Relations between strangers run into little difficulty because there are no expectations and hence, no disappointments. Problems begin to arise when countries graduate to the status of ally. The worst is when they become partners, such as India and America. Since they have not spelled out the terms of this partnership, every incident or statement concerning the two states creates furore. They have no confidence in one another and jump to conclusions which are often far from the truth.
For example, the killing of an Indian fisherman by the US Navy in the UAE waters is an example of ‘distancing’ between New Delhi and Washington, despite their partnership. In the face of strong reaction from New Delhi, Washington should have immediately ordered an inquiry and contacted the fisherman’s family for compensation. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton should have telephoned Indian Foreign Minister SM Krishna to express an apology. Instead, there is behind-the-scenes criticism against one another. This is an exercise which strangers engage in, not partners.
Take the obiter dicta by President Barrack Obama. Observations such as “creating jobs in Boston instead of Bangalore” are all fine when they are off-the-cuff remarks but the latest is an interview to the Press Trust of India.
President Obama said that the American business community found it “too hard” to invest in India due to prohibitions and restrictions on foreign investment in “too many sectors.” However abrasive, the statement remains within the contours of American foreign policy. But President Obama does not stop there. He refers to “a growing consensus” in India that the “time might be right for another wave of economic reforms” to make the country “more competitive in the global economy”. This amounts to dictating terms as Washington has not yet learnt how to address independent countries. It is still used to the dictum of being the master, not a friend.
The Dulles type of arrogance of the 1950s still guides the State Department. Those who were not with America were considered against it. That is the reason why Indian political parties on the right and the left have reacted strongly to President Obama’s interview. New Delhi has to see what is beneficial for it and it has to safeguard its own interest. That is what sovereignty means.
Before giving an interview, President Obama should have at least read what Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had told to an Indian newspaper. He said: “We want the world to know that India treats everyone fairly and reasonably and there will be no arbitrariness in tax matters.” Many in India are unhappy but he has made it clear that the open economy will continue. “Instinctive reactions of many, both in the political class and in the public, are to revert to a state-controlled system. Reversal to an earlier era is neither possible nor desirable.” American investors should have lapped up the prime minister’s statement, but they continue to put pressure on New Delhi to open up more sectors, particularly multi-brand retails. The Indian business community comprises primarily of small retailers and no government can afford to uproot them.
Yet, what people in India and America miss is the benefit of partnership between the two countries. This is not reflected in the policies they formulate to deal with each other. The civil nuclear agreement which Manmohan Singh’s government signed a few years ago, even at the risk of losing power, remains suspect in the eyes of the American companies. They do not want to face the punishment, which a producer should, if something goes wrong with the plant. The two differ on foreign policies. America expects India to take care of Asia as Washington does on the world scale. They differ on the role that each one should have in Afghanistan. America has told India, many a time, to adopt a military role in Afghanistan for strategic interests. Washington does not appreciate New Delhi’s policy not to get involved in ventures which necessitate military involvement. This was Jawaharlal Nehru’s idea of non-alignment. The non-aligned movement still guides India’s Foreign Office. The US never appreciated New Delhi then and does not do so even now, when the two are partners. India wants to do things its own way. America should not push it further.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 24th, 2012.
COMMENTS (34)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@p1845: I feel sorry for your naivity. There was no good intentions beyond the stated intentions for the consumption of Americans and the world. The reality was that the Iraq war was fought so that the US could flex its muscles and show the world that the American century was here to stay. And that countries that didn't line up to Pax Americana were destined for the same wrath Iraq had endured.
It is easy for Americans to say let the past be; not so easy for those who bear the consequences of those acts for decades to come.
Obama is just practicing realpolitik. Nothing wrong with that! India and Pakistan just need to grow up and learn how to do it. Ironical, the US is just tearing a page for the immortal indo-pak classic chanakya's arthasastra (which incidentally is required reading for American diplomats to be along with the other Asian classic suntzu: art of war).
In 300 bc, Chanakya born in what is now KP prescribed four pronged approach: sama (gentle persuasion and reasoning), beda (threats and dissension), dana (money), and danda (war) as far means for influencing other nations. And Obama and the US has long used that lesson well. It is we who have some growing up to do and not imitate Musharraf who sided with the Americans on the mere mention of "danda" or chacha Nehru who went weeping to the UN when the Chinese invaded.
