Daily Times

It all started with just a casual tweet about an ongoing discussion on Twitter. It was about the ongoing diplomatic row between our edgy neighbour and my country of residence. The two countries are at loggerheads with one another on a rather trivial issue, as compared to the major issues paralysing this world. It has been interesting to read from both sides about this so-called ‘Nannygate’ affair involving India’s vice consul general of New York, Ms Devyani Khobragade. I will reserve my personal views on the specifics of the case though, on the surface, it sure seems like the young and beautiful diplomat is in a world of hurt.

I would rather focus on the reactions and some perceptions. When it comes to thinking things through rationally and logically, we people of the subcontinent often let our emotions get the best of us. Deep down inside, we still carry the scars of colonisation and often feel challenged when it comes to dealing with the Europeans and citizens of the US. All of a sudden, a sense of honour engulfs our rational side of the brain. Suppose it had not been the US, and suppose it was, let us say, Chad, Mali or Sierra Leone — would the Indians have been so incensed? At least, in my humble and perhaps flawed opinion, if they were, the ‘honour’ issue would not have taken centre-stage.

Next, it was rather disappointing to see mostly a rather diplomatic, mature and often sensible India, react in a manner that was very different from its very well crafted and ‘shining’ image. The public outcry on the streets, in the newspapers and online forums over the body search of the diplomat, and that too by a female officer, was a bit dramatic. Then, as usual, the fog of obfuscation took over. The people started to dig into stories from all over the world to compare situations and circumstances. A name was repeated by many of my Indian friends in their comments about another US citizen who goes by the name of Raymond Davis. He was a US consulate contractor who was involved in a shooting, reportedly in self-defence, and ended up killing two Pakistani citizens, back in 2011. Amazingly, a lot of Indians who posted comments on news websites felt that he had walked away because of his diplomatic immunity. Those people are a bit deficient on details as Mr Davis ended up paying diyat or blood money to the families of the victims. However, back then, our media, both electronic and print, was highlighting this similar outrage, which was mostly ‘honour’-driven, another proof positive of the melodrama that we have acquired from our Bollywood and Lollywood potboilers.

So, with this recent episode, at least another widely peddled conspiracy theory in our neck of the woods has been busted. Our right wing and its circus-related antics are solely based on the three cornered axis of evil, so to speak: India, Israel and the US, always working in unison, conspiring in harmony to malign the only citadel of Islam. With the US and India in this diplomatic tiff, the usual quarters who hog airtime, at least will be modifying their script. Needless to say, they will invent a new conspiracy in this episode to give us the impression that it is all a show. Not getting off topic here, but none of these bastions of faith and this Islamic citadel squeaked one bit when their granddaddy, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, entered into pacts with their much loathed rival, India.

The prosecutor in this case, Mr Preet Bharara, is an Indian American, very interestingly, like a Bollywood movie script, full of strange coincidences. If I remember correctly, Mr Bharara is the same prosecutor who won a conviction against the only daughter of the unblemished nation, by the name of Dr Aafia Siddiqui.

Though people are trying to provide examples of where the US has exercised diplomatic immunity in rather very unfortunate situations, without sounding like an apologist, each situation is different and needs to be analysed based on specific facts. In my humble opinion, even if diplomatic immunity is exercised, the victims should always be provided with a fair compensation. The idea of diplomatic immunity is to avoid prosecution in the host country for ‘certain’ crimes. In most cases, it is not carte blanche.

With my poor and very basic legal understanding, the idea of diplomatic immunity is to shield the diplomat in the host country from an “unintentional” crime. So an issue that can be proved as planned in advance and perhaps intentional, can it be covered by diplomatic immunity — this remains to be seen. Putting two and two together, based on India’s external affairs minister Mr Salman Khursheed’s remarks at least acknowledging that, at worst, Ms Khobragade may have violated US labour law, gives you some clarity. Next, according to a leading Indian newspaper, India is opting for her total accreditation with the UN. This will qualify her for total diplomatic immunity, which provides you with some more insight into where all of this is headed.

This episode will come to an end too. India is considered a champion of diplomacy in the international arena. At least in this scribe’s humble opinion, the current Congress-led government needs a refresher in that particular area, like yesterday. The sooner this tiff comes to a reasonable and mature end, the better it would be for both nations.

The writer is a Pakistani-American mortgage banker. He blogs at http://dasghar.blogspot.com and can be reached at dasghar@aol.com. He tweets at http://twitter.com/dasghar