The Foreign Service Journal, March 2007

ernment into freeing up troops to help with our pacification of Iraq and Afghanistan. Indeed, President Bush made reference to both countries being victimized by terrorism. Certainly it would be worthwhile to try to wean India away from Russia and other possible suppliers. But on Jan. 25, the Washington Post reported that India had made new agreements with Russia for the construction of nuclear facilities. Have we been “dealt out” of “The Deal?” Concerning possible benefits for the U.S., at least in public, the presi- dential team apparently tried to con- vince India to take a hard line with Iran, her major oil supplier. I believe Indian Prime Minister Singh parried this deftly. There were reports that the U.S. was trying to cozy up to India so as to be a counterweight to China. However, those two countries seem to be seeking better relations, not con- frontation. The net result is hard to calculate. Now that Russia’s back in the game, will the American nuclear industry see a boom in orders? Prime Minister Singh’s coalition depends upon Com- munist Party support. Might the com- rades prefer Russia? Louis V. Riggio Former Foreign Service officer Hollywood, Fla. M A R C H 2 0 0 7 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 9 L E T T E R S Corrections In the February Journal , the last word in “A Bleak Outlook” by Dennis Jett (p. 28) was omitted as the result of a printer error. The article concludes on p. 35: “That is destined to go down in history as Bush’s most enduring legacy.” In the same issue, author identification for Joshua Muravchik (“A Sound Strategy,” p. 29) was inadvertently omit- ted from his article. Muravchik is a resi- dent scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. We regret the oversight.