US-India ties must be made stronger
At a time when Republicans and Democrats can agree on nothing, there is strong bi-partisan support for US-India ties.
The stars are aligned in the political firmament t o make US-India relationship the world’s strongest and most important strategic partnership. India and the US must seize this opportunity. In doing so, they will be able to work more closely on issues ranging from international terrorism, the rise of an Asian hegemon, to economic development.
At a recent US-India Friendship Council roundtable at the American Capitol, US Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley gave a ringing endorsement to USIndia strategic partnership. Perhaps that was not so remarkable since her boss, President Donald Trump, had stressed on US-India relationship in rolling out his South Asia/Afghanistan policy, and Haley’s fellow Cabinet members, Defense Secretary James Mattis and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, were saying much the same thing in Washington and New Delhi.
Perhaps even more note- worthy was Ambassador Haley’s being followed to the podium by leading Senators from the Democratic opposition. Giving strong commitments to the US-India partnership were Senator Tim Kaine, highest ranking Democrat on the subcommittee in charge of anti-terrorism and South Asia; Senator Mark Warner, Democratic Vice-Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee and Co-Chair of the Senate India Caucus; and Senator Joe Donnelly of the powerful Armed Services Committee. These commitments were in line with those previously made by Republican Senators Richard Burr and Thom Tillis at an earlier US-India Friendship Council event.
The bipartisan support in the US Congress for US-India strategic partnership is not limited to the Senate. At the same roundtable keynoted by Senators Burr and Tillis, Republicans and Democrats from the House of Representatives were equally enthusiastic about US-India relationship. Republicans speaking up for the partnership were Representatives George Holding of the powerful Ways and Means Committee, and Ted Yoho, Chairman of the Sub- committee on Asia. Democrats Tulsi Gabbard, Ami Bera, Ro Khanna, and Gerry Connally also spoke strongly in favour of a strongest possible bilateral relationship.
Thus, at a time when Republicans and Democrats in Washington can agree on almost nothing else, there is strong bi-partisan support for US-India strategic partnership. This support extends from the Executive right on through both houses of Congress.
From the perspective of an American observer, support for US-India strategic partnership seems similarly strong on the Indian side. Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Donald Trump had a successful summit, complete with mutual understandings and bear hugs. There seems to be widespread support in India for the proposition that the US and India are “natural partners”.
However, sentiment is no substitute for bi- partisan action. The US and India should take advantage of this political positive alignment to make progress that has real substance. Specifically, there are four areas in which action can be taken now: (1) terror- ism, (2) defence production, (3) international organisations, and (4) visas.
As President Trump indicated in his Afghanistan strategy statement, safe havens for terrorism must be stopped. In 2012, the US government placed a $10 million reward on Hafiz Saeed for terrorist activities, the UN has listed him, and yet Saeed continues to operate in Pakistan as a political leader. The US recently designated Hizbul Mujahideen as a terrorist organisation, but it too continues to operate. The US can direct funding cuts and extend sanctions or take other actions in support of India on terrorism. For example, India has advocated for a Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism (CCIT). The Trump administration endorses the Convention. The US Congress can seize the initiative on this issue by a resolution endorsing negotiation of the CCIT.
With regard to technology transfer and co-production of defence systems, India should have, in the words of the Trump-Modi Joint Statement of 26 June 2017, “a level commensurate with that of the closest allies and partners of the United States”. India should have the same status for arms export purposes as NATO countries, plus five other of America’s close strategic partners—Japan, Australia, Republic of Korea, Israel, and New Zealand. At present India does not have this status. Changing this can give a major boost to “Make in India” for defence projects, from fighter planes to carrier technology.
The Trump and previous US administrations have committed to India as a permanent member of the UN Security Council. But nothing has happened. The trouble is largely with China and Russia blocking this move. India and the US should actively work together to change this. Such joint advocacy can have the additional benefit of emphasising to China and Russia the importance of international law and norms.
Indian Americans have made and are making significant contributions to both their adopted country and land of their ancestry. Indeed, Indian Americans are a key component of the US-India Friendship Council. Indian graduate students are one of the largest overseas groups receiving advanced degrees in science, technology, engi- neering and math. Providing US green cards to such graduates would stand as a monument to the American benefit provided by the many Indians who come to the United States for education.
Making permanent, substantive progress in US-India strategic partnership will not be easy. Long held perspectives and tendencies must be overcome on both sides, particularly in the bureaucracies of both nations. The US must put aside the post-World War II tendency to view allies as necessarily agreeing with it on all policies. The relationship with Iran is a case in point. For its part, India should not continue to be hypersensitive on the issue of sovereignty. The doctrine of non-alignment is a Cold War perspective that no longer applies. Simple procedural understandings such as US defence foundational documents do not constitute some sort of neo-imperialist threat to sovereignty.
