With US President declaring that ties between Washington and New Delhi have ‘never been stronger’, after meeting Modi for the first time, it seems the trajectory and momentum of bilateral ties will be maintained
No contentious issues, focus on common topics
Gopalan Balachandran(Distinguished Fellow, IDSA)
Finally the roadshow is over. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to the US and his meeting with President Donald Trump went off without any hitch or setback to India-US strategic partnership. While what was actually discussed by the two leaders is confidential, the official public disclosures by both parties — the joint statement and the remarks made by the two leaders — would indicate that much of this may have been due to the fact that the Indian side took precautions to exclude subjects that may be of interest to India, such as climate change, H1B visa issues, but on which Trump has taken an active dislike.
Fortunately, there were enough other subjects of interest to both leaders, and Trump was not off the mark when he said that “the relationship between India and the US has never been stronger or better”. With some qualification this is true. The relationship between India and the US has been growing steadily since 2005 and was at its strongest at the end of the Barack Obama presidency. Given that Modi and Trump skirted the contentious issues and focussed on subjects of common interest, it did not cause any damage to the relationship and contributed in a minor way to advance it.
The one positive outcome for India’s defence and security was the willingness of the Trump administration to allow the sale of some sophisticated defence items in particular, the sale of some 22 Sea Guardian Unmanned Aerial Systems, a variant of the MQ-9 Predator UAV, which have not been sold to any non-NATO country so far. These are MTCR category I items and India’s membership in MTCR announced last year should have certainly helped in clearing the sales. The proposed sale is yet to be notified formally to the US Congress and it requires their approval, but the fact that the Congressional caucus on India and Indian Americans continues to be the largest country-specific caucus with bipartisan leadership should be an easy passage for approval. Induction of these UAVs will greatly increase India’s capabilities to have a far better situational awareness of the Indian Ocean region. Not surprisingly, the Chinese have been reported to have been greatly distressed by this sale. This is definitely one of the plus points of the visit. Apart from this sale, not much progress was made on the defence front.
This was, however, not due to lack of interest on the subject on the part of the two leaders. It had more to do with the absence of bureaucrats at senior levels — sufficiently knowledgeable, clued on to the advances already made on both sides, and conversant with each other’s rules and regulations. Unfortunately in the US much of this bureaucracy is still to be named or confirmed by the Senate which would have affected any new proposals being advanced by either party.
For example, the National Defence Authorization Act (NDAA) 2017, which formally named India as a major defence partner, had required the Executive to “designate an individual within the Executive branch who has experience in defense acquisition and technology — among other things — to reinforce and ensure, through interagency policy coordination, the success of the Framework for the US-India defense relationship”. Even nearly six months after the passage of the NDAA, no such person has been designated by the Trump administration.
The position of the Department of Defense (DoD) lead — the co-chair for the India-US Defence Technology and Trade Initiative (DTTI), the major vehicle for advancing India-US defence cooperation — is still vacant. In addition, NDAA 2017 had required the Executive to submit to the Congress a report on how the US is supporting its defence relationship with India. That report, which was required to be submitted before June 23, 2017, is yet to be submitted. It is not surprising, therefore, that no major progress was made at this bilateral meeting except for the sale of military hardware.
There were a few other gains for us. India did manage to contain certain negative aspects of Trump’s opening remarks when he said: “I look forward to working with you, Mr Prime Minister, to create jobs in our countries, to grow our economies, and to create a trading relationship that is fair and reciprocal. It is important that barriers be removed to the export of US goods into your markets, and that we reduce our trade deficit with your country”. The final joint statement managed to refer to only a free and fair trade, thereby deflecting Trump’s preoccupation with balanced and “reciprocal” trade.
However, what is worrisome is the uncritical welcome to the joint statement, attributing far more significance than is warranted. The three major references in that statement that have resulted in unwarranted optimism are:
No such certification has been made in any year and all forms of aid continue to flow to the US under a waiver issued by the administration. Unless the current administration invokes this requirement, the sentiment in the joint statement has not much significance.
As a matter of fact, the US has been conducting, for more than decade, multiple operational assertions and activities against India and China to challenge their alleged excessive maritime claims namely prior consent required for military exercises or maneuvers in the EEZ, and prior permission required for innocent passage of foreign military ships through the TTS (Territorial Sea). In fact, the rights claimed by both India and China are almost identical in the seas. Therefore, unless the US ceases to conduct such operations against India, this statement has little relevance.
Of limited expectations and unexpected gains
Chintamani Mahapatr (Rector, Professor, JNU)
None in the world knew what would be the outcome of the first summit between Modi and Trump. The Indian, American and global media could not even speculate intelligently what would transpire between the two global leaders. In a way, Trump has always been unpredictable and Modi often comes up with out-of-the-box plans and initiatives, and experts could only wonder what would happen in the White House. There was no hype, credible signals or hints from either sides.
