Singh Can Still Be King

Source: Getty
Op-Ed India Abroad
Summary
If Manmohan Singh can show once more that he is capable of making difficult decisions, he could restore U.S.-Indian ties to their earlier upward trajectory.
Related Media and Tools
 

Dr. Manmohan Singh will come to Washington this month on what could be his last visit to the United States as India’s prime minister. When Singh came to Washington previously, he was feted as the first State guest welcomed by President Barack Obama. This time around, the pomp and circumstance will give way to the toils of a “working” visit. It cannot be otherwise—and it could not have come too soon.

Singh’s last visit to the United States in 2009 was undoubtedly a triumph. The Indian growth story then was a coruscating one, and U.S.-Indian commercial ties offered endless promise. The U.S.-Indian civil nuclear cooperation agreement had been successfully concluded and new access to nuclear technology worldwide lay on the horizon for the first time in close to forty years.
 
The bilateral relationship between the United States and India appeared destined for new heights, with the promise of deeper cooperation in defense, in international institutions, and on a range of global issues.
 
Today, the situation is markedly different on all counts. The Indian economy has tanked—ironically, at a time when it is led by an economist with the reputation of a reformer. India’s hard-won liberation into the world of nuclear commerce has been hamstrung by a new enslavement, thanks to its nuclear liability legislation.
 
And India’s relationship with the United States has faltered because of enervating political scandals in New Delhi; neglect and inattention at the highest levels; and, sometimes, deliberate Indian decisions to keep Washington at bay. In the United States, many policymakers have soured on India simply because it appears to be a difficult partner, unable to either appreciate or reciprocate the extra mile that Washington has often walked on its behalf during the last-odd decade.
 
In New Delhi, Indian leaders often appear chagrined by the United States as well, either because its regional policies towards China, Pakistan, and Afghanistan sometimes have a deleterious impact on India, or because of their perception that the Obama administration is fixated on demanding Indian recompense for past American favors.
 
These misaligned expectations have created a stasis in US-Indian relations, a reality that has provoked much commentary during the last few months. Manmohan Singh ought to do whatever he can to repair the damage not as a favor to Washington, but because it bears on his own personal legacy.
 
Ever since he took over as India’s 14th prime minister, Singh nurtured three challenging ambitions: To deepen the economic reforms he inaugurated at P.V. Narasimha Rao’s behest some thirteen years earlier and finally put India on the path of self-sustaining high growth; to effect a historic reconciliation with Pakistan that would unify the subcontinent once again as an economic entity; and to cement the extraordinary rapprochement with the United States that was begun by his predecessor Atal Bihari Vajpayee, whose bold initiatives laid the foundation for the civilian nuclear cooperation agreement that was finally clinched when Singh came into office.
 
It is indeed unfortunate that because of populist policies pursued by Singh’s own party — a disaster exacerbated by his own acquiescent temperament — his dream of liberating the Indian economy lies in tatters at just the moment when his government is running out of both time and options to repair the damage before it faces the electorate again.
 
His struggle to forge a new future with Pakistan too is flailing, but this time not for want of either vision or willingness on his part. Rather, the core problem lies in Islamabad—or, properly speaking, in Rawalpindi—where a still paranoid Pakistan army circumvents its civilian masters in setting national security policy, limiting the government’s ability to meaningfully improve ties with India.
 
Singh’s counterpart in Islamabad, Nawaz Sharif, shares his desire for a genuine rapprochement, but it is unlikely that he will be able to secure the army’s consent to any lasting peace with India before Singh ends his current term.
That leaves relations with the United States as the sole component of the original triumvirate that Singh can still repair in the hopes of salvaging an enduring legacy.
 
He will no doubt attempt to do so. If all goes well, he will announce the conclusion of an early works agreement between the Westinghouse Electric Company and the Nuclear Power Corporation of India, thus inaugurating the first fruits of the civilian nuclear agreement for American suppliers.
 
He could also disclose new Indian defense purchases from the United States, since several significant tenders are now wending their way to completion. The promise of defense co-development and co-production shepherded by Deputy Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter and Indian National Security Advisor Shivshankar Menon might also be consummated during this visit.
 
New commitments to bilateral cooperation in regard to multilateral trade, climate change, and energy could materialize as well. Other sundry initiatives will perhaps also come in tow.
 
