The success of Barack Obama's visit should be judged not so much by whether the U.S. lifts the sanctions on ‘the entities' or he softens his rhetoric on outsourcing. There are far more serious subjects.
The visit of the head of state of the sole, though somewhat depleted, superpower provides us a timely opportunity to apprise our guest of our assessment of the strategic environment surrounding us and to engage him in an in-depth discussion on how to deal with the common threat to our countries and peoples, nearly all of which emanates from the Af-Pak region. The success of Barack Obama's visit should be judged, not so much by whether the U.S. lifts the sanctions on ‘the entities' or whether or not he softens his rhetoric on outsourcing, important as these issues are. There are far more serious subjects which should occupy the limited time the leaders spare for a tête-à-tête or talks at the delegation level. A candid discussion of the strategic implications of the crisis in Afghanistan and Pakistan must be carried out.
The war in Afghanistan, it seems, is not a major issue in the forthcoming mid-term congressional and gubernatorial elections in America. Mr. Obama would no doubt wish to make it an equally not-a-critical issue when it is time for him to start campaigning for a second term. Indeed, it is this factor which has dominated his approach to the Afghan war, as Bob Woodward has brought out so conclusively in Obama's Wars. Henry Kissinger could not resist the temptation of being clever when he said the ‘exit strategy' was all about exit and not about strategy; in fact, however, Mr. Obama has been discussing strategy almost since his first week in office.
Obama's Wars also brings out the President's preoccupation with Pakistan, persuading its leaders to cooperate with America in degrading and defeating the Taliban in Afghanistan. As one of Mr. Obama's advisors said during the endless hours spent on discussing the ‘options' the President could consider, all the persuasion took the form of carrot and no stick. Nearly $20 billion has been sunk into Pakistan since 2001 and more is being pledged almost every week. It must be the highest investment, with very little to show for it, per sq km in the world. The Americans have also felt obliged to assure Pakistan that their President will visit Islamabad next year, as well as not to make too much of a fuss over the Sino-Pak civil nuclear deal. It is not only India that has to be pragmatic in its foreign policy.
One reads in the Woodward book that the Americans have identified 150 targets which they would bomb in case of another 9/11-type attack on the American homeland that was traced to Pakistan's badlands. Perhaps the Pakistan military takes the American threat more seriously than India's when it says another ‘Mumbai' would engender a robust response from us. Happily for India-U.S. relations, Mr. Obama's initial inclination to include India, or more specifically Kashmir, in Richard Holbrooke's mandate was quickly discarded, thanks to New Delhi's timely and effective intervention. Nonetheless, the President, and more so his advisors, have convinced themselves that the key to obtaining Pakistan's full cooperation lies in prevailing upon New Delhi to ‘cooperate' with Islamabad in tackling the root causes of the crisis between ‘the two nuclear-armed arch enemies', as India and Pakistan are invariably described in the American media.
The extent to which the Americans and others in the western world have bought the Pakistani line should be a matter of concern to us. It also shows that Pakistan's propaganda machine is working ceaselessly in all those capitals. One explanation for this bias is that Pakistan is considered an underdog and the world always has sympathy for underdogs. Pakistan's very weakness is its strength. But there is no getting away from the fact that we have to intensify our PR efforts; the lobbying firms we have hired in Washington should be made to produce better results. It is here that Mr. Obama's visit provides us with an excellent opportunity to disabuse him of the falsehoods Pakistan has been spreading about us.
For example, many in the West, and perhaps elsewhere as well, believe that India does present a threat to Pakistan and that the threat would become the most acute if there was a pro-India government in Kabul. The concept of ‘strategic depth' is not dismissed summarily by others, least of all by the Pentagon. Pakistan's argument that India and an India-friendly Afghanistan could join forces and attack it, however laughable, is not scoffed at by all think tanks abroad. In this writer's interaction with several think tanks recently in America, he was told that India must not take advantage of Pakistan's precarious position at this stage, that India must “give comfort” to Pakistan, that India must engage Pakistan in a composite dialogue, including specifically on the question of Kashmir, etc. One influential think tank even suggested that in order to bring Pakistan fully on board in the war against the al-Qaeda and the Taliban, it must be offered a ‘quid' in the shape of a sphere of influence in the Afghan provinces adjoining Pakistan.
