INDIAN STRATEGIC APPROACH TOWARDS SINO-US CHILLING RELATIONSHIP

INDIAN STRATEGIC APPROACH TOWARDS SINO-US CHILLING RELATIONSHIP
(In the context of recent developments of US arms sales to Taiwan region and its impact on the cross-strait relations)

The recent developments of Indo-US relations
The last week of January and this first week of February had already set the agenda for the global political stage in 2010. No one would have predicted the there will be such a sudden “U” turn in the Sino-US relations, as US president Obama’s Nov. 2009 China visit was still fresh in our memory. But the news of US selling sophisticated weapons worth 6.4 billion USD to Taiwan indeed came as this winter’s most severe snowfall for the Beijing. The reaction from the Beijing was unprecedented. Military contacts have been canceled and sanctions are seriously considered for the US based companies involved in this phase of arms supply to Taiwan. This is the first time in the IR history that a developing country is threatening sanctions against a developed country. The diplomacy will take its own course and the ice could be breaking in the near future as the two countries share common interests in the global economy.

During the US president Obama’s visit to China in November 2009, and the joint declaration concluded after his meeting with President Hu Jintao, there was a major upheaval in the Indian strategic thinking community. The Indian concern was with regard to not mentioning their country in the issue with regard to maintain peace and stability in the South Asian region. There were several articles representing official and non-official views of New Delhi disappointments towards president Obama. Even some of the writers expressed their wishful desire to limit Obama’s Oval office to only current term and no second term for the man who is not taking India seriously. The perception of global order shifting to a G-2 empire was seriously discussed and debated.

But this perception gradually changed when the Indian president Dr. Singh visited US in Dec 2009 as the first official White House guest hosted by the Obamas in their rose garden which was decorated in the patterns of Indian marriage canopy. The limelight and media attention it attracted was unprecedented in the history of Indo-US relations. This might have marked a change of thinking back in New Delhi. But still many Indians were feeling uncomfortable for not getting enough credit as their Chinese counterpart in the post crisis economic order. Indian concerns are to be treated at par with Chinese at the global forums not only in economic realm but also in political and strategic spheres. Indian media and bureaucrats have always used the publicity stint of portraying China as a totalitarian communist government with unstable future, where as India being projected as the “world’s fastest growing free market economy.”
Are they allies?
It is true that India needs America, but is it equally true that America also needs India. If yes why and where. What India can do for America in the region or at the global level? The answer to this question is often lost in euphoria when India and the US are projected to the natural partners because of one being the world’s largest democracy (INDIA) and the other being the world’s oldest democracy. Indian ministers and intellectuals always start their speech with the stereotype statement of India being the World’s largest democracy with a vibrant youth population and rising middle class consumer market. Therefore they also link India to be a natural ally of the US (which has been always opposite in the real-politick sense). But this concept of natural ally originated long back since the time of President Kennedy. Thereafter the relationship was maligned under the shadow of cold war when India grouped the third world countries in Non-Alignment Movement (NAM) and vociferously criticized US intervention in Vietnam. When the cold war came to an end, India was indeed looking for a new strategic relationship with the US. But by this time US was preoccupied with its engagement with China and also Pakistan. When the George Bush launched its attack the so called “War on Terror” on Afghanistan after the 9/11 incident, Indian leadership under BJP (人民党) offered Americans to use its military base to launch attack on Afghanistan. But USA chose Pakistan as its ally on war on terror and thus the engagement with India was very limited in terms of some refueling of Americans war planes at the Indian airports.

It is also to be noted that Vajpayee had exploded bomb in 1998 which has created stir in West and US and its close allies including Japan has imposed several economic sanctions on the country. The Indians defense minister had written a letter to the then US president Bill Clinton citing China as no. one threat behind the reasons of the causing explosion, which was letter published by New York Times. Later, Clinton visited India and the relationship assumed to be normal when the most of the bilateral technological cooperation were revived. But there still remained many restrictions on the US transfer of Technology to India in the realm of some sensitive technology such as nuclear and space technology, which will be later dealt by the current Prime Minister Dr. Singh.

When did India-US come closer?
Indian leadership under Prime Minister Rao, started the famous economic reform in 1991 by liberalizing its stock market and other controls in order to get the nod of Washington for embracing a free market economy and letting US companies enjoy the benefits of growing Indian market. At the same time India also initiated the so called “look east policy” which tried to reclaim the Indian influence in the ASEAN region where Indians traditionally had enjoyed cultural influence. This gave Indians an opportunity to get closer to US interest in the region and find a common ground to establish a strategic relationship with the only Superpower. The common ground was to balance the rising influence of China in the ASEAN region. Japan and Singapore played an active role by bringing the Indians to be a part of the proposed “East Asian Community.”India recently concluded a FTA with the ASEAN region and at the same time it has bilateral FTAs with Singapore, Thailand and Malaysia. This all factor led to a growing importance of Indo-US cooperation in the region and also at the international level. At the same time India is yet to finalize a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Act (CEPA) with Japan which has been negotiated for last three years. Now coming to Taiwan region, India is also planning to conclude an FTA which is going in several rounds of discussion and intensive negotiations.