While all such actions would indeed be welcome — and could breathe new life into what by rights should already be a vibrant relationship — one crucial fact risks going unnoticed. Singh’s 2014 visit to Washington is likely to mark the end of an era when personalities drove politics to forge the historical transformation in US-Indian relations. 
 
From Vajpayee’s bold vision of India as a ‘natural ally’ of the United States; to its creative implementation by Jaswant Singh, L.K. Advani, and Brajesh Mishra in the National Democratic Alliance’s term in office; to Manmohan Singh’s singular effort at closing the civilian nuclear agreement, the sinews of partnership were forged by determined individuals who forced policy change well before their countrymen were truly ready.
 
They were matched at the American end by George W Bush’s fascination with Indian democracy, the demonic zeal of Robert D. Blackwill, the quiet radicalism of Condoleezza Rice and Philip Zelikow, and the constant tending first by Nicholas Burns and now by William J. Burns, who despite all the distractions of larger economic crises and other geopolitical firefights has implemented President Obama’s commitment to India at a time when New Delhi summons few allies in Washington.
 
The singular leadership that made a difference to advancing bilateral relations has been conspicuously absent in New Delhi during the last four years. In Washington, it hangs by a slender thread.
 
By itself, this eclipse of personality as a driving force for transformative change would not be fatal if it was adequately substituted by good policies that deepened the strategic partnership. The importance of such policies cannot be underestimated: They alone can enable structural change and provide the lasting effects that go beyond the actions of leaders, however important those may be.
 
The future of US-Indian ties now lies in the hands of the citizenry of both countries, who can cement the relationship only if they are enabled to engage in what Robert Nozick described as “capitalist acts between consenting adults.” There is no substitute for sensible policies that foster such an upsurge in private cooperation.
 
While the failures of the last few years on this count in New Delhi are lamentable, the good news is that Singh does not need to do anything special for the United States in order to rejuvenate the bilateral relationship. Doing right by India alone is sufficient for that purpose.
 
 If he can prove wrong the legions of skeptics and show once more that he is capable of making difficult decisions, he could correct the present dystopia and restore U.S.-Indian ties to their previously upward trajectory to the benefit of both nations. This, however, will be hard.
 
Revitalizing bilateral relations requires, more than ever before, smart policies that return India to the path of high growth—precisely what Singh has been unable to implement during his second term. The electoral pressures coming in the next few months will make this task even more difficult. But if he makes a good faith effort even at this juncture, he will have gone some distance towards retrieving his legacy to show (with due credit to Bollywood) that Singh can still be King.
 
End of document

About the South Asia Program

The Carnegie South Asia Program informs policy debates relating to the region’s security, economy, and political development. From the war in Afghanistan to Pakistan’s internal dynamics to U.S. engagement with India, the Program’s renowned team of experts offer in-depth analysis derived from their unique access to the people and places defining South Asia’s most critical challenges.

 

Comments (4)

 
 
  • Anil Dubey
    A fairly accurate assessment of India-US relations as it stands today but Mr Ashley does not address Indian concerns in full measure. He must acknowledge that there still is a trust deficit in this relationship from the short shrift our country has received in the past at the hands of US foreign policy planners which tended to side with Pakistan in our vexed relationship with it. The more recent history during its ongoing intervention in Afghanistan had afforded an opportunity for the US to do much more than it did for the threats of terrorism emanating out of Pakistan against India but it stopped short of delivering meaningfully to assuage our concerns. Be that as it may, US did no favors to us in ending our nuclear apartheid either which we never accepted anyway in an unjust nuclear regime prevailing in the world, given ours concerns with nuclear armed China and Pakistan.But yes, we have come a long way, from those frosty years of the past and the global economy offers new avenues to take our relationship forward on a mutually beneficial basis. But the US must always keep our concerns vis-à-vis China and Pakistan in mind as it makes this region the most dangerous one in the world.
     
     
    Reply to this post

     
    Close Panel
    • Javed Mir replies...
      --our concerns vis-à-vis China and Pakistan in mind as it makes this region the most dangerous one in the world--

      Why not to develop good neighborly relations with China and Pakistan since immediate neighbors can be more helpful in thick and thin than a distant uncle.
      ina
       
       
  • Anjaan
    Following the signing of the US-India nuclear deal in 2005, India has already rewarded the US with over $10.0 billions worth of defense contracts. Many more are on the way ....... what else do the Americans want as quid pro quo .... ?