When pointed out that this would in effect mean conceding a sphere of influence to China, they were least concerned. All this, despite the Indian government's persistence with dialogue notwithstanding Pakistan's stalling of proceedings against the perpetrators of 26/11 and the undisputable links between the Inter-Services Intelligence and the Lashkar-e-Taiba.
The pressure on us would have been severer had we refused all contact with Pakistan after 26/11. However, the government's knee-jerk reaction every time Pakistan utters the ‘K' word is un-understandable. We have a perfectly good case on Kashmir and in fact we should be the ones to want to discuss Kashmir, since it is Pakistan which aggressed against us and is still occupying our territory. We should not be afraid of the ‘K' word. We should ask those who want us to discuss Kashmir with Pakistan: “What is it that you want us to discuss regarding the Kashmir issue? Are you even sure that Pakistan wants to ‘solve' the issue, except by the only way that we will never agree to, namely to hand over the whole of Kashmir, or at least the entire Valley to them?” Manmohan Singh and Pervez Musharraf came close to concluding an agreement on Kashmir, but that has been disowned by Ashfaq Parvez Kayani.
President Obama might not necessarily ‘buy' these arguments from the think-tankwallahs, although the think tanks in America are as aggressive in pushing their ideas on decision-makers as their businesses are in pushing their products in overseas markets. But he is looking for a way out of the Afghan quagmire and is most anxious that the process of ‘reconciliation' with the Taliban should succeed. He does seem to be persuaded that Pakistan's help in this process is indispensable, even though President Hamid Karzai may have his doubts about conceding anything more than a consultative role to Pakistan. Reports that Pakistan arrests any Taliban commander believed to be talking to the representatives of the Kabul government indicate Gen. Kayani's determination to keep the process firmly in Pakistan's control. The U.S. is anxious not to risk alienating the General described by Mr. Holbrooke as the most important political factor in Pakistan. (Woodward's book has the following gem. Secretary Hillary Clinton asked Mr. Karzai during his visit to Washington in May 2010: “Do you really think the ISI could pick up Mullah Omar if they wanted?” Karzai reached over and plucked a chocolate chip cookie from his plate. “They could deliver Mullah Omar like I can pick up this cookie,” he said.)
Every such visit does not have to be “highly successful” or “historic.” The success or otherwise of the visit must not be judged by our getting concessions on some bilateral issues. Nor should Mr. Obama expect to clinch the deal for sale of 126 American fighter aircraft at this juncture. The President might say something about India's ambition for a permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council. His advisors presumably have explained to him that the Indian public opinion will not be satisfied with some vague formula of the U.S. being sympathetic to India wanting to play a bigger role on international forums including the U.N., etc. If he does not bring himself to expressing unambiguous support, he would be well advised not to say anything on the subject.
The real criterion for measuring success would lie in assessing whether or not the two leaders have reached consensus on defining the dangers that their, and other, countries face from the Af-Pak area and how they intend to tackle it. They must agree on a mechanism for arriving at such assessment and there is only one way of doing it. What is needed is a trilateral forum of consultations consisting of the U.S., India and Afghanistan.
Keywords: Obama visit
Obama "Salesman of the year". Lots of news agency says that Obama is not visiting the Taj Mahal, he is not interested in Taj Mahal , He want to raise money by selling planes and other defence things and how to bring out United States from rescission by selling those things to India
Only some middlemen would benefit and common man will lose
The obsession with Pakistan is both laughable and sad. Why not discuss matters that make a difference to the regular folk of India(you know, the 800 million that the rest of Bharat likes to forget).
One should not get carried away by ANY expectations and rather concentrate on what is doable and in the best strategic interests of India!!! In the first instance, India needs to adjust to the fact that this President followed in quick order by the Russian and French Presidents are all coming for one basic reason, they realize that THEY need India's economic muscle more than India needs ANYTHING from them, and this includes some of the over-pricedmilitary items that are being showcased. India needs to flex its muscle and be blunt, but polite. The US Prez came into power with much fanfare and a Nobel Award that was questionable to say the least, he now needs to the good graces of India to stifle major revolts even in his own Democratic party. So,India needs to be able to play hardball - the Americans will respect that, even if they dont like it.
