A grand jury indicted Thursday anIndian diplomat whose arrest in New York sparked a diplomatic row between India and the U.S., and the U.S. asked Devyani Khobragade to leave the country.
As we reported last month, Khobragade was arrested in December in New York for allegedly falsifying visa documents for her Indian maid. On the application, she said she paid the maid about $9 an hour when, in fact, the woman was paid about $3, well below the U.S. statutory minimum wage.
Diplomats generally have immunity in the foreign countries that they operate in; the typical response against a diplomat that has committed a crime is the country declaring the diplomat persona non grata and sending them home. Arresting diplomats is a foreign policy no-no, and foreign policy no-nos tend to meet tit-for-tat responses: India is now investigating multiple U.S. diplomats (and, I believe, their families); threats have been made (not formally, but by the regular politician demagogues) to enforce India’s gay marriage ban on U.S. diplomats’ spouses; security barriers have been removed around an American embassy. Further diplomatic cold shoulders are being shot back and forth with your everyday found-only-in-middle-school-and-foreign-relations shitfests with interestingly chosen words and statements from certain people rather than others, etc.
America and India aren’t going to go through a divorce or anything soon: they’ve too much on the mutual table for that (nuclear stuff, geopolitical stuff, etc). They are pawing at each other though (certain Indian officials particularly furiously).
Another break from your regularly scheduled (well, not scheduled per se) snarkycats for a Monday morning rant because Monday morning rants and soapboxes and life:
The developing world would no doubt be better off with gender equality, and there may even be some poor people who would welcome the arrival of recycled soap, teddy bears, or clowns. But it is more than a stretch to categorize such efforts as part of development, which should focus on generating higher, more stable incomes.
Did this person just get published in Foreign Fucking Affairs trying to equate gender equity with even the ballpark irrelevance of teddy bears and clowns with respect to international development, and try to justify it via Maslow fucking Maslow’s hierarchy of needs? (he goes much further, fyi, read the article).
(askbox is still open fyi)