Missed opportunities

PRESIDENT Roosevelt is known to have commented that the Orient was "ruled by a handful of whites and they resent it." Talking to State Department adviser Charles Tausssig, he added: "Our goal must be to help them achieve indepenence -1,100,000,000 potential enemies are dangerous. Churchill doesn't understand this." This was possibly undistilled expediency and pragmatism, if not self- effacing enlightenment. It is this acute awareness of the need to carry the Orient with her, especially its largest democarcy - India - that has characterised U.S. perceptions for more than six decades. It is an entirely different matter however that such awareness has occasionally - sometimes for disappointingly long spells of time - been obfuscated by dalliance with regions and partners of not much consequence to the long-term interests of the U.S.. Indo-U.S. relations forever haunt researchers and not a month passes without some literature getting added to the impressive bibliography.

Gratifyingly, the issues involved are crystal clear. Pakistan, China, nuclear non-proliferation and free trade are subjects on which Indo-U.S. relations have quite often got stuck. Acerbic expressions of their rival viewpoints have often tended to obscure an underlying goodwill and a desire to iron out differences for mutual benefit. On the face of it, the dialogue is so polemic at times that former Ambassador to New Delhi Harry Barnes would say: "The history of U.S.-Indian relations is at least lively." Specifically on nuclear weapons, he is emphatic that beneath the veneer of divergent approaches, the two countries share "an overarching vision" of a weapons-free world order. Mature observers therefore tend to believe that pyrotechnics being very much a part of international diplomacy, one can safely ignore them, particularly after signs lately that the two nations are somewhat convinced they need each other. This is the backdrop that guides us while dipping into twelve essays on the subject effectively woven into Engaging India: U.S. Strategic Relations with the World's Largest Democracy. (Routledge, New York 1999).

Editor Gary Bertsch rightly begins with posing the question: Why are the world's two largest democracies so often at odds? He identifies President Eisenhower's pro-Pakistance stance, U.S. despatch of a carrier group to the region in 1971 and "the debilitating distractions of the Cold War" that forced the U.S. to bllindly push anti-communism as having adversely impacted the situation. India's passionate pursuit of non-alignment and conviction that good relations with the Soviet Union were geographically and otherwise a need of the hour were more dimensions to a knotty situation. The end of the Cold War following the break-up of the Soviet Union provided a totally unexpected respite. But India's nuclear tests of May 1998 and the "harsh response" of the U.S. caused a setback albeit only temporarily.

P. R. Chari, former Director of the Institute of Defence Studies and Analyses, handles non-proliferation concerns capably. He identifies five phases in the history of Indo-U.S. relations in this area beginning with Pokhran 1964 and ending with the 1998 tests. In his view, the deliberate "ambiguity" of successive governments was because "they sought a balance between the deterrent value of nuclear weapons and national commitment to disarmament." This is an analysis that should find wide acceptance. In contrast, his categorical assertion that the 1998 tests were traceable soley to political compulsions could be contentious. Perceiving the current situation as one where India signing the CTBT is not a remote possibility, Chari believes that there are avenues of cooperation in the nuclear area which could become more and more apparent once a modus vivendi evolved.

C. Raja Mohan is intrigued that despite the fact that there had never been a direct conflict between the U.S. and India during the entire Cold War, the warm relationship between their peoples and the strong bond of English language that united the two countries, a "serious political partnership" has been elusive. There is here a dichotomy that is likely to be difficult to comprehend for observers who do not belong to either country. Raja Mohan may be saying the obvious when he states that the two countries were shadowboxing and were not divided by any sustained animosity. Refreshing however is his analysis that India's focus should shift from excessive attention to the U.S. hobnobbing with Pakistan to one of closely monitoring the vicissitudes in U.S.- Chinese relations.

Without gloating over any occasional downswing in such relations, we should seek sobriety and balance which alone would ensure that the dialogue with both the countries proceeded simultaneously. Prof. Amitabh Mattoo seems to endorse this prescription. He is clear that India should consciously avoid yielding to any anti- Chinese rhetoric while talking to the U.S. The temptation to put down China in an attempt to contain the latter's obvious over- assertiveness in the region is difficult to resist. The occasional needling by China by propping up Pakistan is an irritant that we may have to learn to live with.

Prof. Kanti Bajpai looks at the present "Copernican phase" in Indo-U.S. relations with some cheer. There are no doubt difficulties and imponderables. The predictability that was distinct during the Cold War was no longer available for our guidance. Muddling along on an uncertain turf seems inevitable. Nevertheless, the differences, especially over nuclear non- proliferation, is not all that acute as would prevent better mutual understanding. In Bajpai's view, the U.S. does not any longer need to strain itself to woo Pakistan. On the other hand, "a tilt towards India is now possible, perhaps even necessary." US reaction to recent events in Pakistan point to a cold sternness that is significant enough to warrant attention. The tempo in the pace of economic reforms in India should also receive new support in tradtionally hostile segments in the U.S.

Prof. Bajpai rightly dwells on issues such as drug trafficking and terrorism which require the two countries to collaborate. This unfortunately is an area which has not received enough scholarly attention. A well researched monogram on the subject could spur meaningful administrative action. This is especially in the context of the growing U.S. concern over the enlarging contours of Islamic fundamentalism and its offshoot of terrorism of the Bin Laden variety.

Bertsch, Gahlaut and Anupam Srivatsava conclude with an apparently simplistic prognosis. ("Indo-U.S. relations are poised on the cusp of significant possibilities.... the lack of trust about India's intentions will continue to govern U.S. policy..."). They believe that if suspicion continues to dominate exchanges, and "the emphasis (is) on worst-case scenarios," there is little doubt that cooperation will be "suboptimal." Unfortunately, despite a general clearing of the air, the popular impression is that it is psychology rather than unclouded reality which colours relations.

On the whole, this is a well complied volume which places a subject of great contemporaneity in proper perspective. This publication could not have been better timed because there is now evidence of relations between India and the U.S. being poised for a new phase of bonhomie and empathy. Any literature such as this that seeks to promote positive relations should be welcome in both countries.

R. K. RAGHAVAN

Engaging India: Gary K. Bertsch, Seema Gahlaut,and Anupam Srivastava,Routledge, Rs.495.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Features
Previous : A different feminist
Next     : Countering the revivalist spirit