Pollack
OK, a mistake was made. How was one to know that the Soviet Union ceased to exist.?
Senior citizens like Kuldip Nair and me do lose track things after a while, no matter how perfect we are. Fear God, and don't be uppity.
Remember me when you read by Where you are now, once was I Where I am now, you shall be Thank the good Lord, for EeTee.
@Anonymous: " ... We would love to get the outsourced jobs, but not the investments that may hurt the retail. ... "
Companies that have outsourced, have improved their finances. The deal ends there. There is no need for additional quid-pro-quo for outsourced jobs.
@ Express Tribune, I wish to express my appreciation to your organisation for publishing this article. I would like to admit that I am new to posting comment on an article. What caught my attention was that an article posted of a benign nature (my apologies to Mr. Nayer) turns into bickering, that lightly smells of a notion of Indian - Pakistani bickering.
I would like to elaborate, but this seems hardly the platform. I would like to ask, propagate, question, and just wonder that: "what's wrong with " ""live and let live"" , as someone wise said". We are mostly missing most of the prophets; you name it. Mohammed, Jesus, Abraham...
Pls do not publish this sentiment in writing or verbatim, as it might not be commensurate to the audience of this thread.
You can paraphrase, if you like before publishing, o/w pls send to subscribed e-mails. Thanks.
..Wishing you and us all the best
@kaalchakra: "Soviet union"??? Hahaha. Why not bring back Stalin too?
@p1845: The Afghan war and the Iraq war has given the Americans some experience hubris brings with it. America is headed downwards unless American politicians show some leadership and brilliance; alas that is lacking and all Americans can seem to do is to bully the rest of the world in their desperate last-ditch attempt to bend the world to its will.
Dear Sir
Thank you, Sir, once again from every one in the region. India must continue its non-aligned policies and close friendship with the Soviet Union.
Dear sir, I came across the article by chance, being a news junkie. I would say it is temporal at best and no bearing on a longer term thinking or strategy on part of us(US), India, Pakistan or rest of south Asia.
Obama made the remarks to win the election and keep Romney at Bay. However, being a lifelong republican, I would not mind Romney winning the election, just to prove your supposedly point wrong (just kidding). That would be a disaster to the world diplomacy as we know it. I am going to vote democratic all the way from federal to state and to local. A change in order, I think for a better world.
Your article has smelt the onion and not even tried to peel the first envelope. The changing world orders can not be summarized by few statements, on either side.
I did use to read your articles, but may be I should just scan those and only give a cursory glance at best.
I mean no disrespect, but I expect a thoughtful analysis from respected journalists or thought leaders. ..Best
History is a good teacher. Indians have read well about the Anglo-Afghan wars and have so far kept Indian military boots out of Afghanistan despite US bait as indicated by the author. Wisdom demands they better keep the course. US needs to introduce the section on Ango-Afghan war in West Point.
@Sapan Kapoor: While I agree with how Americans control other nations economically, I disgaree with the notion that weaker countries have a choice to keep America at length. To some extent that choice can be exercised but change is continuous and is a must and change is generally triggered by the more powerful. Nations must be agile enough to evolve their systems to keep pace at least somewhat, with the change being proposed by more influential nations. If this is not done then weaker nations will loose influence with powerful nations just as Pakistan has lost influence. India has generally done a good job keeping pace with the change as well as distributing its nest eggs in different baskets (again unlike Pakistan).
US also controls other nations in other very simple ways. It keeps tracks of other nations VIP's and leaders- their spending habits, ill gotten wealth, their families, children, idiosyncrasies, etc. Now they have the power to create incentives and disincentives for the various rulers because any leakage of undesirable information (such as Saudi rulers, Pakistani or Indian rulers) can cause local and illiterate population to rise against them.
@Raj - USA: No, that is not what the author is saying. The Indian fisherman got killed as others because they apparently did not follow instructions not to come closer to the warship. They were probably unaware and the US warship could not take the risk. I agree with Kuldip that US govt could have responded little differently and more niceley given they were dealing with an important country like India.