Under the second term of Bush regime a historical agreement was signed between India and US which clearly gave a hint of US policy tilting towards bringing Indian in the mainstream of the International politics. The deal is refereed as “123” deal because it is under the first 1, 2, 3 provisions of US HYDE act to supply nuclear technology to other countries. Formally the deal has come to be known as “Indo-US Civil Nuclear Deal”, as it is aimed at peaceful use of nuclear technology. In the past, India had first carried out one nuclear test in 1974 under the Prime minister ship of Ms. Indira Gandhi. That test was also carried out with the supply of plutonium from USA and Canada on the conditions of peaceful use of Nuclear energy. But in1980 the Nuclear Supplier Group (NSG) was established which India needed to get their approval, China being also a member of the NSG criticized the US attempt of changing the rule of the game by making an exception for India. After all the formalities the deal was finally passed by US Congress in the late 2008. In the words of President Bush, “this gave India a Passport to the big power club of the world.”


What’s the impact of Sino-US deteriorating relations on Indo-US relations?
Indian leadership realizes it again and again that economically India is not as important as China. Chinese economy is almost one and half times bigger than the Indian and also China is the largest buyer of US t-bonds and also the largest holder of foreign reserves (more than two trillion USD). Therefore Washington always attaches first and foremost importance to Beijing when it comes to trade policy making and global economic order. There is no doubt that in the current situation no bilateral relationship is as important as Sino-US or “Chimerica” (a term invented by historian, Niall Ferguson of the Harvard University). The so called G-2 is the reality of the current post-crisis global economic order where China has emerged as the savior the global along economy. It has been estimated that China will replace Japan in 2013 as the Second Largest economic power and finally will also replace USA by 2020 to become the World’s largest economic power. India is expected to surpass the US economy at least not anytime before 2040.
Despite all the above economic interdependence between China and US, it is also evident that China has emerged as the most obvious and imminent power to challenge the US supremacy or even Hegemony encompassing Asia-pacific as well as Middle East and African region. China has clearly and directly objected the US new sanctions on Iran and is in favor of using diplomatic method to sole the same issue. This has posed a serious strategic dilemma for the Americans and therefore they look at cashing over India’s close and traditional influence in the region. This implies that a step backward in Beijing-Washington relationship yields a step forward in New-Delhi Washington closeness. The loss of China is the gain of India and the vice-versa is also true. The two countries can hardly come on the same platform except at the recently concluded Copenhagen conference on climate change.
Sino-US relationship has been ascending and descending in the last three decades but overall it has been peaceful and stable except the 1999 attack on Chinese embassy in Belgrade and also the U-25 plane incident in the first year of Bush Presidency. The political bashing of anti Chinese senators was less evident during the US presidential election of 2008, except the house speaker Nancy Pelocy’s nostalgic attraction towards Dalia Lama. Overall, the Last 8 years of Sino-US relations has been categorized as one of the best era of their bilateral relationship. There has been several rounds of strategic dialogue at high levels between the leaders of the two countries encompass economic as well as military aspects. It has contributed in mutual understanding and confidence building between the government as well as people of the two great nations.
What went wrong recently leading to arms sales to Taiwan and Beijing threatening to sanctions can not to be blamed only on Washington, it has to be looked at from different angles and current domestic and international political context through which Obama administration is being challenged. Obama completed one year of his presidency and thus gave a State-of-The-Union address as the US constitution requires it. It was clear that he has not stood up to expectations of American people who believed that it will mark a great change and US will take a positive turn. As he has promised, he could not shut down the Guantanmao Bay prison, and neither withdrew the US army from Iraq. He has decided to send 30,000 more troops to the war in Afghanistan which is leading to nowhere in the recent future. Therefore, he has totally failed to the expectations of the international community of bringing an end to the non-ending war which his predecessor has launched.
On the domestic front, as the US statistics suggest, the unemployment ratio is already 10% and there is no hope of coming it down in the recent years. The US fiscal deficit has risen to 1.3 trillion which is highest in the US history and crossing the danger mark. The US manufacturing industry is not able to create new jobs, and services sector has been paralyzed due to failure of several banks and insurance companies. US economy is still far from recovering to the pre-crisis period. As per the International Relations theory these are the sufficient conditions for a leader of a particular country to divert the attention of its people to international issues. Therefore in my views after suppressing the Taiwan deal almost for a year, Obama administration fired a shot at Sino-US relations in order to distract the attention of domestic and international media form his failures at home and abroad. Now the question arises, why Sino-US relation became the target, it’s simple that no bilateral relationship is as sensitive and important as the G-2.

