Uncertainty in India-US ties

The pioneer ^ | Thursday, April 15th 2010 | G Parthasarathy

[cold start]

US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner thrilled corporate audiences in Mumbai by showering praise on the performance of India’s economy and referring to the growing interest of corporate America in the ‘prospects’ for cooperation and investment in India. Earlier, in his State of the Union address, US President Barack Obama had proclaimed: “These nations (India and Germany) are not playing for second place. They are placing more emphasis on Math and Science. They are rebuilding their infrastructure.” In the same speech, however, he reiterated his aversion to outsourcing to India, stating: “It is time to finally slash the tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas.” Though the Indian corporate sector has not been overly concerned about Mr Obama’s pronouncements, there are, naturally, queries regarding his mindset about India when he proclaims: “Say no to Bangalore, say yes to Buffalo.”

Mr Geithner’s visit came just after the revelation that Mr Obama had issued a presidential directive stating: “India must make resolving its tensions with Pakistan a priority for progress to be made on US goals in the region.” It has also been reported that the Obama wish-list includes a number of ‘dos and don’ts’ for India. We are told that because the Obama Administration requires Pakistan’s help for securing a speedy withdrawal from Afghanistan and getting a deal with the Taliban that India has been forbidden from any effort to train the Afghan National Army. This is because Pakistani Army chief, Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, himself wants to train the Afghans who, in turn, have little trust and even less affection for the Pakistani Army or the ISI. India, it is asserted by the worthies in Pentagon, should be ‘more transparent’ and ‘cooperative’ about its activities along its border with Pakistan. We are also required to reduce the number of troops in Jammu & Kashmir to enable Pakistan to deploy more forces along its western border.

New Delhi is dealing with an American Administration which just does not know how to respond to a Pakistani Army that trains, arms and provides safe havens to the Haqqani network in North Waziristan and hosts the Mullah Omar-led ‘Quetta Shura’, which moves around freely all across Pakistan. Rather than dealing with this issue by putting the squeeze on Pakistan and compelling it to end support for those killing American forces in Afghanistan, the whiz kids in Pentagon have decided that the easier way out would be to compel New Delhi, seen to be receptive to American ‘persuasion’, to fall in line with everything Gen Kayani demands from India, even as he continues assisting the Taliban in Afghanistan and the Lashkar-e-Tayyeba against India. Kayani-appeasement appears to be the policy being advocated by American Generals James Jones, David Petraeus, Stanley McChrystal, Karl Eikenberry and Admiral Mike Mullen. And Mr Obama appears ready to abide by the advice of his military brass.

Addressing his troops at the Bagram airbase near Kabul on March 30, Mr Obama proclaimed: “We are going to disrupt, dismantle, defeat and destroy Al Qaeda and its extremist allies and deny Al Qaeda safe haven. We are going to reverse the Taliban’s momentum. We are going to strengthen the capacity of the Afghan security forces and the Government.” Strangely, President Obama’s words about wanting to strengthen the Afghan Government came almost immediately after his National Security Adviser, Gen James Jones, had reportedly bad-mouthed Afghan President Hamid Karzai and his Government for their alleged inefficiency, corruption, nepotism and incompetence. Karzai-bashing appears to have become a favourite sport of American officials ranging from Gen Jones to Special Representative Richard Holbrooke, who show little regard for the fact that the Afghan President is a proud Durrani Pashtun and has more legitimacy than many others the Americans have supported. Turning on those who have cooperated with the Americans while appeasing those who plot the killing of American soldiers seems to have become a favourite pastime for what appears to be a confused and divided American Administration.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh reportedly received soothing assurances on American policies when he met President Obama on April 11. New Delhi should realise that in its dealings with China and in the AfPak region, the Obama Administration appears quite prepared to disregard Indian sensitivities and interests when it finds Beijing and Islamabad useful in furthering its global interests, or facilitating its exit strategy from Afghanistan. Mr Geithner flattered Indian egos in Mumbai. But his real business was to secure Chinese approval to revalue the yuan on his trip to China immediately after his visit to India. This was reminiscent of Henry Kissinger stopping by in Delhi in 1971 en route to Beijing via Pakistan. It should be evident that the White House will play down Pakistani support for terrorism and continue the supply of military hardware including F-16 fighters, missiles and frigates while marginalising India on emerging developments in Afghanistan. India is now, quite appropriately, widening its diplomatic options through active participation in fora like the IBSA (India, Brazil and South Africa) and BRIC (Brazil, India, Russia and China). We should seek full membership of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and work more closely with Russia, Iran, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan on emerging developments in Afghanistan.