@Anonymous: YOu are wrong on both the counts- expecting to change existing culture rapidly to be able to return items and mom-pop shops to give way to big marts quickly. You are immature. Such things never happen and no wise leader will do. A wise leader will try to accommodate as many interests of important stakeholders as possible to make the initiative successful. Then push the remaining stakeholders slowly in the direction of desired goals slowly/incrementally. As an example this is what the Indian government did with the banking sector in the 80's. When they wanted to automate the Indian banks with computerized teller counters and ATM mchines so that Indian banks could compete with future entry of MNC banks, there was much opposition and serious threats from banking labor unions. As a clever compromise, the Indian govt. agreed to retain the same manpower behind every computer even if not required. The automation was brought in but its advantage was reduced/not-utilized by design. Over the years when labor unions saw that to survive with MNC's they have to comply and change they agreed to retrain in newer roles. The lesson from all this is that - change is brought in tid-bits, not overnight !!
@BlackJack: I agree. And as for retail sector opening, why does not India make some proposals that would entail a modified supply chain that would benefit both the small retailers and the MNC's wishing to enter retail sector. The policies should be framed such that MNC's ensure that today's small retailers are necessarily plugged into the new supply chain system, that MNC's open retail super marts only in few select cities and towns on a pilot basis, that they also serve conglomeration of smaller villages by setting up smaller marts. All of this requires planning and foot work that our government has been found wanting and sleeping at the wheels. They only know how to react !!
@Cautious: +1 . I have spoken to some in the shipping business and the fact is that in India, Pakistan and the Middle East, our fisherman do not put in any buoys to mark the location of the their fishing nets. When a ship approaches the fishing nets (the location of which only the fishermen know), the fishing boats engage in high speed maneuvers to intimidate the ship. What they don't realize is that these ships are difficult to turn especially with the amount of cargo they carry. Moreover with the threat of Somali pirates in our neighborhood as well as the USS Cole incident, anyone will get antsy when they see a small boat speeding towards them. . The only solution is to educate our fisherman to mark the areas where they have laid their fishing nets. No ship captain wants to intentionally foul their propeller by going into such areas. So long as the threat of piracy exists, we will see more and more ships straddling our coastlines where fishermen have had traditionally had unfettered access. Chinese fishermen mark their areas and no such incident occurs there. . GoI must educate fishermen, subsidize buoys and plan out a thoroughfare with the shipping lines to eliminate any more deaths. . In this particular case, US DoD Dep. Secy. has already regretted for the incident and an inquiry by the US Navy is on. Until the inquiry is complete especially considering it did not happen in Indian jurisdiction, what more must the GoI do?
@Kuldip Nair Always you write useless articles like this one and you feel that if anybody criticize your article he/she must be a RAW agent.
this man is here for the sole reason of pleasing the pakistanis...by right or by wrong...
Mr Nayyar is obviously past his prime and way too old to have any sense of logic or rationality.It is time Mr Nayyar that you gracefully retire,otherwise you will lose all the goodwill you have built over the last half century or so.
Mr Kuldip Nayar, please grow up, stop whining, and stop looking for validation! Every country pursues her interest and Obama is doing just that. There is difference between listening and agreeing. Listen to what others have to say, acknowledge, thank them for the input, and pursue what's in India's interests. Reactions as apposed to responses only shows your immaturity!
Fortunately no one in India pays heed to dinosaurs.
We would love to get the outsourced jobs, but not the investments that may hurt the retail. That's pathetic. It is like banning autos or cabs in metros to ensure the 18th century cart owners would retain their business of transportation.
It is important to change with time. The mom/pop-shop owners in the USA did accept the malls that ruined their business, and Indian retail owners should also accept it.
Think of merchandise quality and return policies in these retail business owners in India. I know the baniya cheats me everyday, and I don't have a choice. It shudders me to think of returning a faulty merchandise. Therefore, I have no sympathy for individual retail business owners in India, and would love to see likes of Walmart for an improved service.
it is axiomatic that every nation always works in its own interest. The US has shown to be selfish more than any other nation. While the US is reluctant to pursue and shoot at Somali pirates because US is frightened of Muslims they have no qualms to shoot at an Indian fishing boat and kill a fisherman. US businesses are the ones who went overseas to get cheaper services and goods and now they cannot complain. Sure Obama can say that he wants Boston jobs to remain there and not go to Bogota or Bangalore but will the US businesses will listen to him? He is only talking like this because he has no clue how to lower unemployement levels in the US. All nations should be wary of US.
The author is trying desperately with an issue when there is none. What the author says is that US deliberately killed the Indian Fisherman because India did not open up it market for US investments and refuses to adopt a military role in Afghanistan. What a line of thinking !!!!!!
