By Robert T. McLean on 8.28.06 @ 12:08AM
The U.S.-India partnership is not a done deal by any means, as the U.S. must contend with efforts by Russia and China to win over our new best friend.
With the conflicts and disorder of the Middle East consuming the
attention of much of the civilized world, there is yet another
battle raging on -- though few in the West are even slightly aware
of its potential consequences or that it is even taking place. This
one involves the world's great powers and will likely shape the
international environment for the foreseeable future. The Bush
Administration's early March nuclear deal with New Delhi has set
the United States on the proper course in this struggle, but if
Washington is to emerge victorious, it must not let any short-term
success come to be understood as the ultimate triumph and simply
move on.
Much has been made about both the rise of China and a burgeoning
India. Their elevated importance in a globalizing world has drawn
commentators in both the East and West to predict that the 21st
Century will ultimately become the Asian Century. A notion welcomed
by both Russia and China as an avenue to create "multi-polar world
order," this potential shift in power has embroiled the Bush
Administration in an unspoken competition for future primacy in
Asia.
Right after the July 17 conclusion of the G8 summit in St.
Petersburg, Russian President Vladimir Putin hosted Chinese
President Hu Jintao and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in an
effort to strengthen their trilateral partnership. Initially
articulated by former Russian foreign minister Yevgeny Primakov in
a moment of frustration during NATO's 1999 bombing campaign in
Kosovo, the strategic triangle, as it is now frequently called, has
progressed in its development yet maintains the vision of its
architect.
Primakov was one of the pioneers of those with influence in
Russia who advocated a foreign policy aimed at balancing the United
States. Moscow has teamed with Beijing in this endeavor and
together the two have recently come to view New Delhi as the key to
success. Shih Chun-yu wrote in the Chinese state-owned Ta Kung
Pao: "The Sino-Russo-Indian trilateral cooperation is only at
its initial stage," but when "the three nations agree to join
forces, the consolidation will generate [an] unmeasured impact on
international relationships." Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman
Alexander Yakovenko explained that this alliance is only natural as
"Moscow, New Delhi and Beijing have common positions on many issues
and support a multi-polar world order system."
Indeed, there are numerous factors that could compel the Indians
to join in this eastern bloc. Russia possesses both the natural
resources and technology that New Delhi covets. Bureaucratic
inertia -- almost synonymous with India-- in arms purchases from
Russia is something the Bush Administration must counter if the
United States is truly to build closer military-to-military
relations with India, and organizations such as the Shanghai
Cooperation Organization (SCO) are presently unmatched by what
Washington can offer Singh. India was granted observer status in
the SCO last year and while its intentions regarding full
membership are unclear at this time, the Russia and China led
alliance would allow New Delhi a greater influence in Central Asia,
which it desires, and at least ostensible cooperation in
counterterrorism efforts.
India, like China, is also rapidly seeking to fulfill its
expanding energy needs. While recent competition between Beijing
and New Delhi for hydrocarbons resulted in benefiting the sellers
as it only increased prices, the two have found a channel to
cooperate in this regard that has proven mutually beneficial. On
August 16, the Wall Street Journal reported that China and
India -- through their respective state-owned companies, Sinopec
Group and Oil & Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) -- acquired a
fifty percent stake in the Latin America-based Omimex de Colombia.
In late 2005, national oil companies from both countries joined to
purchase stakes in Al-Furat Petroleum Company in Syria. This
concentrated partnership will likely help alleviate the traditional
hostility long existent between these Asian giants.
With all that the Russians and Chinese have going for them in
their pitch to India, the United States has done remarkably well as
of late. The Bush Administration inherited few initiatives that
Washington could build on, but the president has taken advantage of
some inherent qualities that both the United States and India
possess and some burdens that each must address.
The United States and India are both longstanding democracies
that happen to be fighting Islamic fanaticism and facing the
prospect of China's uncertain intentions that accompany its
ever-expanding regional and global influence. Despite an increase
in economic cooperation between Beijing and New Delhi -- according
to some analysts, China should become India's largest trading
partner next year -- geographic and historical factors continue to
contribute to mutual suspicion. Less than helpful in this situation
has been the strengthening of the traditional alliance between
Beijing and Islamabad. Compounding this problem is China's
construction at the Port of Gwadar in Pakistan, which essentially
gives Beijing a naval presence on both sides of the Indian
subcontinent.
Fortunately, a majority in Congress understand the implications
of nuclear cooperation between the United States and India. On July
26, the House of Representatives passed the United States and India
Nuclear Cooperation Promotion Act of 2006 recognizing India as a
nuclear weapons state. The Senate is expected to pass its own
version of the bill next month, but it is imperative that excessive
additional conditions are not placed on New Delhi as such an
alteration of the original text of the agreement could jeopardize
the entire bilateral strategic partnership. Although ties are
consistently improving between Washington and New Delhi, setbacks
this fall could push the Indians to conclude that the politically
homogenous governments in Beijing and Moscow are more reliable
partners than the politically tempestuous United States.
However, in the end it most likely that the nuclear agreement
will become law and President Bush and Prime Minister Singh will
continue to strengthen their relationship. While New Delhi has yet
to sign on to the Proliferation Security Initiative, the biennial
American led RIMPAC naval exercises held this summer included India
as an observer nation for the first time. India's desires to become
a permanent member of the UN Security Council should also play to
Washington's advantage. While this is unlikely to occur in the near
future, the United States could highlight the actual roadblocks in
this effort as both China and Russia strongly oppose Japan's -- who
along with Germany and Brazil would likely have to accompany India
in any addition -- request to be admitted as a permanent
member.
Ashley J. Tellis of the Carnegie Endowment for International
Peace wrote in an extremely influential piece last year: "Unlike
his predecessors, President George W. Bush has demonstrated a
strong desire to transform relations with India, guided by his
administration's understanding of the geopolitical challenges
likely to face the United States in the twenty-first century." The
Bush Administration has not yet won what the CIA has described as
the most important "swing state" of the century, but the same
demonstration of commitment and resolve that the president has
displayed in Iraq should ensure that no Asian bloc arises to
threaten the new American Century.
topics:
Foreign Policy, Vladimir Putin, Islam, Environment, Law, Military, Iraq, Russia, Pakistan, NATO, Nuclear Weapons, Energy, Oil