The article is a beautiful summary of the challenges facing our foreign policy babus vis-a-vis US and Af-Pak. I don't know if our babus are up to the task, but certainly I hope they don't get carried away by the vague "strategic partnership" language similar to the "special relationship" lingo between Blair and Clinton
This is a timely article and India should reflect on themes contained herein. The single preoccupation in the US is with turning the economy around and the current showing by the Democrats in the forthcoming elections is cause for serious concern to President Obama. It is therefore in Foreign Affairs that the attention will shift because the Presidential elections in two years will focus on American successes. Obama needs India to chalk up a success story and the theater will be Af-Pak. There is little doubt that the US will engage in overdrive diplomacy in order to complete the pull-out before the Prseidential elections. After the disaster in Iraq, US voters will look for better news from AfPak and I am convinced that the Clinton/Petreas team will deliver. India, therefore is important in this equation but we must understand the context. The reality is that the realtions between the US and India has come of age and we need not worry about US compromising India's interests
Like other visits nothing is going to come out of this one, excepts that the TV crew will be busy for a couple of days.
As rightly pointed out by columinist it is high time that we should engage in talks with Obama in areas like science and technology,trade, exploration of shale gas technology etc. As far as Af-Pak area is concerned we should not buckle under any one's pressure.
You have very well pointed out the importance of our diplomatic machinery having to work overtime to set the right perceptions and send the right messages to the US and other nations. Sometimes, perceptions are more important than we think they are.
You can expect the main strategic implementation in his trip. Sending his home country the message that Indian trade would fetch so many thousands of Jobs in America. What else? He is all talk and no work.
We cannot expect more from President Mr. Obama's visit to India next month. People the world over expected more from the President as soon as he was elected. But belying the expectations nothing solid had emerged so far from the US. US is reeling under recession and unemployment. Mr President went on to withdraw the tax holiday granted to the US BPO's that outsourced jobs mainly to India and other countries. Though there are world class universities of the world are housed in the US, students of the US are average and he wants this to change. Many banks in the US have been liquidated. The US economy is in doldrums. He wants silicon cities like Bangalore in all important US cities. He has his own head ache. He wants to settle the Kashmir issue for a temporary seat in the UNSC. He wants the Indo-US deal to the settle amicably. Only agreements favorable to the US alone will be signed during his visit and nothing more and nothing less.
As rightly pointed out by the author, a balance has to be maintained with respect to the nature of the discussions held with the the US President and his delegation. But I would say more importance has to be given to the outstanding bilateral economic relations rather than the strategic interests of US in the Af-Pak or the Kashmir Valley. Time and again, we have seen that India's legitimate concerns regarding the US financial aid to Pakistan have gone to deaf ears. What can be concluded from this is that the US strategic policies in the Indian sub-continent depends on a host of other bilateral ties and would not always cater to the Indian demands. Nonetheless, we can hold deliberations on numerous economic issues, the civil nuclear deal and the outsourcing limitations being most pertinent amongst all. Discussions focusing more on bilateral issues would mutually help both the nations and make this opportunity a success.
India should not ask anything of the visiting President. Let him have a good visit. He is going to be coming to India after a brutal mid-term election when his party would have surrendered the majority in the House and barely have a majority in the Senate. Mr. Cool will appreciate some down time. He loves adoring crowds and the hosts should make him feel like a Billion Bucks. Let him draw his own conclusions as to why India did not ask anything of him on his visit. But please welcome him so he will want to keep coming back before he leaves office.
