In the American classic penned by Ernest Hemingway, titled “For whom the Bell tolls”, the male protagonist Jordan arrives from the American forces to blow a bridge in Franco’s Spain, where the anti-fascist struggle was raging on. Jordan hides in a cave with the mission to blow up a strategically situated bridge in the sylvan Spanish promenades and icy mountains. Thus, hereto one is presented with an American intervention during the initial days of World War II when he intends to stymie the Franco Regime.
The same framework works in the American establishment till now, wherein the interventionist zeal with a humanist philanthropy makes Washington intervene and sometimes burn its hands in order to promote the homeland virtues of liberalism, rule of law, democracy, egalitarianism and constitutionalism. But, the all pertinent point which emerges is that with the Presidential agenda since his vitriolic campaign trail has referred to a withdrawal from the gladiatorial contestation in the larger and volatile international system. The “America First” doctrine does not objectify an American overarch, but points towards another inward looking approach in the rigmarole of the American foreign policy.
Every nation needs a framework, both ideological and practice wise, in order to project its power and developed strength in the larger international system. Thus, having a strategy to improve upon its national credentials is the beginning point where any nation’s foreign policy starts from. In the same strategic context and in the sphere of foreign policy, the most powerful nation state in the international system — the United States — too has a historic tradition of releasing its national security strategy within a time interval of twice in a decade or even more frequently if the international strategic conditions demands. It is also a key foreign policy document which elucidates and elaborates upon the intent and policy doctrine of America in the near future. Donald Trump’s National Security Strategy (NSS) is a kind of White Paper on global security and foreign policy.
The NSS unveiled by President Trump ushers in a breeze of fresh air for nations such as India. Being concerned about New Delhi and its international fortunes, Trump has declared quite clearly that the US perceives India to be a world leader and Washington will leave no stone unturned to support and aid New Delhi in its quest for super and hyper power status. President Trump has taken a path away from America’s pro-Pakistan stand and unidimensional policy on disarmament. At least in written form, President Trump unveils a fresh policy underlying a global need for a more proactive role for India in the sphere of global politics. This stress in the Trump’s NSS for uplifting India is a “first” in the context of the much talked about India-US strategic relations despite differences in the realm of United Nations Security Council Resolutions and other developments. How comfortable it is for India to vote against the American sponsored UNSC resolution declaring Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and still receive a warm prediction in the National Security Strategy of December 2017! The Indian foreign policy establishment needs to be congratulated for this massive achievement of rekindling the India-US partnership. One criticism which is directed at the American NSS of 2017 is the practice of segmenting the world into the pockets and identities of good, bad and ugly. Still, that white and black perception of world politics in the present context is a positive development for New Delhi as Pakistan gets castigated for its act of harbouring terror modules and being part of the international terror funding chain. Thus, the decade-old Indian demand for identifying Pakistan as a sponsor of global and trans-border terrorism has been handsomely met by President Trump’s Pakistan policy in the 2017 National Security Strategy.
President Trump has advocated a global force of do-gooders for foreign policy realism. Condoleezza Rice, former US Secretary of State, has analysed the Trump’s NSS. She remarks that President Trump perceives the larger international system as a Hobbesian world which is en route to complete destruction and annihilation, which, according to her, is a rather negative understanding of the global affairs. The NSS can be criticised for rejecting universal values which are superseded by only American value systems and principles. What is beneficial for India is the perception of the American National Security Strategy as labeling India in the “opportunity” category and not as a threat or competition and rivalry for Washington. The strategy document also positively mentions in the text that new importance has to be attached to the term “Indo-Pacific,” wherein, the newly designated regions stretch from the Indian West Coast to the Western Coast of the US. The NSS reflects a great deal of rhetoric but the pro-India tilt in the foreign policy has to be perceived positively rejecting the general negativity which some observers harbour for everything American.
The new hand being extended towards New Delhi might be tarnished by the circumscriptive approach in the Indian foreign policy environment. President Trump means a steady and sincere handshake with India, which should be welcomed. The National Security Service Archive informs us, “The National Security Strategy Report is published by the executive branch of the United States Government. It is intended to be a comprehensive statement articulating the worldwide interests, goals, and objectives of the United States that are important to its security. Among the reporting requirements are those actions needed to deter aggression and to implement the national security strategy.” It further reads, “Under the Goldwater-Nichols Defense Department Reorganization Act of 1986 (amending Title 50, Chapter 15, Section 404a of the US Code), the President must submit a report on the national security strategy of the United States to Congress each year. However, especially in recent years, these reports have been made late or not at all.”
Former President George Bush harped on the Global War On Terror (GWOT) as part of the national Homeland Security Act, while his predecessor, Ronald Reagan, too had a theme or two reserved for the “Evil Empire”. Din M Snider writes, “The 1988 report was written in the context of prominent deficits in the federal budget and balance of trade. The result was that this second report emphasised the importance of integrating all the elements of national power, particularly the economic element. This in turn led to the presentation of separate strategies for various geographic regions with independently planned integration of the tools of power.” Thus apart from deliberating upon a crassly Defense and war matters, the entire national power index has to be delved into wherein structural and economic functions too have found a place in the trail of National Security Strategies of the grandiloquent do-gooder United States of America. However, despite all the bluster and the gung-ho clarion calls, the NSS too is tampered with the domestic and homeland narratives.
(The writer teaches International Relations at Indian Institute of Public Administration, Delhi)