A little over a month into his second tenure, US President Donald Trump is making news by the minute, so to speak. Within hours of taking over he signed over 20 executive orders: more than any US president in the past had on day one. That said, he also started by rescinding 78 executive orders approved by his predecessor Joe Biden during his presidential tenure. Of the 80-odd executive orders that Trump signed, the one on sending back illegal migrants directly affected India and Indians.
On a first head-count, illegal immigrants numbered around 18,000. Of these, three plane loads have already been sent back. But how? They were chained and shackled; not allowed to even move through the long flight. Worse still, the Sikhs were not allowed to wear their turbans: their religious identity.
After the first lot of Indians landed in Punjab, there was mayhem in Parliament. The Opposition parties tore into the ruling dispensation demanding answers from the Narendra Modi government on why those deported had been treated so shabbily. Union External Affairs Minister Dr S Jaishankar’s statement on the floor of the House did little to assuage feelings.
However, when Prime Minister Narendra Modi embarked on his much-publicized US visit within a month of President Trump taking over, it was expected that the beer hug would be followed by India raising concerns about the treatment meted out to Indians who had been deported.
For record, India’s position on illegal migrants is clear: India is ready to take back the citizens of India if they are staying in the US illegally. In fact, this is an assurance Modi gave during his recent visit to the USA: “Those who stay in other countries illegally do not have any legal right to be there. If they live in the US illegally, India is ready to take them back,” Modi had then said.
There is both dismay and anger at the US policy on illegal migrants. The deportation of undocumented Indian nationals sent back in shackles on a US military flight sparked, to put it mildly, an outrage in India. It also hurt Modi and the country’s image for its failure to stand up for the dignity of its citizens. It was less about their coming back, but more about the inhumane treatment they had received.
This is an angst that former foreign secretary and later India’s ambassador to the US Nirupama Rao shared in an exclusive interview with this writer even as she discussed a wide range of issues following the much hyped and recently concluded Trump-Modi meeting: “The manner in which (illegal migrants) were sent back was not in consonance with the way human beings should be treated. They are not criminals; yes, they have broken the law and for that they are being sent back, but to treat them in the manner that the US did was over the top” Rao said.
Having said that Rao was confident that the matter would have been taken up during closed door discussions given that “everything that is discussed between leaders” is not necessarily in the public domain.
Responding to the question that if that was the case then there should have been concrete evidence of better treatment in the group of migrants that followed; in fact, the second and third lot that came back, the Sikhs reportedly were not allowed to wear turbans: their religious identity, Rao said: “It is unfortunate that there was a repeat and I think this is an occasion for us to state our position and say that we are extremely disturbed to see our own citizens being treated in this manner. It has caused a lot of distress to us and we must articulate this publicly,” she said, adding that the US needs to be “sensitive” as also understand what the impact would be on the feelings of the people here.
Rao agreed that the situation was “not good optics” stating that there is “a legitimate reason” for India to take up the issue “once again” with the US government:
“Despite our conveying our concerns to the Americans they have indulged in a repeat which is unfortunate. The sentiment and emotions of ordinary people are hurt by this so there is a legitimate reason for us to take it up once again. We should speak out and make it known that the migrants need not be in shackles”.
Granting that the US policy necessitated that illegal immigrants should be chained and shackled, Rao said: “Even if they were in shackles while leaving the US, once they had boarded the aircraft, the shackles should have been removed. Once the doors are closed, they are not going to jump out of the plane,” Rao said.
More importantly, it was important for India to “demonstrate to the world that India stands for its people”, Rao said: “We should make it known that we are concerned that our nationals were deported in this manner,” Rao said.
Angst apart, she did not agree that India was, on this count, “shortchanged”.
If anything, she described the visit as one that had “both success and symbolism”, in addition to the excellent chemistry between the two leaders: “You saw the good chemistry between both of them; there was excellent communication between both and the impression one came away with is that the Indo-US strategic partnership is in good hands and the relationship is poised for a very positive trajectory in the next four years”, Rao said adding that the visit “achieved the aims that it sought to achieve”.
The visit she said was one that was to “reaffirm and reconnect” with President Trump. She hoped that this would pave the way for “more such contact and communication” between the two countries: “President Trump is a person who is unpredictable, transactional and opportunistic and we have to respond to all this in a smart and calibrated way,” Rao said.
A seasoned diplomat, Rao did not see any “instant gratification” from such visits on grounds that diplomacy is “an ongoing process”.
Therefore, to talk of what the US gained and India lost, was kind of misplaced: “It is not like what is the basket he (Modi) brought back from Washington; what are the goodies he brought back, that is not how diplomacy is transacted. This is not a profit and loss statement that we have to draw up losses and gains, we have to be adaptable and nimble in our footwork when we engage in our diplomacy,” Rao cautioned.
On the contentious issues of trade tariffs and the US ending up selling to India more than it actually bought, Rao said: “I don’t look at it that way. It is not as if the USA foisted this on us and we are in a no-choice position. We are a sovereign country and we will make our own decisions, America or no America. As for imports, we have been importing liquefied natural gas from the US and always felt we could use more. There were constraints on their side so we have to wait and see how the policy measures work out. As for the aircraft, it is not on the drawing board at least yet,” she said. Referring to the F-35 fighter jets that India would be buying from the US, Rao cautioned: “In governance, statements are made at a political level and then they have to be translated into action by the bureaucracy. So let us not jump to conclusions that we are buying from them; they are forcing us to accept these things. I think that would be rather premature.”
On her part she saw the visit as “mutually beneficial” and hoped a quid pro quo: “If the US seeks concession on trade tariffs, there is no reason why India cannot seek concessions on visa policy, cut the long wait and seek easier procedures and so on. Rather than looking at it as a strictly regimented trade negotiation, India can, while giving concessions on trade, seek concessions in other areas. It is an interconnected relationship in so many ways, therefore the key is to create the right balance,” Rao said.
Describing the visit as “fruitful”, Rao summed up: “The door has been opened and the future is waiting to come in. We have to wait and watch and see how it unfolds in the next few months. It is yet too early to assess outcomes or conclude what we have gained or lost”.
—The writer is an author, journalist and political commentator