• Research
  • Politika
  • About
Carnegie Russia Eurasia center logoCarnegie lettermark logo
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Ashley J. Tellis"
  ],
  "type": "other",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "SAP",
  "programs": [
    "South Asia"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "South Asia",
    "India",
    "Pakistan"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Security",
    "Foreign Policy",
    "Nuclear Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

Other

The United States and India 3.0: <i>Cave! Hic Dragones</i>

The United States and India must agree on three vital security issues to ensure that their relations continue to deepen: terrorism, Kashmir, and the balance of power in Asia.

Link Copied
By Ashley J. Tellis
Published on Oct 28, 2009

On the eve of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s first state visit to Washington since Barack Obama took office, the United States and India must agree on three vital security issues to ensure that their relations continue to deepen: terrorism, Kashmir, and the balance of power in Asia.

U.S.–India relations are off to a strong start under President Obama following an unprecedented strengthening during the Bush administration. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton scored high points on her visit to India in July, emphasizing economic and social development, and making a number of symbolic gestures to reaffirm India’s importance to the Obama administration. But relations can only advance so far unless India is assured of U.S. support on its major security challenges.

Key Conclusions:

  • Terrorism: Pakistan uses U.S. counterterrorism aid to combat terrorists who threaten mainly its own security, ignoring those who target Afghanistan and India. India—and the Indian public, especially—is increasingly frustrated that Washington’s policy has failed to show results. The United States must cooperate with India in addressing this challenge, and redouble its efforts to ensure the cooperation of the Pakistani military.
     
  • Kashmir: The Bush administration’s hands-off approach on Kashmir was critical to bringing both sides to the negotiating table with realistic expectations. Talk of intervention by the Obama administration could deepen Pakistani recalcitrance, disrupt U.S.–India relations, and set back the peace process.
     
  • Regional balance of power: The regional balance of power is critical to sustaining India’s current nuclear posture and deterrent capabilities. A private, high-level dialogue between India and the United States would assure New Delhi that Washington values a balanced regional approach—and that U.S. financial dependence on China will not unduly limit the necessity for preserving the appropriate strategic balance in Asia.


“Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s forthcoming state visit to Washington offers the Obama administration a splendid opportunity to engage on these issues, and also on the U.S. priorities of climate change, nonproliferation, and economic and defense cooperation,” writes Tellis. “The success and durability of the partnership between India and the United States will depend on it.”
 

About the Author

Ashley J. Tellis

Former Senior Fellow

Ashley J. Tellis was a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

    Recent Work

  • Paper
    Multipolar Dreams, Bipolar Realities: India’s Great Power Future

      Ashley J. Tellis

  • Commentary
    India Sees Opportunity in Trump’s Global Turbulence. That Could Backfire.

      Ashley J. Tellis

Ashley J. Tellis
Former Senior Fellow
SecurityForeign PolicyNuclear PolicyNorth AmericaUnited StatesSouth AsiaIndiaPakistan

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 Russia Eurasia Center

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Why Are China and Russia Not Rushing to Help Iran?

    Most of Moscow’s military resources are tied up in Ukraine, while Beijing’s foreign policy prioritizes economic ties and avoids direct conflict.   

      • Alexander Gabuev

      Alexander Gabuev, Temur Umarov

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Georgia’s Fall From U.S. Favor Heralds South Caucasus Realignment

    With the White House only interested in economic dealmaking, Georgia finds itself eclipsed by what Armenia and Azerbaijan can offer.

      Bashir Kitachaev

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    What Does War in the Middle East Mean for Russia–Iran Ties?

    If the regime in Tehran survives, it could be obliged to hand Moscow significant political influence in exchange for supplies of weapons and humanitarian aid.

      Nikita Smagin

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    How Trump’s Wars Are Boosting Russian Oil Exports

    The interventions in Iran and Venezuela are in keeping with Trump’s strategy of containing China, but also strengthen Russia’s position.

      • Mikhail Korostikov

      Mikhail Korostikov

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    How Far Can Russian Arms Help Iran?

    Arms supplies from Russia to Iran will not only continue, but could grow significantly if Russia gets the opportunity.

      Nikita Smagin

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
Carnegie Russia Eurasia logo, white
  • Research
  • Politika
  • About
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Privacy
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.