Indo-US strategic alliance
By Talat Masood


INDIA and the United States are natural allies, but India’s Nehruvian philosophy of non-alignment and its aspirations to play a global role in exploiting the capitalist and communist blocs during the cold war kept them apart. After the break-up of the Soviet Union, that barrier was removed and India and the United States started moving closer to each other. It was only after the nuclear tests of May 1998 that this process met a temporary setback.

But it did not take long for the relationship to revive and in hindsight it seems that nuclear testing was seized upon by Washington and New Delhi as an opportunity to optimize their relationship.

Several rounds of Singh-Talbot talks provided that platform. The visit of President Clinton to India in 1999 was the first manifestation of the emerging partnership in the post-nuclear South Asia.

The lifting of sanctions and increased military cooperation, joint counter-terrorist operations and the setting up of several committees to identify areas of mutual interest followed the president’s visit. In January 2004, the US administration and Vajpayee government announced further steps in Strategic Partner Initiative, which included cooperation on missile defence, lifting of ban on civilian space programme and technology transfer from the US.

Now the 10-year Indo-US defence agreement and enhanced cooperation “in the areas of civil nuclear, civil space and high technology commerce” bring about a qualitative change in their relationship with serious implications at the regional and global level. These agreements will give India access to strategic weapon systems while critical technologies provide opportunities for co-production and collaborative research and development, including close collaboration in missile defence.

It will also enable India greater intelligence sharing as well as increased trade in arms. Whereas the nuclear and space cooperation is in civilian areas, India would fully exploit the dual nature of these technologies for a military advantage as has been the case in the past. The nuclear deal combined with the defence agreement and a whole range of agreements has catalyzed the relations between the two countries.

In bringing the two countries close, expatriates, think-tanks, defence industrial complexes and the US and Indian conglomerates have played a significant role in an orchestrated and well-coordinated manner.

America seems committed to transforming India into a world power as a partner, on the lines of Japan, with the expectation that it will compliment its efforts in the quest for shaping the world, particularly Asia, to advance its global interests. India will be allowed to have access to modern weapon systems and technology. It may also become a conduit for outsourcing of low and medium-technology items. In return the US would expect access to Indian military capabilities.

According to a respected think tank in America, “India can take on more responsibility for low-end operations in Asia, which will allow the US to concentrate its resources on high-end fighting missions”. Washington also expects that “India will collaborate with it in dealing with the strategic challenge of China”, notwithstanding the fact that both governments deny that Beijing is a factor in their calculations. But it cannot be denied that both consider China as a potential rival and wary of its growing strength.

Currently China has a balance of about 130 billion dollars annually in its trade with the US, which is a source of friction between the two countries. Recently a retired Chinese general remarked that China would not hesitate using nuclear weapons if the US ever sided militarily with Taiwan in the latter’s bid for independence.

This statement sent jitters in the corridors of power in Washington. Ironically, despite these undercurrents, neither country can afford to have bad relations with China. New Delhi has agreed to a strategic partnership with China and has joined the Shanghai Initiative and its trade with India is fast growing. The United States cooperates with China on a vast range of issues. Nonetheless, New Delhi would like to believe that it has not compromised its foreign policy nor has become too dependent on Washington. It will play the balancing act of emerging as an independent power and yet be a US strategic ally.

Despite the congruence of vital national interests between the two countries, India would not get everything it wants from the US This was manifest in Washington’s opposition to India’ bid for a permanent seat in the UN Security Council, taking the plea that UN reform should take priority.

Although it is very much possible that US may support that India (and China) are brought in the G-8 grouping in the near future.

Moreover, it has to be seen to what extent the aims of the framework agreement will eventually be approved by the legislators, as the devil is in the detail and Indians and Americans are not known for being easy negotiators. There are other major global and regional implications of Washington’s cooperation with New Delhi.

Cooperation in civilian nuclear energy, which India needs for its sustained economic growth, is tantamount to legitimizing its de facto status as a nuclear power.

Cooperation in space and missile defence and sale of sensitive military technologies will weaken Pakistan’s nuclear deterrence and conventional capabilities. It would also erode China’s nuclear deterrence with both India and the US. In addition, there are political and psychological ramifications of the relationship.

India will have to swallow a lot of its national ego and pride to act as a second fiddle to the US., in spite of the fact that some analyst have commented that it is “not in India’s DNA to play a subservient role” to the sole superpower.

What then are the options for Pakistan in the emerging scenario? Despite the Indo-US alignment, Pakistan must continue to foster close and friendly relations with the US and expand them in areas of overlapping vital national interests. These include fighting global and regional terrorism and enhancing military-to-military cooperation, including co-production of military hardware, besides developing close economic and trade links and easier access to US markets.

Also important is seeking support in developing education and our technological infrastructure. Having good relations with the US in a unipolar world is by itself a positive factor in international relations.

At the same time, Pakistan should broaden its options by fostering closer relations with China, opening up to Russia, as there are no inhibitions or limitations of the cold war.

As excellent relations already exist with Saudi Arabia and Turkey, we need to build greater economic and trade links with these countries and seek avenues of cooperation in defence production. Islamabad should remove the irritants in relations with Iran and Afghanistan, giving them no opportunity for concern such as the safety and security of Iranians in Pakistan and the safety of Shia community here.

It is important to strengthen economic, political and cultural ties with the two countries and overcome past suspicions so that a new era of relationship based on mutual trust and respect can be built. In particular, ties with Afghanistan must be deepened and their concerns, whether real or perceived, removed through deeper engagement at the government and the people’s level.

These two countries need us as much as we need them. With India too Pakistan should continue to fully support the peace process and the process of normalization without compromising the aspirations of the people of Kashmir.

For Pakistan to gain international respect it is vital that its democratic institutions are strengthened. Democracy and human rights are now global norms and Pakistan will remain at a great disadvantage until democracy is genuinely restored. To face these new challenges the government would need the support of the people. Equally important is strengthening the economy and a sound educational and technological infrastructure.

The foreign policy of a country is closely linked with its domestic situation. A case in point is South Korea, which has a smaller area and less population than us, but is among the twelve largest economies of the world and commands wide respect and can stand up to powerful neighbours.

Pakistan’s geostrategic importance, its unique standing among the Muslim nations and its nuclear capability will have a significant impact if the country is seen to be free of terrorism, is a responsible nuclear state and has a stable democratic system. This may seem a tall order for a faltering society but true leaders are those who convert challenges into opportunities. Surely the fast changing global and regional scenario around us provides us with one such opportunity.