India’s inaugural 2+2 ministerial dialogue with the United States on Thursday has “symbolic” significance, but is unlikely to yield a structural change in regional security, says a posting on a People’s Liberation Army (PLA) website.
“From a long-term perspective,...it’s unlikely to have any significant impact on the regional security layout and strategic balance,” says an article in China Military Online, underplaying the talks.
‘Regular exercise’
The Chinese Foreign Ministry in its regular media briefing described the 2+2 dialogue as an exercise of “normal bilateral relations between the two sides.”
“We also hope that in this process they will do more to regional peace and regional stability,” Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying observed.
The posting says that the September 6 dialogue between ministers of external affair and defence—Sushma Swaraj and Nirmala Sitharaman— and their counterparts Mike Pompeo and James Mattis took place in the Indo-Pacific framework. The two sides “exchanged opinions on weapons procurement, technology transfer, trade, immigration, and so forth” during talks. Procurement and joint development of weapons and equipment was a focal area during the dialogue.
The online article spotlights United States’ “wariness and distrust with India” by insisting that the two countries “should sign a Communications Compatibility and Security agreement (COMCASA) first and military communications security measures can be transferred only when equipment such as attack drones are sold.”
India too has “deeply-rooted long-standing distrust of the US,” especially in the Indian Ocean, which New Delhi regards as its “backyard”, and where “great powers” are not welcome. Unsurprisingly, driven by its intent of “maintaining a balance among regions,” India has been “conservative and cautious in dealing with military cooperation with the US”.
The commentary reckons that India and the U.S. “must face the inevitable differences and contradictions, inconsistent strategic priorities, and even potential conflicts on many issues,” despite willingness to expand military cooperation.
“These would be the possible key reasons for the US- India 2+2 ministerial dialogue being postponed for number of times.” Yet, the posting acknowledges that in recent years, U.S. and India have accelerated military cooperation, deepened defence relations, and conducted exchanges and coordination such as procurement and joint development of arms, technology transfer, joint exercise and training, and counter-terrorism operations.
“Above all, the scale of the US-India joint military exercises has been constantly expanding and involved such countries as Japan, Australia, and the Philippines, continuously amplifying the scope of exchanges.”
The posting points to Pentagon’s “relatively weak” presence in the Indian Ocean as the driver of its deeper engagement with India. On the contrary, by working out a military relationship with the U.S., India aspires to lower its dependence on Russia-made weapons, diversify its sources of weapons and equipment, and close gaps in vacant areas such as advanced drones and other equipment. It also hopes “to increase its competitive advantage over Pakistan”.
On the diplomatic platform, India wants “to enhance its international status and influence and gain support from the U.S. in international affairs such as becoming a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council.”
Besides close ties with Washington can be used as “a bargaining chip to gain a dominant position in the relationships with Russia, China, Japan, and other countries.
