Here's my take on the common point you both make on the improved relations between the US and India. Few may agree, but Inda had better relations with the US just before 9/11 than now. Pakistan was listed as rogue state by our state department and largely ignored. India provided support for the Gulf war in which it didn't have much of an ax to grind, as it does now in the war against terrorism. Ever since Pakistan was enlisted as a "front-line ally" against terrorism, the Indians have been wringing their hands in frustration but going along. Even The Economist suggested then that Pak was more likely to be a target than an ally. I am sure India has felt that way too.
Pakistan was listed as a rogue state and largely ignored.This brings up an interesting thought. The CIA recommended the declaration of Pakistan as a state-sponsor of international terrorism to Bush Sr. in 1992. Bush referred the recommendation on to Clinton, who kept Pakistan on a list of suspected state sponsors of terrorism, but did nothing else. Robin Raphael, Clinton's assistant sec-state was definitely pro-Pakistan.
How might the "war on terror" have been played if Clinton's thumb-sucking state department had listened to the CIA?
I do remember reading Bush had said he wanted India on board and would move in that direction. To me, it looks like he has done exactly that. Whether it is too little and too late is another story.JMHO