President Obama concluded his three day visit to India, on 27th Jan 2015; the trip was curtailed since the visit to Agra was cancelled, to allow the President to travel to Saudi Arabia, to extend condolences to the royal family, following the death of King Abdullah, which prompted the quip “Oil is thicker than marble”. The Indian Express, however, has a different story – the cancellation was because of a clash between the Supreme Court’s guidelines, requiring visitors to disembark 500m from the Taj Mahal & the secret service insistence on the “beast” being allowed to travel onto the gate to avoid security risks. But for this minor hiccup, the bonhomie during the visit was palpable starting with the PM, Modi, breaking protocol to receive Obama at the airport. The media coined a new term for the act: “Bromance”.
The US President descended into New Delhi & the bear hugs & back slapping made for interesting optics. Modi, for the sake of national interest, perhaps, has, shaken off the rancour of visa denial in 2005 – courtesy Godhra - & tried to cosy up to the President by addressing him by his first name, Barack, which unfortunately was left un-reciprocated. Post partaking in diplomatic talks on Day 1, the President as chief guest of the grand republic day parade, on day 2, was greeted, largely, by vintage Russian armaments, a strategy perhaps employed by the Indian side, to nudge him to grant greater concessions on defence co-production. That, unfortunately, did not fructify.
Obama, on the last day, addressed the Delhi University students & other selected invitees where his reference to religious freedom & specifically Article 25 left the BJP govt. red faced. While some diplomats called it ungracious, his act warmed the cockles of the Indian opposition parties as well as the conservatives back home, rankled as they were by the perverse acts of “ghar vapasi” & attack on churches. A subtle message was perhaps being conveyed to the the Muslim ummah too. He, finally, ended his tour with a joint radio address - “Man ki Baat” - with Modi. Was Michelle Obama’s surprising absence from some outings - unlike last time - largely a precursor of the events to follow – an event that was high on optics & low on substance? Not entirely.
It is to Ambassador Jaishankar’s credit that the US-India relations that had fallen into a deep abyss post the Devyani Khobragade case were revived. He curated the highly visible Modi show at New York in Sept last year & managed to persuade the US administration to be amenable to a second visit by the US President to India during his tenure – a first for any US President. PM Modi clinched a “yes” from the President during the ASEAN summit at Myanmar in Nov 2014. No wonder Modi wants Jaishankar to play a much larger foreign policy role based in Delhi. Suitable deployment of strategic assets like Doval & Jaishankar – son of India’s Strategic expert K Subramanyam - is necessary if India is to play the role it deserves in the comity of nations.
The one major takeaway from the visit: India's decisive alignment with the US - a la 1971 moment when the actor was the Soviet Union though. Critics, including the Congress & the Left, have cringed at such an act with the potential to cause annoyance to our northern neighbors. The statements emanating from Beijing cautioning India against falling into a "US trap" confirmed the suspicion. A pragmatic foreign policy is indeed needed since we cannot become a permanent member of the Security Council with a Chinese veto. The US President did not help matters by lambasting Russia from Indian soil in a press con just as the Russian President caused an embarrassment to the Indian side by having the Crimea’s Prime Minister Sergey Aksyonov sign a trade cooperation pact, during his visit to New Delhi in Dec 2014. Surely, if India has annoyed both sides equally, she is perhaps following an independent foreign policy. And if the US, now, sees merit in our Iran policy we are on the right track.
Modi, to be fair, tried to play a balanced card, by personally getting involved in hosting an impressive reception to President Xi of China, last year, only to be rebuked through border incursions while the visit was in progress – a convenient tactic employed by China in the past too. Modi, therefore, was left with an option of gulping ignominy – like the Congress govt. did during the previous years – or take a decisive action. He opted for the latter – since he had a reputation to protect - & has responded with the Indo-US éntente; the joint strategic vision for Asia Pacific declared “the importance of safeguarding maritime security & ensuring freedom of navigation & over flight throughout the region, especially the South China Sea”. This shall gladden the hearts of all countries in the region threatened by hegemonistic China & hopefully prompt an introspection in the latter. Modi has thus countered the Chinese “string of pearls” strategy to circumvent India by a counter “string of pearls” strategy by forging an Indo-Japan-US-Australia -Vietnam alliance. Clearly he emerges as Obama termed it a “man of action”. One note of caution though - aggression without strengthening the military machine could have dire consequences as the events of 1962 foretell. Therefore, the Indian policy mandarins need to get the infrastructure in the North East & Aksai Chin up & running to take care of any eventuality. The interesting corollary to the entire act is perhaps the victory of India’s covert diplomacy - the election of a pro India govt. in Sri Lanka. The next target: Maldives.
