India puts all her eggs into U.S. basket
Throwing all foreign policy and realpolitik caution to the winds, India has openly – and, I maintain, recklessly – aligned with the United States in her new global crusade against China, après her military withdrawal from Afghanistan.
That was achieved during Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent three-day American sojourn, a key highlight of which was his participation, 24 September 2021, in the first summit of the Quad, or the anti-China grouping that is led by the United States and includes, besides India, Japan and Australia.
The other zenith of Modi’s U.S. yatra was, a day earlier, his address to the 76th session of the United Nations General Assembly in New York where he, predictably, fired volleys of fire and brimstone against China and Pakistan, among other things.
[Incidentally, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan chose not to physically attend the annual U.N. tamasha this year, choosing to make their respective plenary state-of-the-world presentations to the world body virtually.] BACKDROP
Note that India’s flagrant embrace of that anti-China security arrangement – redolent of U.S. policy of ‘containment’ of the erstwhile Soviet Union – follows amid the detritus of the controversial recent AUKUS security pact between the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia, that led, among a passel of unintended consequences, to France’s recall of her envoys to Washington and Canberra. The establishment of that three-member Anglophone security club created a climate of palpable distrust and anger in Europe directed against the United States. Reflective of such a sour mood in Europe was the cancelation of planned meetings at the United
Nations between the U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and a roster of high European representatives, as reported by the Washington Post.
Readers will recall it came on the heels of the anger and frustration that swept the chancelleries of America’s European allies – including in Paris, Berlin and Brussels – ignited by America’s shambolic military withdrawal from Afghanistan last month, sans prior consultations with them. It has placed into serious question in venues varying from London, to Brussels, to Beijing, for instance the value of America’s commitment to allies.
The U.S.’s clumsy military withdrawal from Afghanistan blindsided New Delhi which, hitherto, adopted an Afghanistan policy that broadly paralleled America’s. One of the staunchest – if discreet – critics of America’s hasty retreat from Afghanistan had been India. That was hardly surprising as India obviously considers the establishment of a fundamentalist Taliban regime in Kabul, perceived as backed by Islamabad, most unpalatable. LOW-KEY COVERAGE Intriguingly, though Modi’s latest edition of ‘Mission America’ has predictably been projected as a stellar success by the Indian media back home, here where the action was the Quad jamboree made hardly a few waves across the public discourse waters.
Indeed, the coverage of the Quad event choreographed at the White House was generally and puzzlingly AWOL on primetime TV news channels on the day it was staged. In the Washington Post the following day, where one expected it splashed over page one, it made just the bottom segment of Page 13, along with a telephoto shot of Modi and American Vice President Kamala Harris on the While House balcony!
The headline of the relevant story on the Quad summit, written by Gerry Shih and Anne Gearan, had this title: China is unspoken challenge during the Quad’s first summit. Significantly, days earlier, a write-up on Modi by Rana Ayyub, in the same newspaper, received far more prominent placement – on the Op-Ed page! The cri de coeur by a Post ‘Global opinions contributing writer’ had this evocative two-deck title: India keeps targeting journalists. Modi must be held accountable. But, to return to the mainstream of this tale, there seemed to be a glaring disconnect between the enthusiasm demonstrated by the Indian prime minister and the distinctly low-profile, matter-of-fact American media coverage of the Quad’s first summit, convened barely a week after the formalization of the controversial three-way AUKUS security deal, even more directly targeting Beijing.
For what it’s worth, while
American President Joe Biden – the host of the Quad summit – saw it fit to meet with Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison at the United Nations the very day he addressed it, Tuesday, 22 September, he met with Modi in Washington only on Friday, 24 September. Morrison, one has been informed, was the only world leader that Biden met in New York – before they met again in Washington against the backcloth of the Quad summit.
Incidentally, as the Post informs, Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga, who is stepping down from office shortly, “met separately with Biden and first lady Jill Biden to say goodbye” after the Quad summit.
Be that as it may, several knowledgeable commentators, including C. Raja Mohan and Fareed Zakaria, were in agreement that India has now gone whole hog against China. Mohan declared publicly that India has “aligned herself more closely with Washington”; Zakaria, for his part, concluded that New Delhi is clearly “now openly committed” to an “anti-China” foreign/ security policy.
On the other hand, a CNN print news analysis on the
Quad meeting called it “a rare work of continuity between Trump and Biden”. That aside, it made a number of observations on the four-member antiChina combo that merit some attention.
It reminded, first of all, that the Quad is not a formal military alliance like NATO “but that doesn’t rule out joint exercises in the region.”
Even more arresting is the disclosure that “there is growing speculation that something more formal may emerge and which will mean a debate what the Quad is actually for.” It goes on to say that the Quad meeting is a “sign that the key democracies of the Asia-Pacific region are feeling pressure to respond to Beijing’s pressure”, while adding that “the alliance architecture is evolving.” NOT WALKING THE TALK
Coming now to the bilateral relations aspect of Modi’s America excursion, one may begin by noting that, according to Post reportage, in opening remarks by Biden heard by reporters before the summit’s commencement, the American president referred to the shared goal of “a free and open IndoPacific” – code for open navigation and an end to alleged Chinese military expansion in the South China Sea.
