PRESIDENT Barack Obama’s visit to India can be described as a resounding success. The visit was carefully prepared, the speeches were thoughtfully crafted and, as always, Obama showed his oratorical mastery.
Obama was determined to woo his Indian hosts by striking the right chord: talking to children, joining them in an impromptu dance, meeting farmers, praising India’s civilisation and its contributions, lauding its resilient democracy and economic progress, and using Hindi words at key points of his speech to parliament.

If there were still any sceptics left, he probably won them over by his announcement of support for India’s bid to become a permanent member of the UN Security Council. Obama’s visit was rich in symbolism. It signalled the special relationship that the US has by now established with India. He affirmed that India was not merely an ‘emerging’ nation but one that had ‘emerged’. Obama spent more days in India than in any other country during his visits abroad, and, earlier, Singh was the first foreign head of state hosted by him in Washington.

His trip along with 200 business executives underscored the growing importance of India, which by 2020 is expected to become one of the five largest economies in the world, along with China and Japan. The West is becoming increasingly dependent on India and China to power its economy. India is already a member of the G20 and its trillion-dollar economy and a GDP growth rate of over eight per cent helps spur global growth. A key objective of Obama’s visit was the announcement of $10bn in business deals that would provide 50,000 jobs in the US at a time when unemployment remains a big worry. Little was said during his visit about the concerns in the US about outsourcing for which India has been blamed.

Obama also announced the US would relax export controls on sensitive technology, another Indian demand. But it is unclear as to how much new business Washington will get from India. Sectors like retail and the financial services are restricted to foreign investors and there are few signs that Singh’s ruling Congress party has plans for any major reforms soon. The US wants greater market access to India’s infrastructure and energy sectors.

Of course, attention in India as also in Pakistan was focused on what Obama would say on India-Pakistan issues. While wanting to please his hosts, Obama was careful not to ruffle feathers in Islamabad, like British Prime Minister David Cameron had done. Obama stressed that a stable, strong and peaceful Pakistan was above all in India’s own interest. He condemned the Mumbai terrorist incident of 2008, but avoided any mention of a Pakistani link. The Indian media criticised him for not being more explicit. Obama was more explicit in his speech to parliament, stating that: “We will continue to insist to Pakistan’s leaders that terrorist safe havens within their borders are unacceptable, and that the terrorists behind the Mumbai attacks be brought to justice.” However, since Pakistan itself has said on so many occasions that it would punish those who were proved guilty of complicity in Mumbai, Obama’s words did not produce much reaction in Islamabad.

On Kashmir, Obama said: “We will continue to welcome dialogue between India and Pakistan, even as we recognise that disputes between your two countries can only be resolved by the people of your two countries.” He said that the US could play a helpful role in resolving the dispute if both sides asked it to do so but it could not impose any solution on the two sides.

India is worried by the prospect of the US abandoning Afghanistan to a (Pakistan-backed) Taliban regime. Obama insisted that this would not happen. It was notable that he thanked India for its civilian assistance in Afghanistan.

While Obama’s support for a permanent seat for India in the Security Council could be regarded as a success of Indian diplomacy, the fact is that there is no likelihood of this being achieved any time soon. The pace of reform at the UN is slow, and proposals to expand the Security Council’s composition face resistance from many nations, including current permanent members who have little interest in seeing their power diluted. India’s quest for a seat would face particular opposition from China, a permanent member of the Council and India’s economic rival, and from nations and advocacy groups who say India’s conduct in the disputed Kashmir region and elsewhere consistently violates key UN resolutions.

Kashmiris would be disappointed by Obama’s failure to make any reference to the violation of human rights even though the occupied territory has witnessed unprecedented demonstrations for the past several months. Obama’s praise for India’s high moral values also sounds hollow when judged against its record of forcible occupation of neighbouring territories ever since its independence in 1947.

There are many in Pakistan who view with alarm the growth in US-India ties, that have now been reinforced by Obama’s visit. But it is a mistake to regard the matter as a zero-sum game. If US ties with India grow, it does not necessarily mean a loss for Pakistan, or vice versa. Pakistan-US ties are based on their own rationale. In fact, at this time when the primary US security concern is the war against the Al Qaeda and Taliban, the US sees Pakistan as a pivotal ally without whose support the war cannot be won. Obama has already confirmed he will be visiting Pakistan next year.

The India visit was particularly necessary in light of Obama's bumbling overenthusiasm in his 2009 trip to China in which he lavished much time, energy and praise upon his hosts and then oddly tried to elevate Beijing to a G-2 partnership, a kind of two-nation world condominium. Worse, however, was Obama suggesting a Chinese role in South Asia — an affront to India's autonomy and regional dominance, and a signal of U.S. acquiescence to Chinese hegemony.

This hegemony is the growing source of tension in Asia today. Modern China is the Germany of a century ago — a rising, expanding, have-not power seeking its place in the sun. The story of the first half of the 20th century was Europe's attempt to manage Germany's rise. We know how that turned out. The story of the next half-century will be how Asia accommodates and/or contains China's expansion


The Huffington Post
"The partnership between the United States and India will be one of the defining partnerships of the 21st century," Obama said.
Pakistan views India's ties with the U.S.-backed government in Afghanistan as an effort by its old rival to encircle it.

Obama even got a prickly response from some Indian commentators on his first day in the country for failing to mention Pakistan when honoring the memories of those killed in the Mumbai attacks.

To his audience Sunday, he said the Pakistani government understands the dangerous elements that hide and operate within its borders. He also defended the strategic importance of Pakistan to the United States, as he has about India.

"We will work with the Pakistani government in order to eradicate this extremism that we consider a cancer within the country that can potentially engulf the country." He said the U.S. approach is to "be honest and forthright with Pakistan, to say we are your friend, this is a problem and we will help you, but the problem has to be addressed."

The president sought to make the difficult case that India has a rooting interest in Pakistan's success, arguing that stability for its neighbors could help push peace and more economic growth for India. He encouraged peace talks and offered support, but not more. "India and Pakistan have to arrive at their own understandings," he said.
Huffington Post

__________________
hurt me with the truth,
but
never comfort me with a lie