Page 1 of 2 Anti-terror ties bridge US-India gap
By Peter J Brown
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is in the United States for a state visit
as many Indians are finding US President Barack Obama's treatment of India less
friendly and perhaps more unpredictable than the approach of former president
George W Bush.
"We understand America's tactical compulsions. What we don't understand is what
is its big strategy," a senior Indian official told the Times of India.
However, with the first anniversary of the last year's November 26 terrorist
attack on Mumbai fast approaching, events over the past few days may reshuffle
the deck as far as Manmohan's priorities are concerned. Manmohan, who arrived
on Monday morning for a visit that will culminate in dinner at the White House
on Tuesday, has accused Pakistan of not doing enough given that the Mumbai
conspiracy originated there. He repeated that charge shortly after touching
down in the US.
His remarks - along with the arrest in Italy last week of two alleged
supporters of the plot, as well as the arrest by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI) last month of two men in Chicago allegedly linked to the
group blamed for the atrocity - add to the possibility that the Mumbai attack
may emerge as the core mission for Manmohan's visit to the US.
US Central Intelligence Agency director Leon Panetta's short visit to India
last week highlighted how volatile this situation is becoming. He went there to
discuss, among other things, possible ties between the Lashkar-e-Taiba in
Pakistan and the two men recently arrested by the FBI in Chicago: David Coleman
Headley, a US citizen of Pakistani origin, and Tahawwur Hussain Rana, a
Canadian. Any alleged involvement of a US citizen in the Mumbai attack not only
broadens the scope of the conspiracy but brings ongoing US domestic
counterterrorism activities and FBI surveillance data into focus.
"We have been working hand-to-hand, shoulder-to-shoulder, hour-by-hour in
cooperating and sharing information with India's government on a daily, weekly
and monthly basis," said US Ambassador to India Timothy Roemer at a news
conference at the US embassy in New Delhi. Voice of America reported that
Roemer "declined to discuss how Washington would react to any extradition
request by [India]".
Manmohan will no doubt seek assurances from the Obama administration that the
US "will exert considerable pressure on Islamabad to meet its UN-mandated
anti-terror obligations, and, credibly prosecute the ideologues and
perpetrators directly tied to the carnage," said Sourabh Gupta, senior research
associate at Samuels International Associates in Washington, DC.
"As the US concentrates minds in Islamabad to fight the necessary fight for
Pakistan's own survival, a price ought not to be paid in New Delhi," said
Gupta.
While India can count on many friends in Washington, Obama's unfortunate
omission of India altogether from his recent speech in Tokyo had left many in
India wondering about the current US position on India.
"While the Bush administration may have recognized India not only as a regional
power but also as a potential global power and as a strong pillar in the new
and evolving Asian strategic framework, this view may not hold true under the
Obama administration," said Rajeswari Rajagopalan, senior fellow in Security
Studies at the Observer Research Foundation in New Delhi. "Despite the popular
perception of the relative decline of US power, the US continues to be the sole
superpower, and India believes that it is in its best interests to have a
strengthened partnership with the US."
Some analysts blame India for its apparent inability or failure to craft a
corresponding comprehensive US strategy of its own.
"No thinking has been ever done in India as to what it expects out of a
long-term strategic relationship with the US. It is always the US which decides
what it will give to India, and it is New Delhi which accepts," said
Bahukutumbi Raman, director of the Institute for Topical Studies in Chennai.
"What passes for analysis in India is just wishful thinking."
Since the US does not depend on India in any matter, no actual quid pro quo
relationship - let alone a viable strategic partnership - was ever created.
Instead, India has been assigned the role of a sub-regional power "whose
aspirations of having a status on par with China are unrealistic," according to
Raman.
"Nobody in India has realized that, for the first time, the US, Japan and
Australia have a leadership which does not rate highly India's potential as an
emerging power," said Raman, who has previously stated that Obama is following
closely in the footsteps of president Jimmy Carter in terms of presenting the
US as confused and soft on important global issues.
The vast majority of Americans are simply unaware of Manmohan, and the
importance of his visit escapes them. As the leader of the world's largest
democracy, Manmohan has an opportunity to show how India and the US share
important geopolitical, economic and environmental objectives. Most of all,
Indian and US interests intersect when it comes to dealing with China's rapid
economic and military ascent.
"India does not wish to see a hostile relationship between the US and China
with destabilizing consequences for the continent," said Rajagopalan. "India
needs the US to play a major role in dealing with China and Pakistan, although
it is not clear yet whether it will be a positive one."
Although US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spent several days in India in
July and left a strong impression in the process, Gupta stresses that the US
needs to do far more to convince India that the US is and will remain a
reliable partner. If the US fails to deal with this credibility gap
effectively, the US risks "leading others in Asia to question the reliability
of the US as a balancer against China. These are not trivial considerations,"
said Gupta.
"The US must ensure that it does not use India and South Asia-related agenda
items as a salve to paper over differences in US-China political/strategic
relations. US-India relations must not be a derivative of the US-China
relationship but accorded bilateral exclusivity at a minimum."
This is one reason Obama's rather unexpected comments during his trip to Asia
about possibly expanding China's role in South Asia created an uproar in India
.
"The failure of [Obama] to understand the distrust of China in large sections
of Indian civil society has landed the US in a situation in which the
considerable goodwill between India and the US created during the
administration of his predecessor stands in danger of being diluted by his
unthinking words and actions," wrote Raman recently, adding that China has
consistently tried to isolate India "by keeping alive the old distrusts and
animosities and creating new ones".
The US quickly attempted to amend Obama's remarks. Under Secretary of State for
Political Affairs Williams Burns said that "the US is interested in pursuing
the best and healthiest possible partnership with China, but that does not come
at the expense of other increasingly important partnerships, particularly our
relationship with India."
Obama can now set a more positive tone, according to Gupta, by quickly signing
off on an agreement that will allow India to reprocess spent nuclear fuel.
"Parties are close to an agreement on this front. There could be no stronger
statement of continuity than continued forward movement on this signature Bush
administration initiative, which was vigorously opposed by some who are now in
the current administration," said Gupta.
Subrata Ghoshroy, senior associate in the Security Studies Program at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, identifies several other issues on the
"nuclear agenda" that will be discussed, besides reprocessing - "which India
wants and the US does not". For example, Manmohan will arrive with his
administration's approval of the Nuclear Liability Bill, which will allow India
to join the international convention on civilian liability in case of nuclear
damage.
"Right now, it is not clear when he will introduce it to the [Indian]
parliament," said Ghoshroy. "Nonetheless, it is an important step that will
make it easier for US companies to build nuclear plants in India."
US companies are refusing to start construction in India until this
legislation, which would immunize US companies in the event of a nuclear
accident, is signed into law.
"In a way, this puts the entire onus on India and Indian companies alone and
not on the US companies, their technologies or materials," said Rajagopalan.
"Neither Russia nor France have demanded such a pact. If and when India signs
such an agreement, it will inevitably include all the countries that are
involved in the nuclear trade with India. It is not certain how India and the
US will find a way out of this muddle."
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
