Indian Defence Review

India has an opportunity, and should seize it, without delay or any hedging. This does not mean going along with whatever President Trump says. If he wishes to pursue an “America First” policy, India pursuing an “India First” policy is a logical response. India, therefore, should build long-lasting coalitions with like-minded nations, such as Japan or UK, without unduly annoying USA. 

The visit of the Secretary of Defence of USA, Ashton Carter, to India – fourth in the recent past, and just before he demitted office – generated many questions and less answers. The frowns of puzzlement gathered furrows on the foreheads of many a strategist, since the Democrats were going out of power and White House was to be occupied by Donald Trump, a predictably unpredictable President. One wonders why the special attention, since India continues to fight shy to be labelled as an US ally, though it is the largest importer of US military equipment. India does have many major pending issues with its neighbours, especially with Pakistan, which is an ‘ally’ of the US, but none of those issues are of much interest to USA; the balance of relations between India and countries of the Middle East, another perpetual trouble spot, also has not created any problems for USA. Why, then, this continuing interest in India, at a time when Carter was the outgoing official, and the world was trying to guess the forthcoming policies of the new government?

One needs to study the relations of ‘estranged democracies’ to comprehend the course that the bilateral relations are following today.

Background

From 1947 to 1999, US-India relations followed a sine curve with many vicissitudes. The Cold War period saw India and USA having widely divergent views about their national security interests. India was never on the US radar for any assistance, except for a short period during the early 1960s. The general distrust of India and Indians continued through the decades with USA trying to fathom the Indian policy of non-alignment, and its affinity towards socialism.

The 1971 Indo-Pak conflict probably marked the lowest point in the Indo-US relations. The recently declassified documents of the Nixon era throw light on some important decisions taken during that period. In the months preceding and during the Indo-Pak war, the US administration supported Pakistan, contrary to advice by its foreign service. Immediately after the war, however, it set about trying to mend its relations with India. The ceasefire and the birth of Bangladesh can, therefore, viewed as a turning point in Indo-US relations.

The process of engaging India once again suffered a setback, after India conducted nuclear tests; the bonhomie picked up steam under President Clinton and accelerated further under George Bush and Barack Obama. India is now firmly on the American radar as a growing regional power. The new stance on the part of USA has not come about overnight. It has evolved after careful studies of the Indian economic growth, the support that India offered on the US declaration of its policy on national missile defence and 9/11. Apart from these reasons, there are other strategic and economic grounds which affect US interests, and rightly so too, for no country would move to support another without having carefully considered the advantages to itself, of such a move.

The Indian foreign policy pundits, with some deft moves, adapted to a uni-polar world after the end of the Cold War. In the 21st century, Indian foreign policy has sought to leverage India’s strategic autonomy to safeguard own sovereign rights and promote national interests within a multi-polar world. USA, under the previous two regimes of Presidents Bush and Obama, recognised India’s core national interests and acknowledged its unresolved issues with neighbours and within the region. This acceptance was heretofore missing, and, hence, well appreciated by the Indian governments, especially under the current dispensation. India and USA continue to differ on a variety of regional issues; India’s cordial relations with Iran and Russia are not well appreciated in American government as also the foreign policy disagreements relating to its neighbours in South Asia; nevertheless, relations between the two nations have continued to grow.

There have been rifts between the two nations on economic issues as well. India criticised President Obama’s decision to limit H-1B (temporary) visas; India’s then Minister of External Affairs, Shri Pranab Mukherjee, (now the President of India) opposed US “protectionism” at various international forums. In May 2009, President Obama reiterated his anti-outsourcing views and criticised the US tax policy “that says you should pay lower taxes if you create a job in Bangalore in India, than if you create one in Buffalo, New York.” Notwithstanding, India and the US share an extensive and expanding cultural, strategic, military, and economic relationship, which is in the phase of implementing confidence building measures (CBM) to overcome the legacy of trust deficit.

There are apprehensions on the future of Indo-US relations, now that President Obama has handed over the reins of the country. President Trump, in a vitriolic campaign against Ms Hillary Clinton, which ended in his victory, had many a ‘promise’ to further his protectionist ideology, get more jobs for Americans, and ‘make America great again’, being the main theme. Despite his announcements during the campaign, many of his Indian-American supporters believe that the relationship is destined to see better days.