The outcome of this summit, however, has been depicted as a big success story all over except in Pakistan and China. To keen observers of India-US relations, there were enough indications that Trump’s approach to its relatively new “strategic partner” would by and large be the same as that of his recent predecessors. Critical areas of differences had been carefully handled before the summit by the US and Indian officialdoms to make the summit more fruitful. First of all, Modi had not a word of criticism for Trump’s abandonment of the Paris Climate Deal. With the solitary response of Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj to Trump’s observations on India receiving billions of dollars in exchange of its commitment to the Paris Agreement, New Delhi was reticent on this issue.
Secondly, the Government of India did not make much fuss over the H1B visa issue, although it periodically hit the headlines. Given the penchant of Trump to link almost every issue to jobs for Americans, Indian companies have repeatedly made it clear for whom they have created enormous jobs in the US and would continue to do so. Trump, on the other hand, had a meeting with tech experts from the Silicon Valley and promised that he would facilitate them in getting and retaining talent.
Third, many had doubted if the Trump administration would come heavily upon Pakistan on the issue of terrorism and some consistently highlighted the limitations of the US in reining in Islamabad. But Trump had sounded out his intention to take appropriate measures, including reintroduction of drone attacks on terrorist sanctuaries in Pakistan and a Pentagon report identified Pakistan as the most influential external actor in the Afghan turmoil.
Fourthly, some analysts had expressed concerns about Trump’s commitments to the Indo-Pacific region in the aftermath of his withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership initiative and making an alleged U-turn on his China policy after Trump-Xi Jinping meeting in a Florida resort. But Trump also signalled that everything was not hunky-dory and he was unhappy with China’s lackluster role in reining in North Korea’s nuclear and missile tests.
In addition and more significantly, while Trump had already met several foreign leaders, including from Japan, Germany, Britain and Australia, the outcome of such meetings had one or the other negative story to tell. There were thus apprehensions about how Trump would engage with the Indian PM. However, the limited expectations from Trump’s first summit with Modi resulted in unexpected gains after the two leaders met, established a positive chemistry, held fruitful dialogues, and issued a bold joint statement.
The joint statement has silenced the critics, converted the doubters, and has cautioned two of India’s neighbours — China and Pakistan — to refrain from destabilising activities and to be more law-abiding. At the outset, Trump and Modi — both champions of stronger action against terrorists and religious extremists — pledged to “destroy Islamic terrorism”, and the joint statement warned Pakistan against indulging in “cross-border terrorism” and “to ensure that its territory is not used to launch terrorist attacks on other countries” — basically against India, and the US in Afghanistan. The biggest blow to Pakistan-sponsored terrorism comes from designation of Hizbul Mujaheedin’s leader Syed Salahuddin as a “global terrorist” a few hours before Trump and Modi would have their first meeting.
While China has not been mentioned by name, unlike Pakistan, the language of the joint statement clearly expresses the Indian and the American reservations over Chinese muscle-flexing in the South China Sea and Chinese disregard of the sovereignty issue in its One Belt, One Road (OBOR) initiative. The joint statement says that the two leaders “reiterate the importance of respecting freedom of navigation, overflight, and commerce” in the Indo-Pacific region and “call upon all nations to resolve territorial and maritime disputes peacefully”. China’s PlA intruded into the Indian side of the border in Sikkim at the time Modi was in Washington for the summit!
China’s OBOR initiative not only disregards India’s concerns over the sovereignty of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, but also has the potential of throwing smaller countries into a debt trap. Flushed with money and afflicted with a relatively slowing down economy, China is desperately trying to strike a series of bilateral deals with several countries to promote its concept of OBOR. Through a combination of diplomatic pressure and economic enticement, smaller and vulnerable countries may face difficult economic situations ahead. Hence, the joint statement supports “bolstering regional connectivity through the transparent development of infrastructure and the use of responsible debt financing practices, while ensuring respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, the rue of law, and the environment”.
In addition to these signals to Islamabad and Beijing, the joint statement also sets to rest all doubts related to the continuity, relevance, resilience, and durability of the evolving Indo-US strategic partnership. President Trump has reiterated “recognition of India as a major defense partner”, the two leaders have “pledged to deepen defense and security cooperation” and expressed their desire to cooperate on “advanced defense equipment and technology sectors at a level commensurate with that of the closest allies”.
Besides, Modi and Trump have set at rest the questions related to Indian tech workers in the US by “applauding the entrepreneurship and innovation of Indians and Indian Americans”. Trump also “welcomed India’s formal entry into the International Expedited Traveler Initiative”.
While many analysts saw an inherent contradiction in Modi’s ‘Make in India’ initiative and Trump’s ‘America First’ economic policy, the Indian PM conveyed to his US interlocutor that there is complementarity between the two. Trump seeks to create more jobs for the Americans and Modi through his initiatives, including ‘Make in India’, seeks to create jobs for the Indians. But Indo-US cooperation and, particularly American participation in Indian initiatives, such as ‘Make in India’, ‘Smart Cities’, ‘Digital India’ and several other infrastructure development projects can create thousands of US jobs as well.
By contributing a signed article in The Wall Street Journal, by interacting with a host of American CEOs, through his conversations with President Trump, PM Modi, the master diplomat, emphasised how India and the US can be the real engines of global economic growth and stability.