The joint statement issued by President Obama and President Hu during the course of Obama’s maiden trip to the People’s Republic of China has raised concerns regarding the future role of India in the region, as viewed, and calculated by the United States. Calling for a greater Chinese role in South Asia, including fostering improved relations between India and Pakistan, the joint statement effectively accords China an important stake in Indo-Pak relations. This runs contrary to New Delhi’s position that the India-Pakistan relationship is entirely bilateral and suggestions for its mediation or supervision are not appreciated. Such a statement, proclaimed by a close ally of India in conjunction with the nation most likely to challenge India’s aspirations in the global arena, certainly is an occasion to relearn that one axiom of international relations, “Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they have only permanent interests.”

Obama’s trip to China so far is significant not for the path-breaking agreements reached but rather for the limited strength displayed by the US. It is a reflection of growing Chinese clout, and American cognizance of this. Unlike previous Presidents, Obama did not receive the privilege of addressing the Chinese nation. The much advertised “town-hall” style meeting with Chinese students in Shanghai turned out to be little more than a well-screened, well-managed show. Somewhat oblique references to ‘free information flows encouraging creativity’ and ‘criticism as strengthening democracy’, was all that was said on the issue of freedom of expression and access to information. As for the human rights agenda which was reportedly an important issue for discussion, there was no sign of it. Apart from hoping that the Chinese engage in talks with the Dalai Lama, Obama steered clear of any allusions to riots in Lhasa or Urumqi that may have displeased the Chinese. He did however reiterate America’s commitment to the One-China policy and acknowledged that Tibet is a part of China.

Despite the solidarity on key issues being proclaimed, a reading of comments made during the joint press conference Obama and Hu hosted gives a clear indication of significant differences between the positions of the two countries.

On economic issues, while Hu Jintao emphasized dialogue on macroeconomic and financial policies, he stressed the need to guard against protectionism (read tariffs imposed on Chinese goods in the US). Obama appreciated plans regarding the long term re-evaluation of the Renminbi. This proposed re-evaluation of Chinese currency however has no particular time frame and China has categorically stated it will not revise the Renminbi exchange rate any time soon. New initiatives such as the creation of a joint clean energy research centre were announced on the Climate Change front but caps on carbon emissions were not mentioned.

Hu Jintao emphasized upholding the NPT regime and the resolution of the Iranian Nuclear issue through dialogue and negotiation. Obama went a step forward in proclaiming that Iran’s failure to prove peaceful intentions would have consequences. It remains unclear how far China will support these “consequences”.

Obama’s first visit to China came with many expectations. While we can only conjecture on American assessment of success or relative failure, it must be granted that Obama is not returning empty-handed. The US seems to have received an assurance of support on Afghanistan (arguably, one of the most pressing issues for the Obama administration especially as it looks for an exit strategy). By supporting Chinese aspirations in South Asia, the US can hope to revive the “responsible stakeholder” formulation in order to get Pakistan’s “all-weather” friend to exert pressure on it. China is still considered crucial in the resumption of the Six-Party talks and it has declared to work towards this. As China’s relations with American allies in the Pacific – Japan, South Korea and Australia- improve, it behooves the US to be amiable to the Chinese. Perhaps this amiability may be a starting point for a less contentious economic dialogue.

For the Chinese the visit may well be considered an astounding success. Not only did the American President refrain from emphasizing the human rights issue, he seemingly did not press for immediate commitments on Iran or North Korea (apart from a commitment to pursue dialogue and negotiations). Moreover, he acknowledged China’s productive role in South Asia, effectively declaring it a leader in the region. This in spite of what the Indo-US Nuclear Deal was believed to portend.

What of India? The outrage at the wording of the joint statement between Obama and Hu notwithstanding, India’s strategic community can hardly claim to be surprised. Idealists or not, our policy makers are not naive. Given the changed dynamics of the global order in this time of economic recovery, such bonhomie between the US and China cannot have been wholly unexpected. Fact remains that occupying a leadership position in South Asia is determined by the confidence and success of Indian foreign policy, not the proclamation of a joint statement. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s upcoming visit to the US will be a test of whether India accepts a suppliant’s role or asserts itself as a leader should.