    If truth is to be told in plain language, the people of India do not consider the US worthy of any serious partnership yet, for legitimate reasons.

    The three decade long US led nuclear apartheid and sanctions are still fresh in the minds of the people of India. On top of that, the US policies towards the region in general, and Pakistan in particular, directly threaten India's security. Ask the current Indian defense minister AK Antony, and he will tell you the real story.

    One Nuclear agreement, which by the way was laden with a number of poison pill amendments to infringe on India's sovereignty, and which has nothing to show for even after eight years of its signing, can not be the tool to arm-twist India, the people of India will never accept that.

    India must find solutions to its economic concerns, without selling itself short to the Americans.

     
     
    Reply to this post

     
    Close Panel
  • Gautam Sen, Pune, India
    Ashley as always is persistent with his 'ifs' and 'buts'. However, for him the character of relationship between the United States and any other country(in this case India) is more important than the character of relationship amongst the countries in South Asia. Given the character of electoral politics prevailing in India today, the Congress Party already has calculated their future for the 2014 elections. Hence Dr Manmohan Singh will encourage the furtherance of Indo-US relations to cover not only the nuclear but also open the vast commercial defence deals which if committed firmly this time may exceed 30 to $40bn spread over the next few years. While these aims may look limited but will be a major bench mark of Manmohan legacy hard to replicate or eradicate by future non Congress Government in India. Pakistan will not be a major factor nor a game changer in South Asian politics
    Gautam Sen, Pune, India.   
     
     
    Reply to this post

     
    Close Panel
Source http://carnegieendowment.org/2013/09/26/singh-can-still-be-king/gob7

More from The Global Think Tank

In Fact

 

45%

of the Chinese general public

believe their country should share a global leadership role.

30%

of Indian parliamentarians

have criminal cases pending against them.

140

charter schools in the United States

are linked to Turkey’s Gülen movement.

2.5–5

thousand tons of chemical weapons

are in North Korea’s possession.

92%

of import tariffs

among Chile, Colombia, Mexico, and Peru have been eliminated.

$2.34

trillion a year

is unaccounted for in official Chinese income statistics.

37%

of GDP in oil-exporting Arab countries

comes from the mining sector.

72%

of Europeans and Turks

are opposed to intervention in Syria.

90%

of Russian exports to China

are hydrocarbons; machinery accounts for less than 1%.

13%

of undiscovered oil

is in the Arctic.

17

U.S. government shutdowns

occurred between 1976 and 1996.

40%

of Ukrainians

want an “international economic union” with the EU.

120

million electric bicycles

are used in Chinese cities.

60–70%

of the world’s energy supply

is consumed by cities.

58%

of today’s oils

require unconventional extraction techniques.

67%

of the world's population

will reside in cities by 2050.

50%

of Syria’s population

is expected to be displaced by the end of 2013.

18%

of the U.S. economy

is consumed by healthcare.

81%

of Brazilian protesters

learned about a massive rally via Facebook or Twitter.

32

million cases pending

in India’s judicial system.

1 in 3

Syrians

now needs urgent assistance.

370

political parties

contested India’s last national elections.

70%

of Egypt's labor force

works in the private sector.

70%

of oil consumed in the United States

is for the transportation sector.

20%

of Chechnya’s pre-1994 population

has fled to different parts of the world.

58%

of oil consumed in China

was from foreign sources in 2012.

$536

billion in goods and services

traded between the United States and China in 2012.

$100

billion in foreign investment and oil revenue

have been lost by Iran because of its nuclear program.

4700%

increase in China’s GDP per capita

between 1972 and today.

$11

billion have been spent

to complete the Bushehr nuclear reactor in Iran.

2%

of Iran’s electricity needs

is all the Bushehr nuclear reactor provides.

78

journalists

were imprisoned in Turkey as of August 2012 according to the OSCE.

Stay in the Know

Enter your email address in the field below to receive the latest Carnegie analysis in your inbox!

Personal Information
 
 
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
 
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NW Washington, DC 20036-2103 Phone: 202 483 7600 Fax: 202 483 1840
Please note...

You are leaving the website for the Carnegie-Tsinghua Center for Global Policy and entering a website for another of Carnegie's global centers.

请注意...

你将离开清华—卡内基中心网站,进入卡内基其他全球中心的网站。