Trump and Indo-US Relations

During the early stage of the Republican primaries when Indian diplomats spoke to senior US administration members or prominent intelligentsia, Donald Trump’s chances to win the party’s nomination were emphatically denied. How wrong were they proven! Trump’s presidential oath on 20 Jan 2017, has marked the beginning of a new era in America’s foreign, economic, and domestic policies. Today, all of President Trump’s executive orders, are being discussed not just in USA, but the world over; people get together and discuss issues, or write reports/opinions, with a seriousness as if the world is coming to an end and it is only their suggestions that can save the world!

President Trump has entered office at a time of dynamic change, not only in US political and economic life, but also in the structure of the international system. At this point, how he plans to manage and channel changes underway within the United States is somewhat clear, at least in its broad strokes. By comparison, how his administration will approach the US foreign policy, following through on some of his less orthodox suggestions, is unknown. Not many concrete policy proposals about the approach to South Asia have been spoken about, though some campaign statements, reports on his telephone calls to the Prime Ministers of Pakistan and of India, do offer a window to his approach. A new foreign policy for the United States with both China and Russia though can help guess what a Trump administration might mean for India.

President Barack Obama and the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi shared more of a personal friendship developed through an investment of tremendous amounts of time and political capital to improve the bilateral relationship. There is no reason that Trump and Modi cannot find similar success. Trump has called Modi a “great man” and has repeatedly expressed an interest in working closely with India. He has also emphasised that “there won’t be any relationship more important to us”, than the one with India. President Trump may well prefer maintaining friendship over principle, which could work to India’s liking; there, however, could be bumps along the road.

Pursuance of ‘America for Americans’ policies, as has been indicated by a spate of announcements on the Mexico Wall, H-1B visas, import taxes on US companies and others, would probably raise doubts on the reliability of USA as a partner, under Donald Trump. Similarly, his belligerent telephone calls with the President of Mexico and the PM of Australia, imposing fresh sanctions on Iran after the missile test, and the talk of lifting sanctions against Russia, do give a give an indication of the path of his foreign policy. Some of Trump’s views could directly undermine India’s interests and the cooperation Modi secured with Obama. For instance, climate and energy cooperation were top priorities for both Obama and Modi, about which he has spoken in derogatory terms. What happens to that legacy if Trump backs away from those commitments and rejects the Paris agreement, as is expected?

President Trump has criticized Asian economies like China, Japan, and Korea for cheating America through currency manipulation or bad trade practices; India was one of the few countries that escaped his wrath! However, India will not be able to get away from the negative impacts of the trade policies that he had proposed during his campaign, and if implemented. In 2015, India had a positive trade balance of $23 billion with USA. That number will diminish if fresh US policies erect trade walls. Just as India is on the cusp of gaining benefit from greater integration with the global economy, Trump’s actions could depress already sluggish global trade and growth.

The Indian government has long sought more H-1B visas for its citizens. The non-immigrant-specialty-worker visa programme was under attack during the election campaign and, as promised by President Trump, he has already passed an order to reduce H1-B visas. This translates into fewer Indians going to work in USA, putting Indian IT companies under great pressure. It could also generate animosity toward the administration among Indian-Americans — an increasingly important domestic constituency in USA.

As far as India-Pakistan relations are concerned, President Trump has made some controversial statements, both during his electioneering and after his inauguration. He has offered to be a mediator/arbitrator between India and Pakistan, in a bid to resolve the Kashmir issue. If the offer, which the author is quite sure, would be welcomed by Pakistan, is anathema to India, as it has always rejected third-party intervention in Kashmir. Such an offer, if translated into policy, would be very damaging to Indo-US ties. On the other hand, earlier in the campaign, Trump’s comments criticizing Pakistan over its support of terrorism delighted many amongst the Indian leadership. It now appears that the recent action initiated by Pakistan against Hafiz Saaed, the leader of Jaamat ul Dawa (JuD) and the perpetrator of many terrorist activities in India, is a result of an ultimatum to Pakistan.

Historically, USA has intervened diplomatically during crises between India and Pakistan, even when knowing that Pakistan is the ‘rogue’ nation, sheltering the terrorist groups, just as it did with Osama bin Laden. If USA now looks the other way and allows India a freer hand to deal with Pakistan-sponsored terror, it could lead to an intensification of the perennial tensions beyond the breaking point. While President Trump would like to involve India, as a means of keeping Pakistan under check, he would definitely not an escalation of tensions between two nuclear-armed nations, as it could affect US interests in the region. India would have to play its cards well, maintaining a muscular stance against Pakistan, interjected with some military action, as was done in the publicly acknowledged surgical strikes.

The Way Ahead for India

The Indo-US bilateral relationship has been riding an upward graph since the turn of the century. The Trump administration’s attempts to build on that progress will be watched with great anticipation in India. Even if Trump and Modi are able to weave a friendly working relationship, Trump’s policies as president will determine whether he will be good for India and the relations between the two nations.

