, indeed, in the interest of good relations with China, India should recognise that Hong Kong is part of China! Quid pro quo, right?

Exactly what else has China done for the sake of good relations with India? For instance, during the CTBT negotiations in 1996, it was China that insisted on the infamous 'entry into force' clause. That is, effectively China ensured that the CTBT would not become effective until India signed it. This is a blatant contravention of Vienna Convention rules that no sovereign nation can be forced to adhere to a treaty it did not wish to sign. So much for making nice.

Then, of course, there are the apologists for China, and lately, for the Taliban. India's Marxists crow that India is about to fall apart, but they don't see that China is equally at risk -- ethnic minorities (10% of the population) control 40% of the land. And the pretzel logic of those who justify the Taliban's acts is truly breathtaking. These armchair theorists should be sent on all-expense-paid six-month sabbaticals to Chinese gulags or Taliban terrorist camps.

There are plenty of other lies too: for instance, there was the sudden appearance (and equally sudden disappearance) of an alleged defector from Pakistan's nuclear establishment -- one Chaudhury who claimed that Pakistan was about to go to war with India. Pure disinformation, as it turns out -- but entirely in keeping with the US' insistence that South Asia is a 'flashpoint'. That particular disinformation campaign didn't work, so Chaudhury vanished without a trace.

Now there's a new one -- some unknown academic in the US has claimed that the May nuclear blasts by both India and Pakistan were faked. Well, this is great news, indeed! If this is the case, then why, the US should feel free to immediately withdraw its sanctions on both countries, and we can all go back to being One Big Happy Family.

In addition to the likely nexus between the intelligence community and the media in the US, this particular incident shows another widespread and unappealing characterestic of the Western response to India -- the belief that Indians are incapable of doing anything advanced: Indians "just don't get no respect." This is part of the prejudice against India, fuelled by all those Indian journalists who revel in sensationalistic, negative stories about the country.

And prejudice is definitely rampant. There is an obscure Canadian journalist who purports to be an 'International Broadcaster and Columnist' (I wonder, am I one too?) and whose mailing list I happen to be on. He is firmly of the opinion that China and the Islamic world can do no wrong -- the root of all evil is India. His rationalisations of China's and the Taliban's actions are masterpieces of twisted logic. Clearly he is unaware of Huntington's thesis about a Sino-Islamic axis arrayed against the West.

Speaking of mailing lists, I am on one on that is thoroughly PoCo (politically correct). Some of the people there are PoCo PoCo (politically correct post-colonialist); the brave ones are even PoCo PoCo PoMo (post-modernist, too). Whatever all these terms mean. Makes for interesting reading, anyway. Unhappily, the PoCos -- frequently fundies in their own way -- find it hard to separate the lies from the truth. Lies are more entertaining than truth, I suppose, as in the Clintonian saga.

How Readers reacted to Rajeev Srinivasan's columns

Rajeev Srinivasan