• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
Democracy
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "C. Raja Mohan"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie India"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie India",
  "programAffiliation": "SAP",
  "programs": [
    "South Asia"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "South Asia",
    "India"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media
Carnegie India

The Second Chance

If the expansive agenda unveiled by Modi and Obama is matched by bureaucratic purposefulness in Delhi and Washington, India and America have a second chance at building a strategic partnership of considerable consequence.

Link Copied
By C. Raja Mohan
Published on Oct 6, 2014
Program mobile hero image

Program

South Asia

The South Asia Program informs policy debates relating to the region’s security, economy, and political development. From strategic competition in the Indo-Pacific to India’s internal dynamics and U.S. engagement with the region, the program offers in-depth, rigorous research and analysis on South Asia’s most critical challenges.

Learn More

Source: Eurasia Review

What stands out at the end of Narendra Modi’s whirlwind tour of New York and Washington is the prime minister’s demonstration of political will and diplomatic ingenuity to rekindle the romance with America that had gone cold in recent years. In less than a week, Modi has turned the gathering pessimism about India’s relations with the US into an optimistic storyline. The results from the visit might be a while coming, but Modi and President Barack Obama have restored direction and energy to bilateral relations.

After Obama’s visit to India nearly four years ago, bilateral ties hit a plateau and headed soon enough to the south. In its first term, the UPA surprised the world with its openness to transforming the relationship with the US. In its second, it returned India to its bad old ways.

Delhi signalled it was not open for political or economic business with America. It preferred to posture rather than engage on differences and was hesitant about building on the many possibilities for partnering with America that emerged. Above all, the UPA government was paralysed by an ideological ambivalence towards America.

During his visit to the US, Modi sought to convince the American corporate sector that India is back in business, signalled a readiness to engage on difficult issues like climate change and trade, and seized the moment for deepening defence and security cooperation. Modi also ran an impressive campaign of public diplomacy to mobilise the Indian American community and the political classes in Washington in favour of rejuvenating the bilateral partnership.

None of this was foreseen either in Delhi or in Washington. Coming from where he did, Modi, it was widely assumed, had little incentive to warm up to the US. His party, the BJP, had turned negative on America when it sat on the opposition benches during the decade-long rule of the UPA. It abandoned the legacy of Atal Bihari Vajpayee, who had declared that India and the US were natural allies, and joined hands with the CPM in opposing the civil nuclear initiative. On top of that, America made Modi a political untouchable by withdrawing his visa for 10 long years. Indeed, many in Delhi argued that Modi should not travel to the US unless there was an apology from Washington.

In overruling these sentiments and taking the first opportunity to visit Washington, Modi recognised that expanding cooperation with the US is critical to effectively pursuing India’s domestic development agenda as well as to raising its relative position in the world.

The joint statement issued after his talks with Obama stated Modi’s appreciation of the US unambiguously: “Prime Minister Modi emphasised the priority India accords to its partnership with the US, a principal partner in the realisation of India’s rise as a responsible, influential world power.”

This thesis is certainly not new. The idea was first articulated by the Bush administration in 2005, when it stated that it was in America’s interest to assist India’s rise to great power status. If there was much scoffing at this in the foreign policy establishment, the Congress virtually panicked at the thought of drawing close to the US. Even as he underlined the importance of American partnership in facilitating India’s rise, celebrated shared democratic values and highlighted the common interests in the region and beyond, Modi set his own terms for an equitable and mutually beneficial relationship.

On the question of economic reform, Modi made it clear that he was going to do it his own way and was not going to simply tick off the American checklist. The PM promised to make it easy for Americans to invest and do business in India, and invited them to take commercial decisions on the basis of practical evaluation of the new possibilities in the country rather than an abstract discussion on reforms.

Modi also brought a new pragmatism to resolving the multiple differences with the US. In the past, standing up to America had become a domestic political end in itself, whether it was trade, climate change or civil nuclear liability. India’s past grand-standing was rooted in a lack of national self-confidence and the inability to assess its own long-term interests at home and abroad. In contrast, Modi is saying a self-assured India is now ready to address difficult issues in a practical manner and on the basis of mutual give and take.

On geopolitics, too, Modi is shedding the traditional diffidence that marked India’s engagement with the US. In South Asia, India has long been wary of American partnership with Pakistan and, more recently, of US dependence on Rawalpindi to secure its interests in Afghanistan. As the northwestern marches of the subcontinent enter a more turbulent phase, Modi is eager to explore new opportunities for cooperation with the US in stabilising Afghanistan and in countering the sources of international terrorism in Pakistan.

In Washington, Modi has been more vigorous than his predecessors in highlighting India’s converging interests with America in East Asia. He is also a lot less hesitant on engaging the US in the Middle East, a region of vital economic interest and great political sensitivity for India.

Rekindling a romance is never easy. In 2005, when America unveiled a bold new approach towards India, Washington was at the apogee of the unipolar moment and Delhi was politically unprepared. A decade later, the US has greater stakes in India’s success and Modi has brought much-needed clarity to Delhi’s strategic calculus on America. If the expansive agenda unveiled by Modi and Obama is matched by bureaucratic purposefulness in Delhi and Washington, India and America have a second chance at building a strategic partnership of considerable consequence.

This article was originally published in Eurasia Review.

C. Raja Mohan
Former Nonresident Senior Fellow, Carnegie India
Foreign PolicyNorth AmericaUnited StatesSouth AsiaIndia

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Taking the Pulse: Can the EU Attract Foreign Investment and Reduce Dependencies?

    EU member states clash over how to boost the union’s competitiveness: Some want to favor European industries in public procurement, while others worry this could deter foreign investment. So, can the EU simultaneously attract global capital and reduce dependencies?

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz, ed.

  • Article
    What Can the EU Do About Trump 2.0?

    Europe’s policy of subservience to the Trump administration has failed. For Washington to take the EU seriously, its leaders now need to combine engagement with robust pushback.

      Stefan Lehne

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    To Survive, the EU Must Split

    Leaning into a multispeed Europe that includes the UK is the way Europeans don’t get relegated to suffering what they must, while the mighty United States and China do what they want.

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz

  • Escalation Dynamics Under the Nuclear Shadow—India’s Approach
    Paper
    Escalation Dynamics Under the Nuclear Shadow—India’s Approach

    An exploration into how India and Pakistan have perceived each other’s manipulations, or lack thereof, of their nuclear arsenals.

      • Rakesh Sood

      Rakesh Sood

  • Trump stands in front of a blue screen reading "Board of Peace"
    Paper
    U.S. Peace Mediation in the Middle East: Lessons for the Gaza Peace Plan

    As Gaza peace negotiations take center stage, Washington should use the tools that have proven the most effective over the past decades of Middle East mediation.

      • Sarah Yerkes

      Amr Hamzawy, Sarah Yerkes, Kathryn Selfe

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600Fax: 202 483 1840
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.