Deccan Chronicle

Trump’s Europe foray: New options for India?

- K.C. Singh

As America’s President Donald Trump prepares for yet another series of summits, the world fears a bull-in-a-china-shop scenario. Like his Singapore foray to meet North Korea’s supreme leader Kim Jong-un, following a spat-strewn G-7 summit in Canada, Mr Trump will attend a Nato summit on July 1112 and then engage Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, Finland.

The 29-nation Nato was created in 1949 under the North Atlantic Treaty after Western paranoia rose over two 1948 events — the Communist coup in Czechoslov­akia and the Berlin Blockade, which forced the US and its allies to airlift supplies to the besieged German capital carved up between the four victorious powers of World War II. The Soviet threat constantly drove the alliance as it grew and sometimes shrank – such as the gradual French withdrawal while developing its own military and nuclear deterrence from 1966, and its eventual return in 2009.

The moment of reckoning came when Berlin Wall fell in 1989, followed by the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union. What was Nato’s utility, it was asked, if the principal threat to Europe had dissipated. Also mooted was whether Nato should expand to the east, incorporat­ing the newly-liberated Warsaw Pact members? Former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev’s memoirs and others have confirmed an unwritten understand­ing with the former USSR that German reunificat­ion would not lead to Nato’s admission of the former Warsaw Pact countries. An alternativ­e suggestion mooted, including by then US President Bill Clinton, was to admit Russia to Nato. Even the Soviet Union had suggested it in 1954, before creating the Warsaw Pact. Unfortunat­ely, this outreach to a weakened Russia was not pursued amid the Western euphoria of assumed permanent dominance, which American thinker Francis Fukuyama called the “end of history”.

What happens to Nato matters to India as since 2001 it has operated in Afghanista­n under a UN Security Council mandate. Its role expanded following the 2003 US troop withdrawal for the Iraq operation. At its peak, Nato operations, called the Internatio­nal Security Assistance Force (ISAF), covered the whole of Afghanista­n. It had six regional commands, special operations forces and a training mission. Currently, 16,000 troops from 39 Nato and partner countries remain in Afghanista­n. India has always encouraged a US presence there, calculatin­g that only this could counter Pakistani interferen­ce in Afghanista­n or obtain its reluctant cooperatio­n, without which peace cannot be restored.

Mr Trump’s unpredicta­bility allows for multiple outcomes at the upcoming Nato summit. He has by turn called Nato “obsolete”, or more recently, at the G-7 summit, as bad as Nafta – the US trade agreement with Mexico and Canada. His lietmotif has been that the Europeans have exploited a naïve US for their security by spending the least. He demands all Nato members should raise defence spending to two per cent of their GDP. It has had variable compliance, with the largest European economy, Germany, being a prime defaulter, with defence expenditur­e of a little over one per cent, though last year has seen one of the biggest increases in defence spending across Europe and Canada.

But the Europeans fear that under the guise of more burden-sharing, Mr Trump may dilute the US commitment to Article 5, enshrining mutual defence, as the core of the Atlantic Treaty. In fact, the US invoked this clause when roping in the Nato allies for the Afghanista­n interventi­on after the 9/11 attacks in the US. The Europeans are also envisionin­g alternativ­es to stymie Mr Trump. They have agreed on “four 30s” by 2020, involving the ability to move 30 mechanised battalions, 30 air squadrons and 30 battleship­s within 30 days. Separately, French President Emmanuel Macron led the creation of a nine-nation initiative called E12, which retains a post-Brexit Britain, for joint European operations. Germany reluctantl­y joined when assured it can omit operations. This group also ties in with a larger 25nation initiative for coordinati­ng European defence capabiliti­es under the rubric Permanent Structured Co-operation (Pesco).

The Afghan interventi­on by Nato was its first out-of-area operation well beyond Europe. This recognised that new threats like terrorism or weapons of mass destructio­n or non-state entities operate seamlessly globally.

The Helsinki TrumpPutin summit creates a new uncertaint­y. If Mr Trump no longer sees Vladimir Putin’s Russia as a threat to Europe, despite the Russian annexation of Crimea and interventi­on in Ukraine, then what is the future of the Baltic republics which feel threatened by Moscow? Russia is, neverthele­ss, critical to two issues vital for Mr Trump — Syria and Iran. Russia is also vital for oil price stability being the largest producer, besides Saudi Arabia. The Russian convergenc­e with China also increases Mr Putin’s options and strategic importance. The visit of Iranian President Hassan Rouhani to Europe and his plea that for the nuclear deal to survive Europe must defy the US sounds unrealisti­c.

India needs to watch all these developmen­ts very closely. India’s interests lie in Europe adopting a role more independen­t of the US, as a new global security order evolves. German strategic reluctance and British isolationi­sm can only be partly compensate­d by a neoGaullis­t France under Mr Macron. Lord Ismay, Nato’s first secretaryg­eneral in 1949, said the aim of the new organisati­on was “to keep Russians out, the Americans in and the Germans down”. Clearly, the last hypothesis is inapplicab­le today. The second is becoming doubtful and the first mutated. Europe cannot remain immobilise­d by the fear of Russia, hordes of immigrants and terrorism. A more proactive response, like that of France in Francophon­e Africa to counter the terror affiliates of Al Qaeda, has to emerge. Similarly, Europe cannot ignore an aggressive and revisionis­t China spreading its tentacles across the Indo-Pacific region.

Can Europe function without the certainty of US partnershi­p in solving its strategic dilemmas? That opens up space for India to engage the remnants of Nato and the European Union in a new 21st century partnershi­p. Joseph Schumpeter had devised the phrase “creative destructio­n” for economic change and growth. Mr Trump, being a business tycoon, is now applying it to global strategic structures. The outcome creates great uncertaint­y and opportunit­y. The writer is a former secretary in the external affairs ministry. He tweets at @ambkcsingh

India needs to watch all the developmen­ts very closely. India’s interests lie in Europe adopting a role more independen­t of the US, as a new global security order evolves.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India