Few people are as well tuned to the politics of Washington DC and to the Indian expectations as Timothy Roemer, former US Ambassador to India. Roemer — who was in India recently — spoke to RAJESH SINGH on the growing India-US relationship, and what the outcome of the upcoming presidential elections would mean for bilateral ties
The US presidential campaign is now in the final stages. But it is still unclear as to who the new occupant of the White House will be. If anything, the election is becoming a tighter race than it was a month ago, with Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump running neck and neck in opinion polls. While all of America and the world waits with bated breath for the outcome, India wonders whether it will have to deal with a newcomer whose inclinations are ambiguous but approach refreshing, or have to do business with a known face, even if a status quoist. New Delhi is keeping its fingers crossed, hoping that either of the two as President will be good for India.
People here are especially keen to see which way the Indian-American community goes. Both the candidates have been wooing the diaspora aggressively. Three agencies — Asian Americans Advancing Justice, Asian and Pacific Islander American Vote, and Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders Data — surveyed Asian-American voters from the Vietnamese, Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Filipino communities and immigrants from India and found a majority preferred a Democratic candidate. Nearly 60 per cent of Indian-American surveyed expressed a negative opinion of the Republican Party, and only 17 per cent viewed Trump favourably. The remaining 24 per cent said they didn’t have an opinion.
On the other hand, 65 per cent viewed the Democratic Party positively and 17 per cent didn’t like it. In what can be good news for Hillary Clinton, President Barack Obama, who has backed her, enjoys huge popularity among the community. An overwhelming 83 per cent view him favourably. In contrast, only 22 per cent like Trump. When asked “if a political candidate expressed strong anti-Muslim views, and you agreed with him or her on other issues, would you still vote for that candidate, or would you vote for someone elseIJ” 59 per cent of Indian-Americans said they’d opt for another candidate.
Few people are as well tuned to the politics of Washington, DC, and to the Indian expectations, as Timothy Roemer, former US Ambassador to India, Democrat and a friend of President Barack Obama. Roemer, who was in India recently, talked about the growing India-US relationship and the impact of the outcome of the presidential election on the bilateral ties. The interview was conducted hours after the first presidential debate and Sushma Swaraj’s emphatic speech at the United Nations General Assembly, and days before India’s surgical strike across the line of Control, which destroyed half-a-dozen terror launch pads in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir and neutralised around 35 terrorists.
Many people are of the opinion that the 2016 US presidential election has turned out to be the most divisive in recent decades. This is also the impression we get from analysts based in the US. It appears that the Blacks, Muslims and Hispanics are on one side, while the rest are on the other. What is your assessmentIJ
I would not use the word ‘divisive’, but this is definitely an unusual election, even an unorthodox one. The dynamics have shifted from hope and change, which the Obama campaign had brought eight years ago, to rage. There is anger against the establishment (the political system in general), and the dominant mood is anti-establishment. This is why the Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton, faces a challenge. She has to talk of her experience in the Government to create jobs, fix democracy and restore trust. Her rival Donald Trump’s challenge is to look presidential, act with grace and temperament, and convince voters that he has the qualities to be the President of the United States of America.
It is obvious from what you observe that the US is faced with many key issues which need debating and fixing. And they are both domestic and global. Why is it then that both Clinton and Trump are fixated on running each other down personally. Shouldn’t they concentrate on substantial matters rather than looks, stamina, private life etcIJ
People look for character and integrity in the candidates they have to vote for. We are electing a leader of not just the United States, but that of the world in many ways. Unfortunately, we have been deeply divided on politics for decades. Those in the US Congress are forever looking at ways to destroy one another (personally and politically). You cannot make democracy deliver by being in election mode constantly. Democracy comes with a set of its own problems and we have to address them. But we have spiralled into election rhetoric at any given time.
On the basis of your understanding of both Trump and Clinton and their performance so far, how would you rate them as of nowIJ
I have no hesitation in saying that Trump has very high negatives, though the opinion polls reflect a general trend that seems to favour him. People like his frankness, directness, the fact that he is an outsider. But the negatives are that nobody knows for sure what his stand is on major domestic and international issues. He may develop that as weeks pass, but today there is uncertainty. Also, he keeps shifting his position.
On the other hand, Clinton has a plethora of natural advantages. She has President Obama’s support, which could make a difference, especially in what are called ‘swing’ States. She has experience, and she has something to talk of as delivery on administration, having served as Secretary of State. Her challenge is to battle the anti-establishment mood and forcefully express change. The working class in the US is demanding different results. It is these issues that have given Trump an opportunity to rise and tap into public discontent.