There is, yet, no Trump Doctrine, but the threads of a worldview are now visible. Through his many executive orders signed in the first ten days after assuming office, there appears a trend that President Trump is not going to be bound by the same ideological commitments as his immediate predecessors. This means that he would likely face many of the same political, institutional, and geopolitical constraints as the outgoing president, but it is possible that he would face them differently and, perhaps, achieve very different ends.

Of the many unanswered questions surrounding foreign policy under Trump, few are more significant for India than the future of the US relationships with Russia and China. Notwithstanding all its social and economic difficulties, Russia continues to wield military power and is a key force in the affairs of the world’s most strategically significant regions – Europe, the Middle East, and East Asia. China has likewise entered a period of economic and political uncertainty marked by slowing economic growth and a political centralization effort under President Xi Jinping. Nevertheless, China has the world’s second-largest economy and possesses military forces that are growing increasingly capable. President Trump’s engagement of these two nations, could have a significant impact on India; it would be an indicator of a new world order, a new political order in the Middle East, dictate US role in the Asia-Pacific, and decide on the future of American allies of NATO and otherwise.

At first sight, India does not have much to worry, notwithstanding the shock waves emanating from the many earthshaking policies and telephone calls made by President Trump. The tectonic plates of trade, immigration, international relations with friends and foes alike, have shifted; USA has withdrawn from the Trans-Pacific partnership (TPP), President Trump has had an antagonistic conversation over the phone with a long-time friend and ally – Australia, USA’s one-China policy is under threat, Mexico is feeling threatened with the continuing talk of a border wall, North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is going under review, NATO is under threat. These and many more are examples of planned actions and new policies.

India has an opportunity, and should seize it, without delay or any hedging. This does not mean going along with whatever President Trump says. If he wishes to pursue an “America First” policy, India pursuing an “India First” policy is a logical response. India, therefore, should build long-lasting coalitions with like-minded nations, such as Japan or UK, without unduly annoying USA.

India, first, should secure its position in the immediate and most important neighbourhood of the Persian Gulf. While Barack Obama had exempted India from the oil sanctions on Iran in 2012, to expect such an exemption from Donald Trump would be out of character. Iran is important to India not just because of the oil that it supplies, but also because of India’s geo-strategic plans of developing and using the Chabahar port. Secondly, India should remain on guard for any instability in the Asia-Pacific, aka Indo-Pacific region. Steve Bannon, the chief strategist under Trump, has already announced that wars with China and Iran are a possibility; similarly, the new appointee as Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, has categorically stated plans to deny access to China to the seven artificial islands that it has constructed in the South China Sea. A coalition with an aim of strategic coordination between India and Russia, and India and Japan, could calm things down in the Persian Gulf, as well as Eastern Asia.

A legislation introduced in the US House of Representatives would restrict the issue of H-1B visas, with an aim of making it difficult for companies to replace American employees with foreign workers. India, also affected, has limited manoeuvring space to bypass the restrictions, but can make some broad moves.

Most of the global IT and financial firms that would be affected by the restrictions on H-1B visas have sufficiently large establishments in India; they could be offered placements for their engineers in India, under a special scheme. Indian IT companies, such as TCS and Infosys, in the likely event of their engineers being sent home, should chalk out a plan of action to accommodate them in India. The uncertainty and instability caused by the new visa regime would have an adverse effect on the business of conducting conventions in USA, and associated tourism. Once again, India should grab the opportunity and open locations such as Hyderabad, Mumbai, and Vishakhapatnam; this could be the big moment for India.

Conclusion

Foreign policy of a nation is the open-minded pursuit of national interest. Thinking out-of-the-box, both economically and politically, can turn adverse situations into opportunities. If the issue of H-1B visas is implemented in the manner that Donald Trump wants, then India should seize the occasion to make gains for itself.

Donald Trump has shown to the world that he is not a cultural icon; nonetheless, he is the elected president of USA, irrespective of the fact that he won on a mandate driven by a fractured and insular vote. India should understand what advantages could accrue to it through his election, rather than be carried away by the protests of American liberals.

Prime Minister Modi was one of the first global leaders, who President Trump called after assuming office, and it was a cordial call, unlike some others! India should look towards maximising gains from his promised line of tough action against China and may be even Pakistan. Once the relationship is established, India could present itself as the best option for USA, and other nations, for the future.

It is going to be a period of wait and watch for the Indo-US relations.