After successive postponements, the first Indo-US 2+2 Dialogue is set for September 6 at New Delhi; between US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Defence Secretary Jim Mattis with their Indian counterparts EAM Sushma Swaraj and Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman. In July this year, The dialogue is being held in backdrop of recent developments like: Pompeo announcing $113 million US initiatives in technology, energy and infrastructure in Asia under President Trump’s Indo-Pacific strategy; Pompeo’s recent visit to North Korea stands cancelled; Pompeo to meet Prime Minister Imran Khan in Pakistan on September 5, and; former DG ISI of Pakistan live on Indian TV channel saying Pakistan will not act against Hafiz Saeed, Haqqanis and Taliban.
Announcing above US initiatives, Pompeo had said US wants a “free and open” Asia not dominated by any one country; US will never seek domination in the Indo-Pacific, but will oppose any country that does. China was not named but even if it was, China couldn’t care less what the world thinks about its expansionism. It has extensively militarized the South China Sea (SCS) in absence of any collective security mechanism, splitting ASEAN cohesion with money-power, and US indecisiveness over any forceful action (s). China is aggressively establishing bases, port facilities and debt trapping countries to align them with its strategic ambitions in the India Ocean In backdrop of the trade war China is signaling peace to India, which at best is temporary, but helps mellow the US-Japan-India-Australia Security Dialogue, (Quad) even though it is no collective security mechanism.
US investment of $113 million is small compared to Chinese investments in the region but clearly collective security thought must look much beyond if China’s dominance over the Indo-Pacific is to be checked; in specifically dealing with Chinese plans to establish strategic bases and colonizing coastal areas. For example, if China’s aggressive dominance is endangering “free and open” Asia (read destabilizing the region), then requisite counters should also look for ‘de-stabilizing’ such Chinese moves using all means ‘collectively’. This should include China turning countries rogue even despite their economic dependence largely on tourism and foreign aid. Leaving the response to individual nations implies repeating what has happened in the SCS, with China achieving its strategic objective of dominance incrementally but surely. In this context, the scope of the 2+2 dialogue, as also the ‘Quad’ must go beyond signing of more agreements, sale and joint development of weapon platforms, joint training, exercises, patrolling and the like. Mutually accommodative postures will need to be adopted on both sides. Besides, there are issues that the Trump Administration must examine more closely in backdrop of Chinese expansionism.
The US has given a one-time waiver to India for importing the S-400 Triumf system from Russia. Indo-UD defence cooperation has grown from negligible in 2008 to $18 billion today, and the trajectory is going up. But it is illogical for America to expect India only collaborates with it for its defence requirements. Not only are large inventory holdings of India’s military Russian-origin, there is also the question of costs and reliability, latter linked with issues like cutting off supplies and spares during crisis situations. Most importantly, the US must understand the geopolitical compulsions that India faces in backdrop of newfound Pakistan-Russian defence cooperation. In sum, India cannot be expected to put all eggs in the US basket and cut off from Russia, whatever be the interpretation of “major” defence deal.
Similarly, Iran is second largest supplier of oil to India. Ceasing or reducing oil imports from Iran would hurt Indian economy adversely. Being a developing country, India’s defence allocations continue to be poor, which will reduce further if the economy goes down. The US needs to acknowledge that if it really wants India to build its military strength, India must continue oil imports from Iran. Limiting the “major defence partner” bit to enhanced weapon sales to India, while hitting India’s economic progress is not a neat arrangement. Indo-Iranian relations are also intimately linked to the Chabahar Port and the International North-South Transportation Corridor – both strategically important to India. Placing sanctions on India because of oil imports from Iran implies larger China-Pakistan investment in Chabahar – does US want that?
Despite having been placed on ‘grey’ list by the FATF, Pakistan shows no inclination to clamp down on Taliban, Haqqanis, other terrorist organizations. In fact under the Imran Khan government some terrorist organizations like the Jaish-i-Mohammed are getting a boost through establishing new facilities to train thousands of children for global jihad, and are publicly seeking donations and funds for the same despite Pakistan committing to the 26-point action plan to check financing terrorist groups. The recent Taliban attack in Ghazni, Afghanistan was supported by Pakis tan and the Afghan Defence Minister has stated that bodies of Pakistanis killed have been returned to Pakistan. Having already been debt trapped by China through some $7 billion in loans (both governmental and by Chinese companies), Pakistan is seeking IMF bailout of $12 billion, having undergone three currency devaluations over last few months and its external debt and liabilities ballooning to 31 percent of GDP – highest in last six years. US has warned IMF that the bailout if granted will amount to aiding China, but this needs follow up to pressure Pakistan into clamping on terror.
Outlining his new Af-Pak policy in August 2017, President Trump had closed his televised speech by saying, “May God bless our military” before adding, “And may God bless the United States of America”. It signaled the recognition that America awards to its Armed Forces, and the sacrifices made by made by the military personnel. The emotional attachment that they have with such issues is on display everywhere. To this end, a sore point in the US has been the remains of US service personnel who died in NEFA (today’s Arunachal Pradesh) during World War II, which Americans have not been permitted to search, retrieve and take back home; this is an emotional issue. India should permit Indo-US exercises in Arunahal Pradesh coupled with systematic search for remains of US martyrs.
China is doing development projects in POK (which is Indian Territory) and has stationed a PLA Brigade in Skardu. India should have no compunction to do anything in its own territory. It would also be a strategic signal to China, time for which is opportune with China battling heightening trade war. In fact, joint exercises with foreign armies both in Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh need to be made regular features. Finally, Indo-US defence cooperation must include focus in fields of cyber warfare, electronic warfare, space-defence, electromagnetic stealth, quantum communications, nanotechnology and the like.
Please wait...
Sir a very balanced and a valid approach to what the strategic relation between India and the US should be. Chabahar is important to us as it counters the Chinese CPEC which is basically a bogey to ensnare Pakistan. Chabahar is an easier approach to the Central Asian Republics than the CPEC, it also has the options of a rail link which CPEC cant provide. China has a dilemma as far as Western Tibet is concerned, therefore a brigade in Skardu – Shyok Valley to keep us in Check, it also negates our future plans down the Shyok Valley. We should go ahead a place an Armoured Brigade in DBO area and an Armoured Division on the in the Nyoma- Fukche -Demchok axis. That will unhinge them. The game of Chinese Checkers needs to be played to keep them on their toes. After 71 war our armour and mechanised assets have been rusting. The Americans would perhaps would be too happy to carry joint exercise with us in Eastern Ladakh.