Just finished reading @dhume's fact-free, logic-free, muddled, confused piece on @SushmaSwaraj. Author says a lot of things, some times contradicting himself, but in the end provides zero evidence for his argument. Let's take this apart one by one!
opens his piece by saying qualities of a gret foreign minister are a deep interest in world affairs and a sense of your country's place in it. Does the column give any evidence to show that @SushmaSwaraj does not have these traits? Answer is no.
Third para goes into a flashback to none other Jaswant Singh. Author says Jaswants use of De Gaulle showed he knew Indias place in the world like De Gaulle and therefore was able to stand up to us bullying. But is that really the case? After nuclear blasts in 1998
the entire country was united. Vajpayee and Advani knew why the tests were important and would not have caved in anyway. So did Jaswant Singh get his courage to act on his own or was he just reiterating/articulating something entire country, including political..
establishment felt. After all, Jaswant Singh even if he wanted to could not have acted alone. But Dhume doesn't spare any time for such nuances. Fourth para goes into issue of trust. Jaswant Singh enjoyed Vajpayee's trust so he was a great foreign minister. If so,
what were Jaswant Singh's great accomplishments. We don't know as Dhume doesn't say. Probably there were very few. Point is a successful foreign policy is one where a country talks in one voice and is able to present a united front on global issues. Needless to say
Modi govts messaging on foreign policy issues has been united and they have indeed spoken in one voice. So if Jaswant was able to convey Vajpayee's thinking, why isnt @SushmaSwaraj unable to do so give that Modis foreign policy articulation has been far tighter?
Dhume doesn't say so. We are unable to understand why @SushmaSwaraj is unable to convey Modis thinking despite being a member of core team and a member of CCS? No evidence is provided to back up such claims. The rest of the piece is hilarious as Dhume takes a sharp
turn into completely uncharted waters. He talks about longevity conveniently forgetting that his idol Jaswant Singh did not stay very long in his job! Sergei Lavrov is held up as an example here but Lavrovs term has hardly been without failures and controversies.
An ill-advised foray into Ukraine, serious break with USA over election meddling and problems with western Europe are hardly examples of successful foreign policy accomplishments! Secondly, what makes Dhume think that long serving foreign ministers are automatically
successful. Kissinger served only two terms but was very successful! Gromyko was around much longer but did the Cold War detente and nuclear accords really his accomplishments without Reagan and Gorbys inputs? Very weak point!
What takes the cake is really the comparison with Pakistan's Shahibzada Yakub Khan, Zia-ul-Haqs foreign minister. Dhume argues that he is South Asias greatest foreign minister in the last 70 years and attributes to him such great feats like acquisition of nuclear
weapons and successfully bending US anti-Soviet funding to his designs. What Dhume is really saying is that Khan's Pakistan did a very good job of stealing American money and weapons meant for fight against Soviet Union for it's own nefarious purpose (Read the jihad in Kashmir)
How is that even an accomplishment or a success. Pakistan has become a jihadi hotbed becoz of its support for Taliban with it's economy in ruins. Now, it's relations with USA are endangered and it faces the prospect of prolonged American boycott and ostracization.
But according to Dhume, somehow it is a successful policy! How? How does illegal acquisition of nuclear weapons on the global black market a success! This Illegal acquisition violated all global norms and If Khan's is the father of his policy or one of the originators
he should be condemned. Not praised as South Asias successful foreign minister! One dead give away of what Dhume is really getting at is in this line where he says that Khan's speaks seven foreign languages. This is what appears to be getting Dhumes goat. Khan, Jaswant
are erudite while Sushma can only speak Hindi! Dhumes case against Sushma is really weak. His argument really is that she is all the time on Twitter! Really! What evidence does he provide to show that she is not doing her job and is all the time on social media. Any quotes
from MEA officials, jt secretaries, secretary for instance? No. Any quotes from global leaders? No. Any examples of Indias foreign policy failures directly attributable to Sushma? No. So whats is his case really? That she can't speak French or Persian and is not as erudite
as Khan or Jaswant! Amazing! I have no words to express opinion on this erudite piece of scholarship! Sushma works on Twitter a lot to showcase the services help that MEA provides to Indian citizens. Is that wrong? Is there any evidence to show that this is cutting
into her work at the MEA? Dhume should provide evidence if he has! Helping Pakistan citizens in their hour of need is bad? So what if the country foreign minister dies that? I think a case against her can only be made out if we can show that she is neglecting MEA work while
doing all this. Otherwise, everything else is hearsay and gossip. I think if Pak citizens are happy with Sushmas reach out, India would have earned a lot of goodwill. And that should ideally be good news for those who want people to people contact! India is showing
it's generous heart and nature despite all the problems we have why is that not good enough. I am willing to accept that Sushma is a weak foreign minister only if somebody can show that she is not doing her real work at the MEA. Admittedly, things will be different
under Modi who takes a far greater degree of interest in foreign affairs, is hands on, and has his own ideas about policy and strategy. A foreign minister in such a situation naturally plays second fiddle. But a country's foreign policy should be assessed on
whether it has been successful in accomplishing its goals and on how the world perceives it's role and position and is willing to work with it. Dhume provides no analysis of that. His piece is just Sushma bashing, nothing else!
