Article
C. Raja Mohan, Darshana M. Baruah
{
"authors": [
"C. Raja Mohan"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie India"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie India",
"programAffiliation": "SAP",
"programs": [
"South Asia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"United States",
"South Asia",
"India",
"North America"
],
"topics": [
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
Day 3: India, U.S. Ready to Talk To—Not At—Each Other
As they ended their three-day summit, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Barack Obama had every reason to feel vindicated that their political bet on each other had paid off handsomely.
Published on Jan 28, 2015
Source: Indian Express
As they ended their three-day summit with a joint radio broadcast, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Barack Obama had every reason to feel vindicated that their political bet on each other had paid off handsomely.
Modi went for broke in finding a way to renew the momentum in the partnership with America, which he saw as central to his foreign and domestic strategies. Obama moved quickly after Modi’s election to end US antipathy towards the former chief minister of Gujarat, and invited him to the White House.
Once they found they could do business, they went full tilt at addressing outstanding issues like the civil nuclear initiative, reviving the stalled defence cooperation, exploring common ground on climate change, and expanding economic cooperation.As they tweeted on Tuesday afternoon — Modi bidding goodbye and Obama thanking his host — the two leaders demonstrated an unprecedented level of personal comfort.
If Obama has been widely acknowledged as a master of public communication, he met his match in Modi. Unlike his recent predecessors, who were stiff and formal in their engagement with world leaders, Modi understands the value of personal chemistry in shaping political outcomes.
Obama’s record on India in the seventh year at the White House now looks rather impressive. Contrary to the widespread perception that he is not warm towards India, Obama hosted Prime Minister Manmohan Singh as the first state guest at the White House in 2009. He is also the only US president to have visited India twice.
If George W Bush is rightly credited with re-imagining the relationship with India, Obama has advanced it beyond anyone’s expectations. Whatever his initial reservations about the civil nuclear initiative, Obama has helped wrap up what Bush had started.
Despite his initial belief that a resolution of the Kashmir question will help stabilise Afghanistan, Obama quickly moved away from the temptation to meddle in India-Pak disputes. After the failure of his overtures towards China early on in his presidency, Obama put India at the forefront of his pivot to Asia. He also became the first American president to support India’s claim to be a permanent member of the UN Security Council.
On the last day of his trip, Obama clearly articulated the unlimited possibilities for America and India in jointly promoting mutual prosperity, regional security and a stable global order. As he celebrated the virtues of Indian democracy, Obama also cautioned his hosts against the emerging threats to its cultural and religious pluralism.
Obama affirmed that India’s ability to continually affirm its democracy amidst so much diversity, is an example “for every other country on Earth”.
That Obama’s remarks were widely seen as unexceptionable in India is a testimony to the new maturity of the relationship. India and America are now ready to talk to each other frankly and in a spirit of genuine friendship rather than at each other.
This article was originally published in the Indian Express.
About the Author
C. Raja Mohan
Former Nonresident Senior Fellow, Carnegie India
A leading analyst of India’s foreign policy, Mohan is also an expert on South Asian security, great-power relations in Asia, and arms control.
- Deepening the India-France Maritime Partnership
- Shanghai Cooperation Organization at Crossroads: Views From Moscow, Beijing and New DelhiCommentary
- +1
Alexander Gabuev, Paul Haenle, C. Raja Mohan, …
Recent Work
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
- Taking the Pulse: Is it NATO’s Job to Support Trump’s War of Choice?Commentary
Donald Trump has demanded that European allies send ships to the Strait of Hormuz while his war of choice in Iran rages on. He has constantly berated NATO while the alliance’s secretary-general has emphatically supported him.
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- India and a Changing Global Order: Foreign Policy in the Trump 2.0 EraResearch
Trump 2.0 has unsettled India’s external environment—but has not overturned its foreign policy strategy, which continues to rely on diversification, hedging, and calibrated partnerships across a fractured order.
- +6
Milan Vaishnav, ed., Sameer Lalwani, Tanvi Madan, …
- Lukashenko’s Bromance With Trump Has a Sell-By DateCommentary
Lukashenko is willing to make big sacrifices for an invitation to Mar-a-Lago or the White House. He also knows that the clock is ticking: he must squeeze as much out of the Trump administration as he can before congressional elections in November leave Trump hamstrung or distracted.
Artyom Shraibman
- The Middle Power Moment?Collection
The world has entered an era of upheaval—a period of heightened geopolitical rivalry, deepening political polarization, quickening technological change, glaring economic inequality, accelerating environmental crises, and eroding respect for international law. This moment of disruption and fluidity is also one of opportunity, however. It provides openings for middle powers, both established and emerging, to exercise unaccustomed agency and influence the future of global order.
Carnegie scholars are analyzing middle power responses to this moment of upheaval and assessing whether—and under what conditions—these states can contribute to practical problem solving. They are asking critical, concrete questions: What countries, precisely, are we talking about when we refer to middle powers? In what issue areas do their priorities converge and diverge, including across North-South divides? In what domains can middle powers pack a punch, rather than produce a whimper? Are they willing to shoulder actual burdens and responsibility? Finally, how can middle powers assert themselves globally, without running afoul of or threatening their relations with the United States or China?
- Can Mullin Revive FEMA?Commentary
Restoring competence and trust to the anemic, neglected disaster recovery agency is a matter of national security.
Sarah Labowitz, Debbra Goh
