The latest reset: India and the United States amid Ukraine war
In the last few days, the big headlines in ties between the world’s two largest democracies, India and the United States, have featured comments from two men who head foreign policy in each country, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar and Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, respectively.
After Blinken raised concerns about human rights in India, Jaishankar responded by saying India too has concerns about human rights in America. The next day, Blinken noted: “The US and India have always had much to learn from one another… interactions with Gandhi influenced a key figure in our nation’s journey: Martin Luther King, Jr. We share a special bond indeed.”
Some commentators have seen this as a sign of the dawn of the multipolar world, others as India successfully pushing back effectively on a contentious issue. That this came after weeks of debates between the two countries on India’s hands-off stance in the Ukraine war, including abstentions in United Nations resolutions aimed at Russia, and India’s oil purchases from Russia during the war.
India has argued fervently, with Jaishankar leading the charge, that India buys a tiny fraction of its energy needs from Russia (what India buys in a month, Europe buys in “an afternoon”, to quote Jaishankar) and this has continued despite European and American sanctions on Russia after the start of the war.
This essay argues that this is only the latest in the continuing journey of the US and India renegotiating the terms of their engagement as ‘natural allies’, though, a history of argumentation and periods of estrangement.
The debate on India’s ‘positionality’ could be said to have begun as early as 1949, only two years after India’s Independence, and a year before the country formally became a republic, when the first prime minister of India Jawaharlal Nehru toured America and met president Harry Truman, and then declared itself non-aligned.
This non-alignment bit, which began of course in the Cold War era with India leading the group of countries that affirmed that they were neither aligned towards America nor Russia, continues to cast its shadow as seen most recently in the Ukraine war. Even before the war, Jaishankar famously quipped, India was on one side — its own.
India has had periods of intense cooperation with the United States, not least on food security, the Green Revolution in the subcontinent was fuelled by the work of American agronomist Norman Borlaug, and considerable divide, especially after India refused to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and following the country’s nuclear tests.
***
Also Read
Head-on | Why US needs ‘swing’ power India in a rapidly changing world order
Triumph of Indian diplomacy: India-US summit and 2+2 ministerial dialogue
***
But as India opened its economy and became one of the world’s biggest markets, and as its GDP (gross domestic product) grew, a renegotiation of ties occurred. And even though it was severely affected after the 1998 nuclear tests conducted by India, by the summer of 2000, president Bill Clinton was receiving the red carpet and turning on the famous charm across India during a much-publicised visit. The very next year all sanctions on India which had come on after the nuclear tests were removed and a new partnership in business, and critically in defence ties, developed leaving behind many of the apprehensions of the past.
By 2005, the two countries were signing a historic civil nuclear deal-making India a global exception for the US. India became the only country outside the NPT framework to retain nuclear capabilities and conduct nuclear commerce.
Two things were pushing the renegotiation of the relationship – at every step, the Indian economy was doing better than ever, and India was successfully using this among its toolkit of arguments, which included its steadfast commitment to non-aggression even when faced with acute terrorism, to push its case as an outlier deserving greater importance and leeway.
In 2008, the Nuclear Suppliers Group, the powerful intergovernmental organisation setting rules and norms for nuclear exports, reworked its rules to allow India the freedom to conduct nuclear trade — India had successfully argued that its energy security and its unique positioning needed such opening of guidelines urgently.
That India did not take military action after terrorists from Pakistan attacked its financial capital Mumbai in 2008 underlined all the arguments it had made on responsibility and restraint. By 2010, the two countries were launching new economic partnerships, unveiling their first strategic dialogue and President Barack Obama was backing India for a permanent position in the United Nations Security Council.
In 2014, the American ambassador to India Nancy Powell resigned after the arrest of an Indian diplomat in New York and as regime change seemed imminent in India.
Under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, India was made a major defence partner for the United States in 2016, once again highlighting the success of its exceptional argument and consistent renegotiation of its position vis-à-vis the US.
In recent times, if there has been a high point in the signing of the COMCASA (Communications Compatibility and Security Agreement), there has been the friction of US President Donald Trump removing India’s preferential trade status (which had continued since the 1970s) and India responding by kicking in its own set of tariffs.
Jaishankar’s pushback on Blinken’s ‘human rights’ point and his mention of ‘lobbies and vote banks’ in America represent the latest chapter of this history of renegotiation between the US and India on India’s status and role. As a country swiftly anticipated to rise to the third-largest economy in the world (after the US and China), this is one of the most distinct signals that India seeks to deepen and enrich its relations with America but while retaining independence — both strategic and in response. As Jaishankar said, “… we will not be reticent about speaking out”.
What is the difference in the latest iteration of this history of renegotiation? It is that the things that India may have heard quietly and responded to only in private, the country is now willingly to say firmly in public.
It would be a mistake to think that this is any hardening of stance on the part of India. As status scholars in international relations have often told us, throughout India’s independent history, it has sought a certain unique status for itself. At different times, it has negotiated from different positionalities — starting with resource-poor to, the current, when it is ranked as a rising power.
India’s history of status resets with the United States has altered depending on India’s own internal resources, but also depending on America’s positionality. When India argues its point today, it is underlining again that its geography (with two hostile, nuclear-armed neighbours in north with whom it has a history of conflict) and its importance in the future of the Indo-Pacific must be recognised before any swift judgement is passed on its action. Indeed, for a country that survived economic sanctions after its nuclear tests at a time of significant resource crunch, it is signalling that it is willing to keep its priorities intact and if that leads to any adversity, so be it.
When asked about American law (CAATSA – Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act) on imposing sanctions on countries that buy weapons from Russia (India’s is buying Russia’s advanced S-400 missile system), the Indian foreign minister recently merely said that America has to do what it has to do, and India will do what it must.
There is tremendous goodwill in India for better ties with America. India’s brightest fuel is Silicon Valley, and power many parts of its Ivy League education system. Trade is growing in leaps and bounds. US-India goods trade has risen 50 per cent year-on-year to $118 billion in the 12 months through February 2022. Exports from America are up 56 per cent in this period. India has jumped to 7th place among the US’s key trade partners.
But this natural progression must happen in keeping with the understanding of India’s special role and status. The latest reset also comes with a strong ‘right to respond’.
The writer is a multiple award-winning historian and author. The views expressed are personal.
Read all the Latest News, Trending News, Cricket News, Bollywood News,
India News and Entertainment News here. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.
from Firstpost India Latest News https://ift.tt/8NUFoCJ
Hindol Sengupta
Comments
Post a Comment