India and the US should recognise the historic opportunity that lies before us. Making the US-India strategic partnership the world’s strongest will benefit both countries and the cause of peace and prosperity throughout the world. A fresh attack from a close relative of the Vadra family on Rahul Gandhi, shortly before his elevation as Congress president clearly reflects that many are not pleased with this imminent development. Shehzad Poonawalla, younger brother of Tehseen Poonawalla, who is married to Robert Vadra’s cousin, took everyone by surprise by questioning the legitimacy of the process through which Rahul is going to be elected as party president. Although Tehseen and his wife Monika have publicly dissociated themselves from Shehzad, the spectacle regarding the falling out of the two brothers is being viewed as nothing less than a dramatised attempt to cast a shadow over Rahul’s election. Firstly, both the Poonawalla brothers are virtually non-entities in the Congress party and are, at best, peripheral players. If one of them is an office bearer of the Maharashtra Congress, it is because both of them enjoyed the patronage of Vadra—a grave mistake on the leadership’s part. Secondly, both of them have been appearing regularly on TV channels on behalf of the Congress, thereby creating the impression that they were voicing the party’s official line. Their electronic appearances have surprised many within the organisation as well, but due to their close proximity to a section of the family, no one has come forth to question their credentials.
The Poonawalla brothers, like some others, who represent the party in media debates, are not well-versed with either the traditions or the background of the Congress. They are suave speaking individuals, who seem to have caught the imagination of TV anchors, ever looking for opportunities to showcase the Congress in dim-light. The party leadership and the media department are also at fault in being unable to send a clear-cut signal to the channels on the official list of spokespersons, who would present the party’s view-point.
There is little doubt that in its 132-year-long history, the Congress is going through an exceptionally lean phase. Ironically, it has 45 MPs in the Lok Sabha, but over 65 designated spokespersons. It has, during the past decade or so, overlooked the need to strengthen the organisational network, and thus, has been losing one election after the other on account of its short-sighted, myopic vision. Shehzad Poonawalla, has, in purposely leaked emails, pointed out that the organisational election process was flawed and so therefore supplied an unfair advantage to Rahul Gandhi since “yes men” alone would ensure his victory. The attempt is to supposedly highlight that Rahul would not be an undisputed leader of the party, and even those who were considered his supporters were discontented over his appointment, described “as selection”, in place of “an election”.
Shehzad, is understood, to be rather thick with a former minister sharing a good rapport with the Vadra family by virtue of his multi-tasking capabilities. Therefore, to believe that Shehzad is a “lone wolf”, who has acted on his own, would be a completely delusional act. It is crystal clear that he has been prompted by some person or group to publicly challenge Rahul’s election and thus the motivation is at the behest of power centres within the grand old party who are being threatened by this handing over of baton.
Shehzad, inadvertently, has also attacked Sonia Gandhi when he has claimed that sycophants would obviously not vote in accordance to their own free will, but would go out of the way to accede to the wishes of those who have appointed them. Those familiar with the functioning of the Congress know that various decision making bodies of the party, including the working committee, are packed with people who have been hand-picked by Sonia Gandhi, primarily because they were seen to be pliant.
The last elections to the working committee were held in the early 1990s in Tirupati, when P.V. Narasimha Rao was both the Congress president and Prime Minister. He, too, had then demanded the resignations of all the elected members and after accepting their quit requests, nominated them to the body to demonstrate that his leadership was supreme.
Sonia Gandhi has been the party overseer for nearly 20 years, but no effort has been made to either hold elections or constitute the Congress Parliamentary Board, the highest body as per the party’s constitution. These matters are wellknown facts, though have not even been flagged by senior Congress functionaries. However, during the past few days, elements which were pointedly responsible for the poor plight of the party, but had managed to seamlessly shift the blame on Rahul, have once again become vocal. Their utterances are designed to lay the focus on a religious debate which would pit the secularists against the communalists. This is being done knowing full well that a religious discourse on the eve of the Gujarat polls would sway in favour of the BJP and thus to Rahul’s disadvantage. Shehzad Poonawalla seems to be serving all these deep-seated vested interests. Rahul, during the next phase of his political journey, will have to face mammoth challenges. If he has to succeed, he should free the party from the shackles of Sonia’s coterie, while simultaneously declaring that his first priority would be to strengthen the organisation. He would do better in playing the role of a facilitator for the alliance partners instead of being the face of a possible coalition. The next parliamentary polls would be between the Modi of 2014 versus the Modi of 2019. Rahul, thus, should formulate his strategy accordingly. Between us.