US should forge counter-terrorism ties with India: Huntsman

WASHINGTON:The US should forge closer counter-terrorism ties with India to respond to threats posed by al-Qaeda and other terrorist cells operating from countries like Pakistan and Yemen, a key Republican presidential hopeful has said.

Calling for a reassessment of America's relationship with Pakistan, Jon Huntsman, a former ambassador to China under the Obama administration, said "certain realities" with Pakistan had to be recognised.

"This is not a relationship based on shared values," he said in a speech at Southern New Hampshire University.

"It is transactional at best," former governor of Utah was quoted as saying by the leading Congressional paper, The Hill.

Huntsman said America should forge stronger ties with India as it would also help US counter-terrorism interests through better intelligence gathering.

"I think a stronger relationship with India would allow us to gain that understanding," Huntsman said in response to a post-speech question.

Huntsman said his foreign policy would rely on a streamlined American military better equipped for counter-terrorism than Cold War-era conflicts.

"We still have remnants of a top-heavy, post-Cold War infrastructure. It needs to be transformed to reflect the 21st Century world, and the growing asymmetric threats we face," Huntsman said.

"For example, counter-terrorism needs to be a much larger part of our foreign policy. We must be prepared to respond to threats -- from Al Qaeda and other terrorist cells -- that emanate from a much more diverse geography, including Yemen, the Horn of Africa, Pakistan and the Asia-Pacific," he noted.

On Iran, Huntsman said he would consider using force to prevent a nuclear-capable Iran.

"I cannot live with a nuclear-armed Iran. If you want an example of when I would consider the use of American force, it would be that," Huntsman said.

Do not assume that there is a perfect match between Indian and American interests. India is most certainly a better partner than Pakistan, but please consider the following:

1. India has a fifty year old strategic partnership with Russia, that partnership has been tested and is not going away anytime soon.
2. India and Russia have mutual strategic interests that might conflict with US interests.
3. India is “Gaullist”. I.e. like France, they don’t like to be told what to do, by anyone. (India has always been one of the most vocal members of the “Non-aligned movement”).
4. A strategic partnership with India will require a great deal of painstaking diplomacy. (India is an extremely complex democracy with a wide range of ideologies represented - ranging from communists (Marxists and Maoists) to conservatives (BJP)). Do not for one second think that dealing with all this will be easy.

I have to disagree with a few things here.

1. India has a fifty year old strategic partnership with Russia, that partnership has been tested and is not going away anytime soon.

India has a buyer-seller relationship with Russia and has similar relationship with France, Israel, UK and even US. US has major strategic relationship with Pakistan and has major trade relationship with China. That isn't going away anytime soon either but I believe both countries are mature enough to work past those constraints.

2. India and Russia have mutual strategic interests that might conflict with US interests.

Actually Indian and Russian mutual strategic interest has more to do with fighting terrorism, energy security, regional stability(read Afghan/Pak) and fighting piracy on the sea. None of this is in conflict with US interest.

4. India is an extremely complex democracy with a wide range of ideologies represented - ranging from communists (Marxists and Maoists) to conservatives (BJP)

Yes India's political structure is complex but India's foreign policy has been pretty consistent across the political spectrum. In fact it is the US that has been very inconsistent and at times whimsical in her dealings with India. A good example is how the Congress government carried over the close ties with Israel and US which was initiated by BJP... and how Obama changed America's tone towards India post Bush.

Don’t you think the India - Russia relationship goes a little bit further than buyer-seller? AFAIK, the Russians were very supportive during the Indian-Pakistani wars (both providing weapons and diplomatic cover).

A nation that provided India with ballistic missile technology (BRAHMOS), the Sukhoi-30 MKI and is collaborating with India on the PAK-FA, has much more than a buyer-seller relationship with it.

(Russia has a “buyer-seller” relationship with Uganda, Venezuela and every other tinpot dictatorship it sells “monkey model” military equipment to. Certainly not to India, to which it sells its top-line equipment).

India and Russia both have mutual interests in containing China.(Both share borders with China). No two nations are as threatened by China as Russia and India are. America’s relationship with China is more schizophrenic - encouraging China’s growth while trying to contain it.

What about India’s support for Burma? What about its opposition to military intervention in Libya? What about India’s policy on Syria? What is India’s policy on Iran?

India’s support Israel has been pretty consistent since the 1990s, but that is not the only diplomatic relationship that counts (China also has good relations with Israel).

AFAIK, the Russians were very supportive during the Indian-Pakistani wars (both providing weapons and diplomatic cover).

That was the Soviet Union. What stake does Russia have in the fight against Pakistan except protecting her business interests with India?

A nation that provided India with ballistic missile technology (BRAHMOS), the Sukhoi-30 MKI and is collaborating with India on the PAK-FA, has much more than a buyer-seller relationship with it.”

Brahmos and PakFa aren't entirely handout from Russia but a JVs. India developed some of the guidance systems for Brahmos and provided the funding for development of Brahmos, Sukhoi and PakFa. Russia happens to be the only country willing to share technology with India for the right price. Russia need money and India needs technology. Both have mutual interests but most part it is pure business. If Pakistan had more money then India what do you think Russian stand would have been?

If Uganda and Venezuela had more money to spend, do you think Russia would hold back from selling? Russia has sold variation of Sukhoi-30MK to China, Indonesia and Algeria. If Uganda and Venezuela can shell out more money, they too would have the same top of the line models India has.

India and Russia both have mutual interests in containing China.(Both share borders with China).

I am not sure Russia shares the same concerns on China as India. They sell top of the line weapons systems and technology to China. Russia and China have also resolved their border dispute. In case of US, they still have a potential flash-point with China over Taiwan and North Korea. Russia's strategic focus is towards the west and against NATO. China's strategic focus is the Asia-Pacific region. Not very likely Russia and China are going to bump into each other there.

What about India’s support for Burma? What about its opposition to military intervention in Libya? What about India’s policy on Syria? What is India’s policy on Iran?

None of the above have anything to do with Russia. In Burma, India feels the need to engage the Military junta to counter the Chinese influence and prevent insurgency. Iran has traditionally been a friendly country to India and India needs to import natural gas from Iran. Lastly India has been pretty consistent on opposing foreign military intervention on most global issues.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.