India’s bilateral relationship with the US will remain its most important bilateral relationship for the foreseeable future. The potential for cooperation in areas ranging from agriculture and education to space and high technology transfer is immense. Moreover, the corporate sectors in the two countries have set the stage for rapidly expanding trade, business and investment cooperation. But in a climate of strategic uncertainty resulting from the strange handling of foreign and security policies by the Obama Administration, it would only be appropriate for our political parties and Parliamentarians to carefully examine the provisions of the proposed Nuclear Liability Bill. This Bill should be passed only after wide-ranging consultations and studies about practices across the world, even if such examination takes a year to complete. Similarly, while there are suggestions that defence supplies from the US should get preferential treatment, we need to look at the possibility of increasingly linking defence purchases to the consideration that suppliers show for our security concerns. Moreover, close consultations with Russia, China and countries like Brazil and Turkey are needed while formulating our response to American concerns on Iran’s nuclear programme.

[cold start]

Shrunk India-US canvas
The drift continues in bilateral relationship

It is a measure of the continuing drift and listlessness in the India-United States relationship that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh spent an entire 36 hours more than he had originally planned in Washington DC for a 50-minute conversation with US President Barack Obama on terrorism and related issues. Apart from the usual spin about how the two get on famously, the official briefing suggested nothing substantial was achieved. It is, therefore, not clear why the meeting was arranged at all. If it was the case that both sides wanted to be seen conversing with each other a day before the presidents of the US and China were to meet, then the differing agenda of the two conversations should say it all. President Obama talks business and the world with President Hu Jintao and terrorism and the region with India. It is not clear why the prime minister had to step in on the bilateral conversation between India and the US on the David Headley case, and even less clear how exactly the US plans to walk the talk on its stated concerns about Pakistan’s efforts post-26/11. On the Headley case, the matter should have been left for officials to handle, once the Indian home minister had taken it up at the political level. The narrow framework of the Obama-Singh dialogue, as spelt out by official spokespersons, restricted to issues like terrorism and the situation in Afghanistan-Pakistan (AfPak), shows that the bilateral relationship in the Obama presidency is still being painted on a smaller canvas than was the case with President George Bush.

Apart from the fact that there seems to be no meeting of minds between India and the US on the AfPak issue, nor indeed on the nature of the threat of terrorism India faces, the more disconcerting aspect of the Singh-Obama meeting is that the two countries are back to discussing nothing more than Pakistan. This is how the Pakistanis and the Chinese would like to see India-US relations and that is how President Obama seems to view it too. Prime Minister Singh’s attempt to widen the canvas of the conversation, which succeeded during the Bush presidency, no longer seems to find many takers in Washington DC. Indian diplomacy, for its part, has also not risen to the challenge. There does not seem to be any meaningful conversation between the two governments on other issues. None of this is, of course, news. The signals from Washington DC have been clear for some time now. India and the US are not on the same page as far as President Obama is concerned. Till this changes, one should not expect more from such bilateral meetings. While such conversation between heads of government is useful and India should certainly keep the US constantly engaged in wide-ranging conversation, it is not clear what exactly the prime minister has achieved by spending an extra day in Washington DC. And, if he has achieved something, then the message has been poorly communicated.
http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/shrunk-india-us-canvas/13/09/391700/