From the beginning of the meet at Seoul, the Chinese leadership focused on the US. The fact remains that China successfully stared down the US in Seoul from trying to control the nuclear order. Till now it used to be exclusive domain of America which defined the rules of the game but in Seoul, China used the American stick to beat the participating nations.

The Seoul development exposed the importance of US President, Barack Obama in the global arena. Little doubt he has lost the charisma of the rock star. In 2008 the same person was looked at with awe and reverence. For obvious reasons China used the opportunity to further consolidate its stand and position among the global fraternity. During a plenary session of the NSG from June 23-24, 2016, India’s bid to join it was rejected.

Leading the naysayers was China, along with three countries which have strong positions on nuclear non-proliferation — Ireland, Austria and New Zealand. Mexico also pressed for a “criteria-based process” for allowing non-NPT members into the NSG, along with Switzerland, Brazil and Turkey. What came as a shock was the stand of Mexico, Ireland and Switzerland as they had promised support during Narendra Modi’s visit a few weeks ago. Brazil was also a surprise since India counted it in its “support column”.

Intriguingly, the Obama administration did not prevail upon or suggest its friend countries such as New Zealand, Ireland, Switzerland and Austria to come fully on board to isolate China. The presence of these “conscientious” objectors allowed China to play procedural games with style. In fact they hid behind the China wall. It is for the US to clarify the position, but it is also a fact and there are many examples when Washington secured support of these countries when that was necessary for the US even if that was contrary to those countries’ interests.

Undeniably, India’s failure to get a place has simply undermined its prestige in the World but also questioned the efficacy of the government’s ability to secure international support on vital issues. It is a known fact that Austria, New Zealand, Ireland, Mexico and Switzerland are amenable to firm US diplomacy, but were allowed to play into China's hands and buttress its opposition by raising procedural issues. China was allowed to inflict a diplomatic defeat on India.

Little doubt this single episode has added to the strength of China and will help reverberate its power play across globe and particularly in Asia. America’s vacillation is also a calculated move to pit India against China and seek commitment from India against the rising Chinese threat in the Asia-Pacific region. China scored over the US in a forum established by the US and dominated by it for decades. If China could block the US, it also raises questions about America's capacity to checkmate Beijing elsewhere, not only in the South China Sea.

It would be wrong to say that Obama couldn’t keep his promise to Prime Minister Narendra Modi on the NSG. Instead the fact is USA was not willing to help the Indian cause. The Obama administration had promised India a berth even after being aware that India was not a signatory to NPT. It also knew that India was opposed to the Paris climate agreement. Naturally in this backdrop the USA should have either told Indian in plain words that it would not support its claim or used its power to push through India’s case. The USA did not adhere to the minimum political ethic. It is worth mentioning that Obama was not enthusiastic as was George Bush about India on the nuclear issue. Barely two months ago he equated India and Pakistan’s nuclear programmes at the Nuclear Security Summit and implied they were moving in the “wrong direction”.

True enough, India was back-stabbed and abandoned by its friends. Countries previously committed to India made a last-minute U-turn while the United States refused to fight for India as it had in 2008. The diplomatic failure in reading Chinese stance correctly is only to be attributed to the deeply flawed foreign policy that India has been pursuing.

It cannot be denied that pro US lobby amongst the politicians and bureaucrats have been using the prevalent situation to suit the American needs. They could have impressed upon the prime minister not to keep away from the NAM summit and used the forum to reach out to the member countries and build a strong group of committed global friends. Seoul set back must act as an eye opener. India’s one sided policy inclined towards USA has been primarily responsible for this situation. India’s present foreign policy does not meet our expectation but rather compromise on India’s leading role in the Non-Alignment Movements in the developing world and make our traditional allies like Russia and Iran seek closer ties with China. Narendra Modi should have attended the recent NAM summit at Venezuela which would have helped explore new avenues and opportunities.

It is sheer naiveté to believe that the USA controls the international system. The diffusion of power and influence is such today that any sagacious country would pursue a multi-vector, non-aligned foreign policy. India’s touching faith in America’s power is costing us heavily. The NSG embarrassment testifies to it.

Modi should not ignore the fact that the Non-Aligned Movement comprises frontline states in the contest for economic influence between China and the United States. Modi’s decision to skip the 17th Non Aligned Movement (NAM) will not do good to the country in the long run. Some analysts may endorse Modi’s decision as they view NAM as anti-West, especially anti-USA forum. Yet another reason for skipping the meet is its overt identification with the Congress.

The fact is the NAM is a multilateral institution that still holds promise for Indian diplomacy. Modi is right to step up the intensity of India’s engagement with major powers, but NAM also provides with an opportunity to further the goodwill he has generated. For the sake of tying with the US as a buffer against China’s rise, India should not discount the reality that it is these smaller countries that will become frontline states in a bipolar contest.

True enough in 1973, Indira Gandhi had sought to skip the summit, “on account of a reluctance to get involved in emotional Arab politics when the problems of Pakistan and Bangladesh were still unsolved.” However her advisor, P.N. Haskar, prevailed on her and she eventually attended.

The Non-Aligned principles are today more relevant than ever. Little doubt Modi skipping the NAM summit has sent out the wrong message. It is worth mentioning that in 2012, Dr. Manmohan Singh had travelled to Iran, despite pressure from the U.S. to minimise contact with the country that had major sanctions imposed on it. (IPA Service)