Is a US-India strategic partnership viable ?
The three reports in India Abroad (June 8,2012) on the conference on '
Power, Identity and Security in Asia : Views on Regional Cooperation
and the US Role' are illuminating as they throw light on different
aspects Indo-US relations. There are many things in common between the
USA and India - democracy, free press, judicial independence,
acceptance of diversity and religious freedom. They should have been
the natural partners since India's independence. That did not happen
as USA looked at all countries from the cold war perspective - with us
or against us. Remember John Foster Dulles ? India was not ready to
join the cold war but was content to build its own economy, and later,
it joined other newly free countries in the non-alignment
movement.Rest is history.
After the collapse of the Berlin Wall and the Soviet Communist system,
the Cold War and two-polar world came to an end and USA emerged as the
sole super power. With the rise of China, interestingly with the help
of USA, there is now another power which seeks to dominate the world.
The GDP of China has surpassed that of Japan to emerge as the second
largest economy in the world. Its military spending has gone up to
$89.8 billion, next only to USA with $739.3 in 2011. It is investing
heavily in " asymmetric capabilities" to blunt overwhelming US
capacity, as a report in the Economist reveals. It is not inclined to
settle its differences on territorial waters with the neighboring
countries such as Vietnam, the Philippines and Japan.It has not yet
settled its territorial dispute with India since the conflict in 1962.
All this naturally make many doubt 'the peaceful rise' of China.
This scenario was envisaged by Henry Kissinger, who as the Secretary
of State of USA, had sent the 7th Fleet to Bay of Bengal in 1971, when
Indira Gandhi helped Bangabandhu Mujibur Rahman to free East Pakistan
from the Pakistani military atrocities and to become Bangla Desh . In
his book, Does America Need a Foreign Policy ?, published in 2001,
Kissinger writes that " India is a democracy by far the best
functioning and genuine free system of any of nations achieving
independence following the Second World War." and admits that the
alliance with Pakistan " blighted America-India relations during the
cold war". He also says India and USA have common interests which
should not be jeopardized by over-emphasizing the nuclear issue and
that " a closer cooperative relationship between the two countries is
in their mutual and basic interests". He supports India's need to
protect its interest in the Indian Ocean and the Arabian Sea through
the naval supremacy from Singapore to Aden.He advocates cooperation
with China, India and Japan but proposes that there should not be any
domination by one single nation in Asia and that should be thwarted.He
is a farsighted statesman.
India is a peaceful nation which has not invaded any other country in
its long history. It is true that Indian kings had extended their
regime to South-East Asia ( Cambodia, Indonesia, Thailand), it was
more a cultural conquest than military. Buddhism spread to China,Korea
and Japan not by military means but by the Buddha bikkus
(missionaries) of India. India is a reluctant military power, not a
militaristic power. Souresh Roy is right when he says, " India will be
driven into an alliance with the US only when it sees China as an
existential, imminent danger and not before that." It sought US
military help only after the Chinese attack in 1962. Dr.Deepa
Ollapally is right in observing that " Even though India is one of the
most consistently biggest arms importers and is building up its army
capability,international reaction is quite favorable for India,
compared to China's rise. And I suspect, most people would say that's
something to do with India's democracy, which goes right to the matter
of the nature of India, rather than the raw power." Success of
democracy in India owes much to the Hindu ethos of acceptance of
diversity and freedom of thought. This is evident if one looks around
India who were free at the same time.
However, Jonah Blank of Rand Corporation, who was a journalist in
India for some time and has written books on the Indian sub-continent,
now called South Asia, seems to have missed the point altogether. He
is surprised that autonomy is the core of India's position. What is
the meaning of independence of a state without autonomy or freedom -
to decide its economic,political and strategic affairs.India has the
potential to regain its past prosperity - its GDP was 27 percent of
the world in the 17th century, according to the British economist
Angus Maddison.
As has been pointed out by Kissinger, interests of India and USA are
parallel, not in conflict. Both share many common values. Both can
join hands for peace and prosperity for all its people.
http://www.indiaabroad-digital.com/indiaabroad/20120608/?pg=5&pm=1&u1=friend
June 6,2012.
******