India, like the rest of the world, is following the US presidential election with keen interest. Most of us have formed opinions based on material available in the media, on who between Clinton and Trump will be good for India. What are your thoughtsIJ
It’s very unclear as of yet what Trump brings to the table on India-US relations. Nothing that he has said so far points to a single identifiable direction. But what Clinton brings is very clear. Her position, as Secretary of State and earlier as First lady, on US-India relations is known and has been applauded in India. She brings continuity of the warm ties that have been forged with India during the presidencies of Bill Clinton, George W Bush and Barack Obama.
It is often said, no matter who heads the Governments of Israel and the US, nothing can upset the strong bonds of friendship between the two nations. That Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Obama don’t bond well has been a subject of much discussion. And yet, it has not dented the US-Israel bilateral. Would you say the India-US relationship too has reached a similar levelIJ
(Smiles) Generally speaking, no matter who is elected President — Trump or Hillary — the positive tone that President Obama has set and President Bush had set earlier, will take India-US relations forward. That momentum will continue. There is a lot more that India and the US share today in terms of interests — trade, strategic security, defence cooperation. Plus, we share common values of family bonding, of democracy, of humanitarianism. We have developed long-lasting defining partnerships on terrorism and climate change. India is seen by the US as a problem-solver on both these issues. The US recognises India as a major and trustworthy power. India’s contribution to the UN peace-keeping forces is, for instance, a testimony to its responsibility towards global peace and harmony.
The Indian-American diaspora is a strong force to reckon with in the presidential election. How do you read its political inclinationIJ The general sense is that being a Democratic candidate, Clinton has a bigger following among this diaspora.
The Indian-American diaspora is very strong and influential in both the Democratic and the Republican camps. like the India-US Caucus in the Congress, it’s very pro-India (and pro-US). Both these groups are bipartisan when it comes to seeking support for Indian interests; they’re active among the Republicans and the Democrats in equal measure.
The diaspora is a very positive and productive force. It has contributed through its research inputs and by producing candidates for local and federal politics. The Indian-American diaspora also brings in a different worldview and enhances the US’s policy directions. Then there is the Indian diaspora which is also influential. All of this I can say with certainty. But it is difficult for me to say which side the Indian-American diaspora will vote for. It will depend on which of the two candidates is able to convince them on intent and sincerity.
let’s now shift to the India-US relationship, regardless of the election. Despite the unprecedented height the ties have touched, irritants have remained. While they have not been serious enough to derail the bilateral, they do end up leaving a trail of dissatisfaction. Issues like trade tariff, intellectual property rights, doubts over transfer of cutting-edge technology to India etc, have seen the two countries take different positions. The same was the case with climate change, though eventually the two sides hammered out an agreement. How are these to be resolvedIJ
Well, clearly there are issues to be resolved. Some will be, through agreements, while others will remain unresolved for lack of agreement. That’s fine so long as the larger relationship remains robust. The beauty and strength of the bilateral lies in the fact that we can agree to disagree and deal with it. We know, and having served in New Delhi, I know it personally as well, that there are issues on which we shall differ. We just have to accept it and move on to those issues where we can effectively collaborate for mutual good and for the larger global good.
One of the complaints that Indians, even those who are generally welcoming of the growing US-India relationship, is that the US has not done enough to rein in Pakistan, which continues to sponsor terrorism in Indian territory. Pious statements have been issued by various arms of the US administration, warning and advising Islamabad to behave. And yet the US continues to provide military aid to Pakistan and give large amounts of financial aid which, many experts believe, is channelised to promote jihadi activities. Why is the US not doing more to contain PakistanIJ
After 9/11, we had strongly stated that our relationship with Pakistan needed to change. The 9/11 Commission report is clear on this. We said Pakistan had to address the growing problem of terrorism being exported from its soil to neighbours such as India and Afghanistan. We have maintained this position consistently. We have been pushing Pakistan to do more, show greater sincerity. We have expanded our relationship with India by simultaneously squeezing and reshaping our relationship with Pakistan. But I want to add here that we want to remain friends with Pakistan because that’s the only way we can convince that country to change.
With relation to Pakistan, there is a second complaint. It’s that whenever India seriously contemplates punitive action over Pakistan-sponsored terrorism, the US is quick to use its good offices to advise restraint. It happened soon after the Parliament attack in 2001, and again in 2008 after the 26/11 Mumbai terror strike. On the other hand, the US chases its target even into foreign soil and neutralises it. The elimination of Osama bin laden by US special forces in Pakistan is a good example. This is double standards. What do you have to sayIJ
It’s absolutely incorrect to say that the US tells India what it should do in response to terrorist strikes. It’s for the Government of India to take a decision. We believe that the Government and the people of India have the wisdom and the courage to take decisions that are in their national interest. As far as terror strikes are concerned, the US had strongly condemned the attack on an Army camp in Uri and called for Pakistan to dismantle terror networks on its side. We believe that Prime Minister Narendra Modi knows how best to respond to such attacks. As a friend, the US stands by India.