The United States welcomes, in particular, India’s leadership in expanding prosperity and security across the region. The two leaders agreed to deepen existing regular strategic consultations on developments in East Asia, and decided to expand and intensify their strategic consultations to cover regional and global issues of mutual interest, including Central and West Asia. In an increasingly inter-dependent world, the stability of, and access to, the air, sea, space, and cyberspace domains is vital for the security and economic prosperity of nations. Acknowledging their commitment to openness and responsible international conduct, and on the basis of their shared values, India and the United States have launched a dialogue to explore ways to work together, as well as with other countries, to develop a shared vision for these critical domains to promote peace, security and development. The leaders reaffirmed the importance of maritime security, unimpeded commerce, and freedom of navigation, in accordance with relevant universally agreed principles of international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and peaceful settlement of maritime disputes.”
Mrs. Clinton and other US officials have indicated that the US does not envisage a role for itself in the territorial disputes between India and China. This suits India too which prefers sorting out bilateral issues””-whether with Pakistan or China”” at the bilateral level without the involvement of third parties.
Thus according to him, just as China has a useful role to play in South Asia as stated in his Joint Statement with Hu, India has a useful role to play in South-East and East Asia. It is evident that the US will not like to get involved in matters relating to the Sino-Indian border dispute. Recent remarks by Mrs. Clinton and other US officials have indicated that the US will not be averse to playing a role in the search for a mutually satisfactory solution to the maritime disputes involving China with Japan in the East China Sea and with some ASEAN countries in the South China Sea. But, it does not envisage a role for itself in the territorial disputes between India and China. This suits India too which prefers sorting out bilateral issues—-whether with Pakistan or China— at the bilateral level without the involvement of third parties.
What India would want is that just as it would prefer the US continuing its effective presence in Afghanistan to act as a check on Pakistan, it would prefer the US continuing its effective presence in South-East and East Asia to act as a check on China without itself getting involved in any relationship with the US which might be interpreted by Beijing as directed against it.
What does Obama mean by saying that India and the US can partner in Asia? What will be the objectives of such partnership? How would India react to the proposal? Answers to these questions are not available. As part of the policy of re-asserting the US leadership in Asia, there has recently been a surge in US diplomatic activity in South-East and East Asia and Australia. Mrs.Clinton and Robert Gates, the Defence Secretary, had visited separately a number of countries in the region. They had also visited jointly South Korea and Australia.
From their statements and comments and from those of Obama, it would appear that what Obama probably has in mind is not the revival of the idea of his predecessor George Bush of a four-cornered strategic relationship involving the US, India, Japan and Australia, but parallel strategic partnerships of the US with each of these countries in order to strengthen peace and security in the region without giving it the shape of an alliance. Where would the USA’s relations with China—-which Obama wants to deepen simultaneously— fall in this parallel arrangement? It is not clear. Obama’s new Asian policy is still taking shape and not much thought seems to have been given by his advisers to the various implications of it.
Please wait...
