U.S secretary of state John Kerry’s visit to India marks the first cabinet-level interaction between the Obama administration and the new Indian government led by Narendra Modi, and Kerry is expected to prepare the ground for the bilateral meeting between Modi and U.S. President Barack Obama at Washington in September.
Relations between India and the U.S. have not matched the partnership rhetoric. The superficiality of the ties was exposed during a scandal involving the arrest of an Indian diplomat in New York last year. The dust has settled on the issue since, and the recent spate of visits to India by high profile U.S. officials is being seen as an attempt to reinvigorate the bilateral relationship. India’s new government on its part has made it clear it is ready to engage with the U.S. on all fronts. Kerry’s entourage includes some heavy hitters from Washington: secretary of commerce Penny Pritzker, deputy secretary of the department of energy Daniel Poneman, under secretary of the department of homeland security Francis X. Taylor and special envoy for climate change in the department of state Todd Stern. U.S. defence secreary Chuck Hagel will follow on with a visit to India next month.
Gateway House asked six experts for their perspective on the bilateral and what to expect from this crucial meeting.
Ronen Sen, former ambassador to the U.S. (2004- 2009)
“The intention behind these recent visits by high profile U.S. officials to India is to ensure that Prime Minister Modi’s visit to the U.S. in September is a success. There is a mutual desire to usher in a new phase which recaptures the spirit we saw in 2008-09 during the nuclear deal, and build a forward-looking, dynamic and vibrant relationship – even though these moves come soon after recent contentious developments like India’s stand at the WTO and the allegations that the NSA had spied on the BJP.
The gains made during the nuclear deal were lost in a maze of details, in particular the liability law. Since 2008-2009, there has been a lot of mutual recrimination and nitpicking over a host of issues like regulations, local content and IPR – pharma in particular. There issues were not uniquely American, but rather global problems involving companies from Europe as well like Bayer and Novartis. However, American firms chose to respond in a rather belligerent fashion.”
Neelam Deo, Director, Gateway House
“John Kerry’s visit will prepare the ground for Narendra Modi’s visit to Washington in September. The arrival of the new Indian government had generated widespread interest as the decisive victory of the BJP indicated it would be a strong government.
Despite the turbulence all over Asia, the mainstream American media is paying hardly any attention to Kerry’s visit. The perspectives of India and the U.S. on issues such as Israel and Ukraine are very different: the U.S. was the only country to vote against the UNHRC Resolution to probe the Israeli offensive in Gaza, which was supported by India and the other BRICS nations. While Washington unleashes a series of sanctions against Russia, New Delhi is more sensitive to Moscow’s security concerns. The U.S. is becoming a bystander in West Asia, while India’s focus on the region will increase as countries like Libya and Iraq descend into chaos and our energy security and expatriate workers come under threat.
Even as India works to improve relations with Pakistan, it must push for a more realistic American stance towards Pakistani tolerance of anti-India terror groups and interference in Afghanistan is following the disputed presidential election outcome. India and the U.S. should work together to limit Pakistani connivance with the resurgent Taliban.
China is a major strategic convergence as both countries seek to balance Beijing’s growing economic clout globally and territorial expansionism regionally.”
Rajrishi Singhal, Senior Geo-economics Fellow, Gateway House
“Any discussion on economics, trade and agriculture will have to contend with the two countries’ diametrically opposite views on Trade Facilitation Agreement in the WTO. India’s unwavering stand on first finding a permanent solution to farm subsidies and food security does not square with the U.S. priority on getting TFA off the ground.
The other ghost in the room: Modi’s support for BRICS bank to act as a counter-weight to the IMF and World Bank, while the U.S. Congress refuses to allow an increase in India’s shareholding in the IMF.
It will be interesting to observe progress made on some crucial fronts. For instance, there is the work-in-progress Trade Policy Forum (TPF), the principal trade dialogue between the two countries, which has five focus areas: agriculture, investment, innovation and creativity (IPR), services, tariff and non-tariff barriers. Any progress on making TPF effective will need the U.S. Trade Representative (responsible for leading TPF) to reconsider his critical assessment of the Indian IPR regime. In recent months, the U.S. administration – egged on to a large measure by the industry lobby – has been griping about India’s allegedly flawed IPR regime in pharma.”
Nishith Acharya, Gateway House Expert
“This dialogue will be a success if the two sides can use the two days to develop a strong working relationship and identify some common values and goals for the next few years. The Indian government will be focused on proving its foreign policy bonafides to the U.S. The Indian government will also want to understand if the U.S. will be a partner in good faith on issues ranging from trade to climate change and vice-versa. And they will accurately question the Americans about the role and importance that India has in Obama’s foreign policy.
The challenge with this dialogue is that the time frames for the two parties are very different. The Americans are looking (mostly) for things that can be accomplished by the summer of 2016. They are looking for quick wins and righting the relationship. The Indians are taking a longer framework and want big things to happen over the course of Modi’s term.
I expect the visit to also focus on ways to engage the business community better through the CEO Forum.”
Seema Sirohi, Washington-based analyst
“India and the U.S. have displayed ample pragmatism of late. American officials have been saying all the right things to show they respect and accept the Indian voters’ mandate for Modi. The visa issue is history.
Nisha Biswal, assistant secretary of state for South and Central Asia, testified last week in both the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives about “re-energising” the relationship. She said both Democratic and Republican administrations have made a “strategic bet” on India and there should be no doubt that the United States wants a “strong and influential India.”
The U.S. Congress and the business community are enthusiastic about Modi’s business-friendly approach. They want an ambitious agenda and clear “deliverables.” The Americans are keen to conclude the long-hanging Bilateral Investment Treaty and revive the Trade Policy Forum, which was a platform to air differences before they become divisive.
A group of senior U.S. senators have urged the Obama administration to consider increasing export of liquefied natural gas to India and move on getting India into APEC. For India, the priorities are infrastructure, manufacturing, modernising the military, energy security and expanding skills training and education.”
Sameer Patil, Associate Fellow, National Security, Ethnic Conflict and Terrorism, Gateway House
“Intelligence sharing between India and the U.S. on counter-terrorism, terror financing and border security has improved substantially after the attacks in Mumbai in 2008. Ajit Doval, India’s national security advisor, is likely to expand on this bilateral cooperation due to his firm focus on internal security. Both countries need to reach a mutually amicable resolution on issues like the extradition of, Lashkar terrorist David Headley for his involvement in the 2008 Mumbai attacks to reach a mutually amicable resolution on this issue to cultivate greater trust.
In 2013, Edward Snowden’s revelations on the NSA snooping on India had strained bilateral relations. India did not formally criticise the PRISM surveillance programme but should use this opportunity to assert its concerns to the U.S. in the Joint Working Group on Information and Communications Technology, which has been created under the aegis of the Homeland Security Dialogue.
Furthermore, the national chapters of CERT in the U.S and India have signed a cooperation agreement for information exchange on cyber security. The two countries need to go a step further and discuss cyber security of critical infrastructure—both sides can share best practices and approaches to promote public-private participation in tackling cyber threats.”
This article was exclusively written for Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations. You can read more exclusive content here.
For interview requests with the author, or for permission to republish, please contact outreach@gatewayhouse.in.
© Copyright 2014 Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations. All rights reserved. Any unauthorized copying or reproduction is strictly prohibited