The President of the United States (US), Barack Obama came on his second visit to India for three days – 25-27 January 2015, becoming the first American President to visit twice, as also the first American President to attend India’s Republic Day celebrations as the Chief Guest. Having followed relations between the two countries from the time of Franklin Delano Roosevelt (1933-1945) to Obama, one can say that the relations have never touched the pinnacle as during the period of Modi-Obama – despite the latter’s passing sermon at the Siri Fort auditorium on 27 January.
Hence, may I say that Obama came, he met Modi and the two conquered one another! In this article I will try to analyse concrete achievements of the meet with particular reference to strategic partnership, and its complementary issues like pushing forward implementation of Civil Nuclear Deal (CND), defence and economic cooperation. These achievements move from complete abstraction to increasing concrete realisation and understanding. India’s relations with the US began to improve since the demise of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War in 1991. But it was more of arm-twisting in the Bill Clinton-Narasimha Rao phase to toe the American line on important issues like Kashmir, opening of Indian economy, Pakistan-promoted terrorism, China-Pak collaboration against India and the nuclear issue.
A real change in the India- US relations took place only after the Indian nuclear tests of May 1998 conducted by the Vajpayee government, and subsequent visit to India by the US President Clinton in March 2000. Vajpayee had termed India and the US as natural allies. Ever since then there was no looking back but only moving forward – though there were plateaus as it happened during the UPA’s second term between 2009-14. During the last two years of the UPA, even pro-India American politicians and academic commentators were frustrated with the lack of movement in all-round US relations with India.
Strategic partnership
The American desire to strengthen its overall relations with India and their frustrations with Indian vacillations were making US to look desperately for a change in India. Desperation was best expressed by Hilary Clinton during her visit to India for an annual strategic dialogue in July 2011. Then she had said: “It’s time to lead” for India. She repeated it while she was in Chennai. She said: Washington was looking for India to “reclaim and play its rightful role” from farthest northwest of the subcontinent (Afghanistan) to deepest Southeast Asia.
Hence, despite US’s past differences with Narendra Modi, they were convinced of his leadership skills – even before he assumed the office of Prime Minister (PM). While campaigning in Arunachal Pradesh in February last year, Modi asked China “to leave behind its mind-set of expansion”. China had labelled Arunachal Pradesh as a disputed territory between India and China by laying a claim to it and calling it southern Tibet! But Modi made it clear to China: “No power on earth can snatch away Arunachal Pradesh from India.” Post-elections, he made it abundantly clear to China he means what he speaks. After he extended a redcarpet welcome to Chinese President Xi Jinping, he did not hesitate to tell Xi that improvement of economic relations cannot be at the expense of India ignoring continued Chinese incursions into Eastern Ladakh. As he said, even small incidents can impact the biggest of relationships, just like the toothache that can paralyse the entire body.
Needless to add that from George W. Bush onwards, the US was looking towards India to balance out the Chinese aggressive policies. Before his US visit last September, Modi had visited Japan to strengthen India- Japan-US strategic interests as they converged. All three nations had a common threat perception of China. While US-Japan had an alliance from 1945, China was keen to keep India out of a strategic partnership with US. But the three democracies went ahead with cooperation among themselves and others having similar perceptions, like Australia and Vietnam.
Bilaterally, India has carved out a position of strength since PM Modi’s visit to Washington DC last September. The joint statement then issued had “expressed concern about rising tensions over maritime territorial disputes, and affirmed the importance of safeguarding maritime security and ensuring freedom of navigation and over-flight through the region, especially South China Sea.” The “US-India Joint Strategic-Vision for the Asia-Pacific and Indian Ocean Region” issued during the summit meeting on 27 January 2015 referred again to South China Sea publicly. The US welcomed “India’s interest in joining the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Forum, as the Indian economy is a dynamic part of the Asian economy.”
Clearing the nuclear hurdle
The Modi-Obama summit meeting’s success was illustrated by the momentum to nuclear energy cooperation. The Civil Nuclear Deal (CND) signed earlier by the former PM Manmohan Singh and Bush in July 2005 had one major aim of enabling nuclear energy cooperation between the two, by ending nuclear apartheid against India. Though the two countries had approved it in 2008, they had their differences on the Indian Nuclear Liability Act, 2010. The US government and nuclear reactor-manufacturers considered Indian law on nuclear liability, as a roadblock to resume nuclear trade with India. Companies like General Electric, Hitachi Nuclear Energy were to setup two nuclear reactors in Andhra Pradesh, and Toshiba- Westinghouse was to setup two nuclear reactors in Gujarat in partnership with Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL) as operator. But in addition to operators’ liability for a nuclear disaster, the law imposes liability upon the suppliers of the nuclear reactors and its sub-contractors, if any, to compensate victims.
The liability law is a byproduct of insensitivities shown by the then Central and Madhya Pradesh governments after the Bhopal Gas tragedy in 1984 that saw thousands die and many languish even now without any compensation for their miseries. The law is also bipartisan as the BJP, while in opposition had supported it. Politically, it cannot easily amend it. The option that the government proposed is to have the suppliers’ guarantee covered by the Indian General Insurance companies to meet any such claims against suppliers for faulty design or parts, with government extending its support to insurance companies.
Then there was another difference between the two sides: the condition in the 123 agreement that the US authorities be allowed to monitor use of nuclear material purchased by India from even third countries. This was not acceptable to India. Then, President Obama used his executive power to end the nuclear stalemate, helping to resume nuclear cooperation and trade; somewhat similar to PM Modi resolving the WTO (World Trade Organisation) stalemate on trade facilitation agreement. The significance of the India-US nuclear cooperation is this; it will open the doors for other doubting nuclearpower nations, including Japan to sign the agreement on nuclear trade with India.
It must be made clear that strategic partnership is not a revival of Cold War type military alliance. Neither the US nor India are interested in ‘containing’ China, as both have further improved their trade relations with China. It is only making politically clear to China that India is not alone in experiencing China’s aggressive designs. This should help China to contain its territorial ambitions. This should also help India to find a solution to border problems. With coordinated efforts one could also visualise restoration of Tibetan autonomy and return of the Dalai Lama. Signs are already visible in these directions.
Defence and economic cooperation
During the summit, Modi-Obama were also able to renew the US-India
defence relationship signed in 2005, for another 10 years. Under Modi’s ‘Make in India’ programme, US has promised to transfer cutting edge technology and avionics to build aircraft carrier, electromagnetic aircraft launch system and several others. Former US Defence Secretary (DS), Chuck Hagel had said last August, that for India everything is on the table and he had offered seven specific technologies for joint production; India has only to decide systems which it can absorb. Similar was the tone of present DS, Ashton Carter at his testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee hearings on his confirmation.
India has emerged as the world’s No. 1 importer of weapons systems. The new Defence Technology and Trade Initiative should help India to enhance its military capability as well as economic growth by selling weapons systems to friendly countries.
In conclusion, we can say that there are huge gains for India in various agreements—almost covering every aspect of human life. Hence, India- US relations should not be clouded by Obama’s parting patronising advice to India. As much as Indian leaders have their domestic compulsions, Obama has them too, as the President of a predominant Christian society with his dual Muslim-Christian religious identity. Unity in diversity is not an invention of free India; it is inscribed in Indian psyche from the Vedic times!