Subsequently, he pivoted to the group’s first major initiative – to produce and distribute one billion doses of an Indian-made coronavirus vaccine – which he claimed was “on track” although, as the two Post reporters make out, doubts remain among international observers. As far as I am concerned, I find it illuminating that neither Biden nor his guests mentioned the words ‘China’ or ‘Beijing’ in public opening remarks. It is equally telling that Biden seemed to further deflect attention from the Quad’s main, if implicit, target by extolling cooperation between Quad members on climate change, critical infrastructure and the coronavirus pandemic! To me, that suggests anything but firm resolve or stirring confidence visà-vis frontally confronting China, which, if correct, will hardly make Beijing shake in her boots; others, too, I’m afraid are bound to draw similar conclusions. However, leaving such heretical thoughts aside, let us take up Biden’s warm verbal welcome to Modi and his tribute to the four million Indian Americans who he said “make us strong”. That evokes memories of the ‘Howdy Modi’ extravaganza hosted by that group in Houston, Texas in 2019, attended by former President Trump who sought their votes in his bid for re-election. Incidentally, on that trip to the United States, Modi kept away not just from Biden but from the Democratic Party as such, convinced as he was that Trump would emerge victorious at the 2020 presidential elections, and hence be obliged to him for support from the ‘Howdy Modi’ wallahs. Sadly, as we know, it was not to be. To come back to base, Modi reportedly returned Biden’s greetings optimistically predicting that his bilateral meeting was sowing the seeds “for an even stronger friendship” between India and the United States. Though that, of course, remains to be seen, as per a BBC report, 23 September, Modi was most effusive in his meeting with Harris – gushing, “The people of India are waiting to welcome you” – clearly based on the naïve assumption that Harris, whose mother was Indiaborn but subsequently became a naturalized American citizen, made India the natural ally of America!
RISKY FOR INDIA Walking the anti-China
Quad talk, even if unspoken in public, is a risky proposition particularly for India. While the U.S. should obviously be able to cope with a military challenge from China; Japan and Australia are treaty allies of the United States and thus under an American security umbrella, while India – thus far – is not. Even otherwise, Japan, is still a significant military power, and is situated at a considerable distance away from China; Australia is, of course, physically very distant from China.
India, in contrast, is not just the only Quad member that shares a land frontier with China but also has a bitter legacy of military defeats at the hands of China, including in 1962. Even presently, the two Asian behemoths and neighbours are locked in boundary disputes, with occasional and gory clashes occurring in the high Himalayas. In such circumstances, is it sagacious for India to threaten or confront China, via Quad? As already stated, Japan and Australia are far away and, in any case, could offer some help in the ‘Indo-Pacific’ theatre, but hardly in a hypothetical land war with China. No wonder, then, that former Indian Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran is among those quoted in the Post story as saying, “We cannot put all our eggs in one basket” - without mentioning that the “one basket” is made in America. While Saran has served as India’s ambassador to Nepal – and is well known and disliked for his interventionist role in the plot to overthrow the monarchy - he is, in my estimation, still about the most clued-up Indian foreign/security policy expert today.
It would make eminent sense for those in the baithaks of power in India, hence, to heed Saran’s sage advice against tearing up India’s traditional nonaligned foreign policy or puncturing her vaunted ‘strategic autonomy’ policy goal. What is more, Saran is an acknowledged Sinologist who even knows Mandarin: he should therefore be aware of what he’s talking about. But that, of course, is basically an Indian issue. As far as Nepal is concerned, all she can do is to carefully monitor relevant developments visà-vis the Quad and China: in more than one way, it has a direct bearing on our national policies, including those in the foreign and security spheres.
AUF WEIDERSEHEN Following Sunday’s German elections, Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats posted their worst-ever election results, coming in second (24 ) to their rivals the Social Democrats (26 ) and creating a power vacuum until a new coalition government is formed, possibly after lengthy negotiations between various interested parties. However, it is still possible for the Christian Democrats to head a new government because, as one commentator put it, “it’s not about who the strongest party is but who can mobilize the majority.” There is one certainty, though: Merkel will no longer be at the helm of German affairs as she has been for 16 years.
In a Washington Post editorial, 26 September, titled, ‘Passing the torch’ the newspaper acknowledged that she leaves behind a legacy of sober, patient leadership, “in which she both articulated and modeled democratic values.”
The Post noted, though, that “Under Mrs. Merkel, Germany, motivated by economic self-interest, built a gas pipeline with Russia and traded massively with China.”
“It is to Mrs. Merkel’s credit that she leaves with the esteem of her people, and of millions of others around the world, but not that she failed to groom a strong successor in her own centrist party…That could make Mrs. Merkel’s departure felt all the more acutely at a time when the world’s need for strong champions and exemplars of democracy is greater than ever.”
Auf Weidersehen, Merkel!
Mrs.