The forthcoming elections of 05 November in the US are being globally observed. The US has a bad habit of commenting on other democracies, finding imaginary flaws, simultaneously ignoring its own shortcomings. While it openly interferes in elections and pushes regime change in nations, it accuses others of interference in its electoral process, even when there are none. In this age of social media, narrative building is expected from both, allies and adversaries, and will remain the norm, even if termed as interference.
While India has progressed to EVMs which have been globally appreciated, the US remains in the dark ages by sticking to paper ballots. It claims that its population permits it to continue with the system. India moved to EVMs to prevent booth capturing and ballot stuffing. In the US, fake ballots and burning of ballot boxes is regularly reported, including in the present elections. There are already complaints of polling officials shutting polling booths hours before closure time to restrict specific voter groups.
In most nations, proof of identity is essential before a vote is cast, thereby ensuring that only legitimate nationals of the country select their elected representative. Not so in the US, where the intent is to exploit illegal immigrants’ votes for specific party gains. Wonder which democracy is flawed as also legal loopholes are more exploited, India or the US. India invited global representatives to witness the world’s largest democratic global exercise, its elections, displaying fairness and vibrancy. Will the US reciprocate?
The US government claims to adhere 'strongly' to principles of freedom of speech. When questioned on protection being provided to Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, head of the so-called Sikhs for Justice movement, on his threats to Indian assets including its airlines, the US ambassador to India, Eric Garcetti, in a media interview, mentioned, ‘We always tell our Indian friends to focus on crimes. And when we focus on crimes, as opposed to opinions, we are able to see progress.’ His implication was that Pannun was only voicing an opinion. He added that Washington launches investigations whenever Indian consulates are attacked.
A write-up in FBI news dated 05 October 2018, warns the public by mentioning, 'Issuing a threat—even over social media, via text message, or through e-mail—is a federal crime. Those who post or send these threats can receive up to five years in federal prison, or they can face state or local charges.' The article also lists a series of incidents where individuals have been jailed for periods ranging from 12 to 24 months for fake bomb threats.
Wonder if there are different laws in the US for those threatening other nations’ assets and individuals versus those of the US. Possibly threatening to target Indian airlines as also offering awards to assassinate its political leaders is 'freedom of speech', while emailing false threats on US soil is a federal offence.
Maybe the ambassador has never heard of Ridhi Patel a 28- year-old, Indian-American student. She has been accused on 16 felony counts and jailed on suspicion of eight more. Bail has been denied. Her charges include 'intending to terrorize with threats' as also threatening city officials 'during a pro-Palestine speech.' There was 'no violence' just threats in her impassioned speech.
Only because those she threatened were US city officials, she is behind bars, while Pannun offering rewards for assassinating Indian leaders as also destroying its aircraft is protected under freedom of speech. Wonder if Garcetti realizes how illogical are his comments.
The Indian consulate was attacked by so-called Khalistan activists twice last year. The first was in March and the second in July. Eric Garcetti mentioned that the US is investigating the attacks. He was backing the statement of the FBI Director, Christopher Wary, who commented during his visit to the Indian National Investigative Agency (NIA), that the FBI is 'aggressively investigating' the incident.
What Garcetti failed to mention was that the NIA had through its CCTV cameras identified the individuals involved with the incident and shared details of the same with the FBI. Surprisingly, there has been no further progress. Not a single individual from the list has been questioned till date. If it takes the FBI this long to push through an investigation where evidence has been provided, then the agency either possesses poor investigative capabilities or has no intent to investigate. Possibly the Indian consulate is the lowest level of priority in the US, contrary to Garcetti's comments.
Simultaneously, Garcetti wants India to act against those whom they 'claim' were behind the plot to assassinate Pannun. He added that the US desires accountability from India. He mentioned, 'Not just say it won't happen in the future but that those who were involved will be held accountable'. Is accountability a one-way traffic, Mr Garcetti. At the same time, Washington ignores the fact that it is amongst the few nations that have assassinated their adversaries, whether it be al Qaeda leaders or Iranian citizens, and then proudly announced the same from the White House.
The same Pannun, who threatens Indian assets, subsequently files a court case against Indian government officials and there is not a peep from any US government official. A similar case against the US company, National Carbide, behind the Bhopal Gas tragedy, has gone unpunished and ignored for almost half a century, simply because the US defends its culprits and refuses to extradite them.
The US has filed charges against ex-RAW officer Vikas Yadav and would in the future demand India extradite him to face legal proceedings in their country. At the same time, it refuses to deport David Headley, responsible for the Mumbai terror attacks on account of his negotiated plea. Simultaneously, there are 61 extradition requests pending with the US over the past two decades.
The US expects its allies to follow its approach to global issues, including the Russia-Ukraine war. It further demands that in case it imposes unilateral sanctions, legal or illegal not being an issue, all must adhere to them. India's disagreeing resulted in tensions between the two.
Washington questioned New Delhi's ties to Russia as also its oil procurements. It disliked the fact that India adopts an independent foreign policy. As Garcetti mentioned in a seminar in July, 'it (India-US relationship) is not yet deep enough that we take it for granted from the Indian side.' The Indian government rightly ignored his biased comments.
While the US points fingers at others, it is time that it looks within. India is amongst the few nations that would never be cowed down by US threats, nor will it bother about loose comments by their ambassador Eric Garcetti.
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are those of the writer. The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of ETV Bharat)
