Indian foreign policy makers are trying to establish a delicate balance between
Russia
and
America
. The two different poles of the Cold War are coming closer to
India
and desiring a strategic partnership with it. One is a traditional ally and the other is a natural ally.
India
has three options. One, go with the traditional friend who has always stood by
India
. Second,
India
can deepen its friendship with the
U.S.
The third option is to maintain a certain distance from both and select between them depending on needs and opportunities.
It will be wise to blend the second and third options. Realists argue that a state should pursue its national interest, since there are no permanent friends or foes in international politics. In the last few years
India
has become important to
Russia
and the U.S. President Clinton and Putin have both praised
India
’s democratic system. The strength of the economy in general, and the information technology sector in particular, have changed the Indian image.
This is a good for
India
to reformulate its foreign policy and use its cooperative relationship with the
US
whilst giving to
Russia
. But if choice becomes inevitable, then
India
must favour the
U.S.
Let us take a look at the limitations of Indo-Russian relations.
In the beginning of the 1950s,
America
tried to contain
China
. It did not transfer sensitive military technologies to
China
, so
China
turned to
Russia
. When the Russian military-industrial complex was going though its worst phase,
China
was able to lure hundreds of indigents Russian scientists and obtain the latest military technologies. In fact, military cooperation between
Russia
and
China
has always been a matter of concern to
India
. Both are working on a number of military projects-like an anti-missile defence system to face the American threat to dilute the 1972 ABM Treaty and deploy a theatre missile system in
East Asia
to protect
Japan
,
South Korea
and
Taiwan
.
At this juncture Indo-US relations could be made more productive. It could be categorised into economic, political and strategic dimensions. Economically,
India
’s reforms with the
U.S.
as it offers a huge market for US exports and investment.
Clinton
categorically said that “globalization does not favour nations with a licensing raj, it does favour nations with a panchayat raj. And the world has been beating a path to your door,” during his visit to
India
.
On numerous political issues, the antagonistic attitudes of both countries have subsided and a new understanding has been created based on a convergence of interests in both countries.
Clinton
said, while delivering his speech in the Indian Parliament, “I have certainly not come to south
Asia
to mediate the dispute over
Kashmir
. Only
India
and
Pakistan
can work out the problems between them.”
On the CTBT and terrorism, there is the possibility of an agreement between the
US
and
India
. The American stand on CTBT has become flexible.
Clinton
pointed out that only
India
can determine if it will benefit from expanding its nuclear and missile capabilities. Recently,
America
has criticised the threat of a suicidal attack by
Pakistan
based terrorist organization Lashkar-e-Toiba on the
India
Prime Minister’s residence. The
U.S.
cautioned
Pakistan
that if any untoward incident occurred,
Pakistan
would be heed responsible.
America
has been critical of human rights violation in
Kashmir
by the Indian Army. But recent initiatives by Vajpayee like the cease-fire on
Kashmir
, and giving passports to the Hurriyat leaders have altered
U.S.
perceptions.
India
and the
United States
have common geo-strategic concerns on many issues. First, both countries would like to ensure the security of commercial and naval traffic in the
Indian ocean
. Secondly,
India
can only manage to have regional stability in
South Asia
with the help of the U.S. Thirdly, the outgoing American president has recognised
India
as a great nation and sought a strategic alliance with
India
. On the other hand, the newly elected American President Bush has decided to downplay its strategic alliance with
China
. According to
Bush, China
was not a “strategic partner,” but a strategic competitor.” The Republicans have decided to broadness their relationship with
India
. There is a strong lobby in the
United States
who acknowledge Indian security concerns vis-à-vis
China
. Fourth, there is also a growing convergence of American national security objectives with those of
India
in what
New Delhi
calls its “extended neighbourhood” –the
Persian gulf
,
Central Asia
and
South East Asia
.
Pakistan
is no more a linchpin for the
U.S.
to promote American interests in Islamic countries.
It is to be hoped that the new grammar of bilateral relations evolved between the “natural allies” during
Clinton
’s regime would expand further under the relations.
Facebook
Blink
Del.icio.us
Digg
Furl
Google
Simpy
Spurl
Y! MyWeb