The Indo US joint statement mentions all the usual suspects – “advance mutual prosperity, a clean and healthy environment, greater economic cooperation, regional peace, security and stability” The $4 Billion financial package – including $1billion for “Made in US” exports & $2 billion in renewable energy - promised by President Obama looks miniscule as compared to the $35 billion commitment from Japan. “The nuclear deal is done” said the Indian foreign secretary although the fine print is still hazy. The BJP while in opposition pushed for a seller liability in consonance with the US tort laws. Without altering the statutes a memorandum of law by the attorney general is proposed by the same party in power now; however victims’ recourse to judicial scrutiny is still permissible & hence corporates could continue to remain wary. A limited liability corpus of about 1500 crore – perhaps, with an equal contribution by insurance companies & GOI is getting created. Not sure if it would inspire confidence, but if it does, then some business shall flow to US firms, GE & Westinghouse. Nuclear power accounts for less than 2% of India’s energy production & with agitations against nuclear power post the Fukushima meltdown & the consequent focus on renewables this % is unlikely to change appreciably in the years to come. The high cost of nuclear power is the other deterrent.
The US supports India’s phased entry into the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), the Wassenaar Arrangement, and the Australia Group. The US committed itself to a reformed UN Security Council with India as a permanent member with the caveat that "with power comes responsibility” Clearly US would expect India to do more heavy lifting in its international obligations.
The Joint declaration has reaffirmed committment to disrupt entities such as Lashkar-e-Tayyiba, Jaish-e-Mohammad, D Company and the Haqqani Network and reiterated their call to Pakistan to bring the perpetrators of the November 2008 terrorist attack in Mumbai to justice. Pakistan smarting from the de hyphening of that country from India, predictably, had its NSA, Sartaz Aziz, opposing all the positives listed above & demanding that India bring the Samjhouta Express culprits - of 2007 – to book. Expect Pakistan to get into the Chinese grasp & both of them working closely to needle India in both the Western & Northern borders. Pak Army chief, Raheel Sharief, was in China when the US-India éntente was in progress which buttresses this assessment.
The US wants India to be the pivot in Asia to counter a rising, belligerent China in a bid to maintain international rule of law which includes maritime security. Clearly this calls for economic & military enhancements. However, while India, a 1.9 trillion economy, spends $38 billion on defence, China whose economy is roughly 5 times larger, officially, spends $132 billion, although the actual fig could be 40% higher than the stated fig. India, therefore, needs to grow consistently more than its northern neighbour for about 20 years to play catch up - a big challenge indeed. The PM realizes that & in the ET Global business summit, held in Jan this year, has asked business leaders to dream for a $20 trillion economy. In the interim there is a need to boost indigenization & get more bang for the buck.
In the run up to the summit the US wanted an agreement on climate change, bilateral investment treaty, greater trade & IPR protection, friendly Regulatory & Tax laws & changes in the nuclear liability laws. Obama, on a high post the climate change agreement with China, was keen to conclude a similar deal with India too as he is looking for establishing a lasting legacy before his second term comes to an end. The Indian side wanted greater FDI - especially in defence including joint production - totalization agreement – which shall entail a saving of about $3 billion dollars to Indian IT companies, currently paying for social security in the US - reining in Pakistan & Intelligence sharing. The US, perhaps, got the nuclear deal while the Indian side got the language it desired on Pakistan & a $4 billion bounty. Surely, US would not share the technology behind its “crown jewels” when it comes to military equipment & neither can we expect them to fight our battles in Pakistan or beyond. The US, therefore, would lend us a helping hand, to help us grow - to reduce its own workload in the Asia Pacific region. However, if India falters on growth or governance, it can fall off the perch fast Therefore, while the deliverables of the summit might appear infinitesimal, the onus is on us to take advantage of this new Nixon- Kissinger moment – which opened up China to the US in 1972 – to make it a truly “defining relationship of the 21st Century”
No comments:
Post a Comment