While the hype and anticipation surrounding the US President's visit is typical as well as justified, India must not lose focus amidst the glitz. Its own citizens' needs must always be first, encouraging FDIs at the cost of endangering the self-dependence of our people can be likened to sitting between two chairs and falling down in the process. Moreover, as far as US treatment of Pakistan and Afghanistan is concerned, it has always treated Pakistan with kid-gloves owing to the latter's cultural proximity and influence over the US's bette-noir and nemesis Afghanistan. This is the time for India to express solidarity with its belligerent neighbour which is currently in the grips of one of the worst, most lethal and, intense and protracted insurgencies with easy entry from the Afghan border compounding problems for them. Its seems the snakes it harboured in its bosom are finally coming back to bite them.
President Obama has two eyes one on Pakistan where he has invested heavily to the extent of $2 billion while he has offered $2 million to India which is the biggest democratic country in the world, but his visit is just to see pulse of the Govt, as to see how far there are close to US or USSR and how can US make India still come closer and kept away from China, which is becoming the world power and US economy is dwindling and within antoher 10 years India and China become the most powerful nations in the world.Hence India has to look after its relationship with all neighbours and also ensure equal distance from all of them more so China. And India has to tell Obama that its investment in Pakistan is a waste and a bad investment since Pakistan has given its Pakistan-occupied Kashmir to China for its control against India.
This is an excellent article if the Government in Delhi understands the contents and their implications for India. US has been taking India for a long ride for a long time and India herself did not do what was necessary to take care of Pakistan when the opportunities presented themselves. Shameful! Now that Obama is coming to India, for business deals and to exploit Indian market no doubt, it is time for India to tell Obama and US bluntly-- Look we have been very patient with Pakistan until now. The stage when we cannot take Pakistan's duplicity, sabotage and terrorism any more, has become and we will take care of Pakistan at all costs unless Pakistan stops for good undermining India. Has India got the gumption, the backbone and the national pride to say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH and that India has come to the end of its patience. I have my serious doubts considering India's cowardly behavior in the past.Wake up India!
Instead of merely exchanging gifts, lavish dinners, and photo sessions, hopefully the US and India use this opportunity to arrive at pragmatic solutions to the numerous challenges that confront the world including the economic chaos that prevail all over.
This article is a caveat for the Indian government of what not to expect during Obama's visit. I really felt preposterous when the author pointed out about how the Pakistan government has vituperated us in the west and I feel Obama's visit would be the right time for us to corroborate to the west of what we really stand for. It's also high time that we should beef up our economic ties with U.S.
If India truly want to become a regional power, India can't afford to have an incompetent bureaucracy that can't get anything done. China is not going to wait for India to catch up. Bad governance means no seat at the UNSC high table either.
Singing the CSC before the President arrives in India will be a good augury for welcoming the US President and will greatly gladden the US hearts. There is no doubt that he will be welcomed by lakhs of our people wherever he visits. He is accompanied by a delegation of as many as 215 American CEOs who expect to return with bagful of contracts with our Indian counterparts. This is welcome too for international trade is the main basis of global relations to grow. The main concern of our people is what our companies are going to get by way of orders, tie-ups etc. to accelerate not only our economic development but also of employment in the manufacturing sector. There are lingering doubts on this aspect as in the last meet of the Indo-US CEOs, while the American companies not only gave a long list of their demands for liberalization in various fields but also gave almost a notice to our minister that they expected these to be fulfilled before their President visited India. But our CEOs were noticeably silent; at any rate there was no news for the public on this front. I hope that will not be the case now. The responsibility for this rests solely on our corporates, apex business chambers and our ministers for commerce, trade, finance and foreign affairs. In fact, each one of them will be on test on how effectively they functioned to derive the maximum benefit from this rare visit of the US President to our country. It is much important and more urgent for business relations to grow giving a fillip to our economic growth rather than pursue the distant dream of becoming a permanent member of UNSC with the help of US. However, a few aspects of US behaviour do not go well with our public such as for instance cutting as many as 50 trees in Mumbai to enhance the security is something that will hurt the Mumbaikars. Similarly, the ultimate vetting of the Indian business CEOs with the President by the US authorities irks us; This is the responsibility of the host nation. Notwithstanding these minor irritants, it is hoped that both India and US will gain substantially by this visit. It is expected of the mainline dailies such as yours to give a full account of the net outcome of the visit soon thereafter for the benefit of the people.
Please Email the Editor