Possible
US envoy to New Delhi says India must get assurance against China
By Ajai Shukla
Business Standard, 21st Jan 17
As
President Donald Trump’s administration and policies take shape, Ashley Tellis,
whom Washington Post identifies as America’s likely next ambassador to New
Delhi, has urged America’s new president to continue Presidents George W Bush
and Barack Obama’s policies towards Asia, and India in particular.
Writing in
the publication, Asia Policy, Tellis has recommended that Trump should “[take]
the existing threats of Pakistan-supported terrorism against India more
seriously, [develop] a considered strategy for aiding India in coping with
Chinese assertiveness, and [persist] with the existing U.S. policy of eschewing
mediation on the thorny Indo-Pakistani dispute over Jammu and Kashmir.”
New Delhi is
concerned that the Trump administration might back track substantially on
Obama’s “rebalance to Asia”, reducing the salience of India in US foreign
policy. While campaigning, Trump had indicated he would reduce America’s
superpower role of maintaining global order, allow US military intervention
only to tackle direct threats to the US homeland, make military allies pick up
a larger share of the bill for their own defence and reject multilateral trade pacts
like the Trans Pacific Partnership, a key component of former President Barack
Obama’s economic strategy in Asia.
As in New
Delhi, there is concern in capitals across the Indo-Asia-Pacific about whether
America’s 45th president will leave the region on its own in dealing
with a rising, aggressive China.
Tellis, one
of America’s most highly regarded strategists and a Mumbai-born (??) India
expert who served in New Delhi a decade ago, warns the incoming administration:
“An Asia in which the United States ceases by choice to behave like a
preponderant power is an Asia that will inevitably become a victim of Chinese
hegemony. In such circumstances, there are fewer reasons for India to seek a
special strategic relation with the United States, as the partnership would not
support New Delhi in coping with the threats posed by Beijing’s continuing
ascendancy.”
Tellis says
that President Bush devised the policy of supporting India without expecting
reciprocity from New Delhi, an approach that Obama has continued. “It was
anchored in the presumption that helping India expand in power and prosperity
served the highest geopolitical interests of the United States in Asia and
globally — namely, maintaining a balance of power that advantaged the liberal
democracies”, he writes.
“Accordingly,
it justified acts of extraordinary US generosity toward India, even if specific
policies emanating from New Delhi did not always dovetail with Washington’s
preferences.”
Tellis
writes that this “calculated altruism whereby Washington continually seeks to
bolster India’s national capabilities without any expectations of direct
recompense” includes the US-India civil nuclear cooperation agreement, support for
a permanent US Security Council seat for India, championing India’s membership
of global non-proliferation regimes and relaxed access to defence and dual-use
technology.
Such
initiatives would reap success, says Tellis “only if the larger architectonic
foundations of the bilateral relationship — centered on boosting New Delhi’s
power—are fundamentally preserved, not because they happen to be favourable to
India but more importantly because they serve larger U.S. grand strategic
interests in Asia and beyond.”
Career diplomats need to be appointed to key nations for competent representation in their field of expertise, and Obama played to the gallery by appointing a Chinese-American to China, Carolyn Kennedy to Japan, and ethnic Indian-Americans such as Richard Varma to India and now strategists like Ashley Tellis.
ReplyDeleteIt is no secret that ambassadorships for non State department persons are sinecures and quid pro quos for political backscratching during election campaigns.
They may be great individuals, but what happens when there is a crisis ? Besides, the truth is that the State department is WASP territory (White, Anglo-saxon Protestant), and anyone outside of that group, is ultimately an outsider looking in. Indian, and US interests are served better by having a dyed-in-the-wool diplomat with a deep understanding of South Asian terror challenges.
The americans don't want to prevent a india-china war. Instead they want to encourage it so that the two big powers can cancel each other out; atleast enough to be out of the equation vis a vis america.
ReplyDeleteSadly, most indian pro-west observers do not understand this reality or plain refuse to acknowledge it. Nehrus congress understood this the hard way during the cold war and the BJP is slowly understanding it. Military power is directly related to economic power and modi knows this well. When war breaks, I hope the pro-west indian observers do not get caught in the same situation as nehru did until the 62 war slapped him back into reality.