What is the official thinking in India?
Why Obama administration took this decision of enraging Beijing over the most sensitive and core issue of Sino-US relationship, and why now? Indians view can be represented in the following excerpts from an article published in the Indian express titled “cracking Chimerica”. It says: “Obama’s agenda for the bilateral relationship with Beijing was ambitious. Chinese cooperation was seen as vital to discouraging Iran and North Korea from pursuing nuclear weapons. On important multilateral initiatives, such as a breakthrough agreement on climate change and the resuscitation of the Doha Round of trade talks, Chinese cooperation was critical. Closer home, consultations with Beijing were required to gradually overturn the US’s enormous trade deficit and plot a way out of the global financial crisis. The potential returns on all of these fronts were large enough for Obama to expend considerable political capital to keep positive engagement alive. His administration’s rather public declaration to reduce its emphasis on Chinese human rights violations unsettled advocates at home. Obama earned the added ire of supporters by opting not to meet the Dalai Lama. And he was widely ridiculed for various conciliatory gestures made during his visit to Beijing in November. But it was also developments during that visit to Beijing and the subsequent UN climate summit at Copenhagen in December that suggest that the G-2 has now swiftly fallen out of favor. Despite the generous concessions offered Beijing, not one of Obama’s strategic objectives was met. There was no move to float the renminbi, and no discernible change in position on either Iran or North Korea. Cyber attacks have reportedly continued emanating from China, and dissidents have been jailed. At Copenhagen, China was seen as primarily responsible for obstructing a meaningful agreement. Cyber security and Internet freedom featured prominently in a major speech by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, while Obama has also decided to meet with the Dalai Lama later this month.” This article is a typical Indian thinking in majority about the current Sino-US entanglements, but it does not mention the any diplomatic or economic gain for India out of these recent developments. India will act carefully and will calculate its loss and benefit before taking any strategic decisions in haste which may enrage her largest neighbor. Nevertheless India does feel a relief for some time when the media attention has deviated from Sino-Indian relations to the Sino-US relations. New Delhi is currently following the policy of wait and watch.

Washington is trying to bring India in its “Game plan” of pressurizing China on various issues. There has been kind of opinion from Washington based think tanks to engage India on the same front as Japan in the pacific to balance the rise of China. This view has been reflected in the testimony of various American Indians to the Senate committee on foreign policy making. Ashlley Tellis a Mumbai born Indian based at Carnegie endowments for Peace in Washington is a leading proponent of engaging India to counterbalance the rise of China. The international editor of Newsweek magazine, Fareed Zakaria also belongs to the same school of thought. Back in India, Prof. Brahma Chellany is a China basher on anything and everything and he is well read in the Western Media for his critical approach towards rise and threat of China theory. Some of the retired Ambassadors and diplomats have a moderate view towards China but they are very nostalgic of bringing India in close courtship of US strategic alliance. They neither see China as a threat nor as a reliable partner. Their approach is very clear that it is only the US which can checkmate the dragon. India on its own cannot take on China.
The international conditions are also in favor of India coming closer to USA, because of India’s rising influence in Afghanistan and Iran, and China’s limited interest in the same region. Indians in the United States have emerged as an important lobby group and no President can ignore their influence. As well known is the fact that Silicon Valley is dominated by 35% people of Indian origin, and the same is also true in many realm of the US services industry. India is the base of many outsourced business operation of US firms and the trend is not going to stop soon. The largest number of foreign students at the various US Universities also comes from India. Therefore it is natural that Indians enjoy an intellectual influence over US policy making. Some policy makers also argue that there is good communication channel between Indians and Americans compared to the Chinese and Their US counterparts. The Pentagon’s Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) 2010 has recognized ''a more influential role in global affairs'' for India including in the Indian Ocean region and beyond based on its commonalities with the US, while expressing Washington’s concern about the nature of China’s military development and decision-making processes.

What could be the future outlook?
It will be naïve to conceive that Obama’s foreign policy making will mark a watershed change from its predecessors. The Hawk and Dove share the same common office in the Oval office and therefore it is well in the interest of China to be ready from any maneuvers or challenges emanating directly or indirectly from the Washington Hawks. India could be a pawn in the US new emerging game in the Asia-Pacific region, but as the six decades of the Indian democracy tells us, that she will never chose to be the one dictated from Washington. India has at least maintained its territorial integrity and sovereign independence of foreign policy making. She will in no situation allow herself to be played at the hands of Washington. There are nostalgia for being grouped as US allies, but there are political and social groups seriously opposed to any close alignment with Washington nefarious plans for seeking global supremacy.
China should give India equal importance and recognize her achievements in terms of a peaceful dealmaker not only at the Copenhagen but at many international forums such as WTO, IMF, and UN. It may not be in direct interest of China supporting the India’s entry to UNSC as a permanent member, but it will never the less give China more global voice and legitimacy for the cause of developing countries in the new emerging world order. India will equally reciprocate to China in diplomatic as well security forums by sharing the common causes of representing the interests of the developing countries at international forums. India China can coexist by sharing much more information and making clear their future goals and intentions in the region and across the regions. The US will not be successful in playing either of one against the other. On certain issue such as global terrorism, India may act together with US, since it faces a common threat of radical Islamic terrorism emanating from the same region of the global terrorism epicenter. But India and China working together can make it possible that 21st century will go down in history as Chindia’s century.