Rubbish. The vessel wasn't even an Indian ship and was clearly violating order issued by a war ship. While the death of anyone was regrettable it has ZERO to do with India/USA relations or USA policy.
America wants to cut off India from Iran but we shall never let it happen. The US must not dictate terms to India on our independent foreign policy. And they must always remember that India and Iran share civilizational links and these ties cannot be broken by any power on this earth. We want to have good relations with the west too but we shall never compromise on our brotherly ties with Iran. We shall never stop our trade, cultural exchanges and people to people contacts with Iran. If the west doesn't like it, so be it. We don't care. For the days of western domination over the Asiatic nations are over now. India should also further improve her ties with China with whom also we share civilizational links. India, China, and Russia must come together to counter the western hegemony and domination over Asia. For the 21st century belongs to India, China and Russia. Period
India should do what is best in its interests. Doing others bidding is usually injurious to one's health, as is evident in our neighbourhood. India must steadfastly refuse military entanglements in Iraq / Afg, no matter how hard it is pushed. US imposes a lot of constraints when selling military equipement, but does not want to accpet the same level of liability in business that is a hallmark of its domestic legal system. (They will sell you weapons but not expect you to use it in a war; but if a commercial project of theirs causes civilian injuries/deaths in India, they expect you to not sue it - remember Bhopal!) But on the other hand, India must be a lot more business friendly. Counterfeiting and software piracy are big issues that need to be tackled; not putting arbitrary restrcitions on foreign cos (Walmart!). If Walmart can eliminate the middleman in the chain from the farmer to the customer (India has one of the highest food/grain wastage percentages anywhere) by driving efficiencies in the distribution, then why not. Plus Walmart would never be able to offer some of the facilities & relationships offered by mom & pop stores. Fiscal responsibility is never popular, but has to be implemented.
I don't understand why kuldeep nayyars writing are so unrealistic to the indian sentiments. it seems that the writer loves controversial statements more than anything else.US apologized quickly to the indians and offered a full investigation of the death of the fisherman , is that not enough ? what more you can want ? US and india are partners due to mutual interest's and we all know that there are no permanent partners and enemies in world diplomacy
We all must be aware of the doctrine of American imperialism. Americans do not take trouble to annex a country, as British annexed India; all they are interested in its profit, and so they take steps to control the wealth of the country. Through the control of the wealth it is easy enough to control the people of the country and indeed, the land itself. And so without much trouble, or friction with an aggressive nationalism, they control the country and share its wealth. This ingenious method is called economic imperialism. The map does not show it. A country may appear to be free and independent if you consult the geography or an atlas. But if you look behind the veil you will find that it is in the grip of another country, or rather of its bankers and big businessmen. It is the invisible but nonetheless effective empire America is trying to create for herself, in India and elsewhere, when outwardly she hands over control of the political machine to the people of the country while exploiting it economically. This is dangerous thing and we must beware of it. We must try to develop our own industries and promote small businesses and become self-reliant. If Americans don't like our investment climate, they can just simply stay away from it. Nobody's forcing them to invest in India. They must understand that India will protect the interests of her people at all costs. The American economic imperialism must be defeated.
The voice of sense and reason. Good advice from a seasoned mature mind.
I think it is high time you get out of your time warp. None of what you preach in this article is relevant to either 21st century India or the relationship that is (slowly) being built with the United States. First of all, it may be of use to understand that 'partner' is an artifical expression that is used when you can't say ally - it is not the next higher level. The US would probably prefer to say ally, but India is not interested and rightly so. However, both sides are free to criticize each other, and I find it amusing that you vent your ire at Obama making a couple of remarks that all of us acknowledge to be the truth, but are out bursting crackers when a bunch of lazy politicians ask him to mind his own business. Obama said nothing different from most leading economists of the day, although his remarks are driven by self-interest - and why wouldn't they be? You also speak of 'missing the benefit' of the partnership but do not elaborate because the negative mindset displayed in the rest of the article represents your anachronistic leftist sentiment and not a hard-nosed assessment; India needs to be able to take honest criticism maturely.
I agree with you sir that we should keep our policy independent. America is not a reliable partner and always seeks its own benefit. So better safe than sorry. We should continue to be close to Russia as the relationship had no expectations and that's what true friendship is all about.