Amit Kumar replies: The Indo-US relationship is evolving; whereas the Indo-Russian ties have long matured. In fact, there can be very few better examples of such symmetric relationship in the international arena as the India-Russia ties. The relationship is based on the twin pillars of trust and mutual interdependence. However, the same cannot be said about the Indo-US relationship, where trust deficit is quite evident and the asymmetric nature of the relationship is also striking.

Saroj Bishoyi replies: Indian diplomat Devyani Khobragade’s arrest, strip search and indictment by the US authorities, has negatively impacted what otherwise has been a burgeoning Indo-US strategic relationship. The immediate impact was on regular bilateral engagements, such as the postponement of the India-US Energy Dialogue initially scheduled to be held in January 2014, on account of rising adversarial perceptions. Perhaps, this also led to the resignation of the US Ambassador to India, Nancy Powell, on March 31, 2014.

However, on March 11, 2014, India and the US resumed their energy dialogue in New Delhi where the two sides expressed their strong commitment to promoting greater technological and scientific collaboration on energy issues. The two sides also expressed their strong desire to further strengthen the strategic relationship based on mutual interests on other areas too, such as trade, climate change, defence, health, education as well as on regional and global security issues. Earlier, on January 22, 2014, India’s External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid had met the US Secretary of State John Kerry on the sidelines of the Geneva II meeting in Montreux. Reviewing the recent development in India-US relations, they not only underscored its significance but also recognised the necessity to set up institutional arrangements to address issues relating to the privileges and immunities for diplomats.

In a positive development, the US court dismissed the January 9 indictment against Khobragade on March 12, 2014. But the American prosecutors immediately thereafter, on March 14, filed another indictment against her on charges of visa fraud and accused her of underpaying her domestic maid, which was again resented by New Delhi. So far the issue has not been resolved to the satisfaction of New Delhi.

However, efforts to normalise the relations continued as the two sides held the sixth round of India-US East Asia Consultations on March 28, where senior government officials from both sides discussed maritime security, combating nuclear proliferation, and expanding regional trade in the Indo-Pacific Economic Corridor and beyond.

While in India general elections are underway, the US too is looking forward to mid-term elections due later this year. This means that there will not be any substantive development in the bilateral relationship until the next government takes over in both the countries. However, the two countries cannot afford to overlook the relationship for a long time, given the congruence in their strategic interests on a wide range of issues. In addition, both the countries have heavily invested in diplomatic and political capital over the last one decade in improving the relationship.

Though the relationship is clearly going through a tough time, yet it remains a very important one for both the nations. Despite existing differences over trade, visa rules, nuclear liability, security and other issues, the core objective of India-US strategic relationship remains very strong. The differences can be resolved through established joint mechanisms, such as the India-US Strategic Dialogue. Once the dust settles down both in New Delhi and Washington, the two sides will most likely sharpen their focus on key issues of shared interest, and make vigorous and substantive efforts to take the relationship to its rightful place. It is in the respective national interests of both the US and India to build a strong strategic relationship in the twenty-first century.

Posted on April 21, 2014

Saroj Bishoyi replies: The fourth India-US Strategic Dialogue, held in New Delhi on June 24-25, 2013, provided an opportunity for both India and the US to take stock of the overall strategic relationship and to rethink what further needs to be done to take it forward. It also provided an opportunity for India to highlight and discuss various pertinent issues. The successful conclusion of the Strategic Dialogue seems to have cleared the ambiguity on some issues which had arisen in recent times.

The two sides discussed a wide range of bilateral issues, such as, energy, education, science and technology, trade and investment, nuclear, defence, counterterrorism, etc. They also discussed regional and global security issues, such as, Afghanistan, maritime security and climate change. Importantly, the US Secretary of State John Kerry and the Indian External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid launched a Climate Working Group (CWG) to strengthen their partnership on climate change as an important area of bilateral cooperation. India’s Human Resource Development Minister M M Pallam Raju and Secretary Kerry co-chaired the India-US Higher Education Dialogue to further build on the cooperation in the higher education sector. On the implementation of the nuclear deal, Kerry announced that Westinghouse would sign a ‘commercial agreement’ to sell nuclear reactors to the Nuclear Power Corporation of India by September 2013.

On India’s concern over the Washington’s negotiations with Taliban and the power transition in post-2014 Afghanistan, Kerry asserted that any political settlement must result in the Taliban breaking ties with the al-Qaeda, giving up violence and accepting the Afghan Constitution. Appreciating India’s constructive role in Afghanistan, he assured that India’s security interests will not be neglected while making any such settlement in future. The two sides also reviewed their close cooperation on the issue of India joining the four international export control regimes: the NSG, MTCR, WA and AG. Secretary Kerry reaffirmed US’ support for India’s full membership in these groups. He also reiterated US’ support for India’s permanent membership in the UN Security Council.

The India-US Strategic Dialogue was inaugurated in 2009 with the primary aim of building a strong partnership between the two countries, based on their shared values and interests. At present, the India-US strategic partnership covers almost the entire field of human endeavour and the dialogue process has helped in building mutual trust and confidence between the two countries. Unlike the past, however, the two sides now realise that though they may not agree on every aspect of the strategic relationship, they do agree that building a strong partnership in the 21st century is in their national interests.

The June 2013 dialogue, thus, provided a good opportunity for both the nations to reassess and discuss on how to take the relationship forward from the current plateau.

S. Samuel C. Rajiv replies: The US first expressed its intention to support India’s candidature in the export control regimes (NSG, MTCR, Australia Group, Wassenaar Arrangement) during President Barack Obama’s November 2010 visit to New Delhi. The Joint Statement between President Obama and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is instructive in this regard. The Statement noted that such a move would be ‘commensurate with India’s non-proliferation record and commitment to abide by multilateral export control standards’. It indicated that the move was part of efforts to expand cooperation between the two countries in ‘civil space, defence and other high-technology sectors’. The Joint Statement further indicated that the US wanted India to play a leadership role in promoting global non-proliferation objectives, to strengthen global export control framework, further transform bilateral export control regulations and policies as well as ‘realize the full potential of the strategic partnership between the two countries’.

The process has however not been smooth given the consensus-based approach to get membership in these regimes and the case of countries like Pakistan and Israel (the other non-NPT members who are nuclear weapon states) which want similar treatment. It is, however, pertinent to note that while Pakistan has a poor proliferation record ranging from North Korea to Iran to the A.Q. Khan network, Israel is yet to acknowledge that it possesses nuclear weapons. China has also carried out nuclear commerce with Pakistan in contravention of the NSG guidelines.

For an analysis of the issues surrounding India’s NSG membership, refer to the IDSA Issue Brief, “India and NSG: Approaches to Indian Membership”.