India and US talk, China is a subtext



For much of the first year of the Obama administration, Washington sought a broad accommodation with Beijing. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told US diplomats and officials to keep China happy. It was all about US weakness, treasury bill stocks, climate change and the need to work with the superpower in the making. China’s response seemed to have been to see this all as a measure of weakness, humiliating Barack Obama in his first summit in Beijing and trying to leave him out to dry in Copenhagen.

This year the US policy shifted as Beijing pushed the envelope around the world. The US urged the Southeast Asian countries to take a tough stand on territorial disputes with China, promising to back them fully. It also tried to stiffen Japan’s spine as China took potshots at it over territory and even economic relations.

India was having its own problems with China. The squabble over the boundary question was taken up several notches. China began reasserting its claim on the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh, dubbing it “southern Tibet.” It also shifted its policy on Kashmir, an area where it had remained strictly neutral.

The obvious question is how much China will be the strategic ghost at the Hyderabad House banquet hosted by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. The answer is it will be there, but left largely unmentioned in public.

First, China’s assertiveness has made the Obama administration begin to insert India into a strategic framework of trying to constrain China. India has responded with a senior official saying just before Singh’s recent East Asian tour that India would seek stronger ties with Southeast and East Asian countries as part of an aggressive constrain China policy.

Second, the two are adding China oriented issues on their agenda. Thus the soon to be announced joint Indo-US programme on Africa, an idea taken from the similarly inspired Indo-Japanese accord on Africa. I would almost not be surprised to hear that the two would also work together on rare earths — a set of substances that are mentioned know whenever you want to make Japan happy and China unhappy.

Third, much of the military togetherness of the Indo-US defence partnership ultimately is driven by China. The more either of them is alarmed by China, the more willingness they are prepared to work together.

Fourth, India has supported the US position in multilateral bodies like the G20 that “global fiscal imbalances” lie behind the present weakness of the world economy. This, when you boil it down, is about the present battle between the US and China where the latter keeps its currency devalued and the former prints mountains of dollars in response. Obama is known to have asked whether New Delhi would care to support Washington in pressuring China about the value of the yuan. India demurred, preferring to do that through multilateral agences. Same policy, different tactics.

But all in all this nothing like the Bush administration years. Both India and the US keep large chunks of their China policy to themselves. They both pursue many parts of their China policies bilaterally, directly with Beijing. They don’t consult each other too much about many of these policies. And the Indo-US East Asian strategic dialogue is really about informing each other about what we are doing rather than really coordinating policy. Beijing plays on this, in effect seeking to keep a certain distance between India and the US. Look at its developing charm offensive against India.

This could change, but given the general drift in the Obama administration I suspect the change will arise from the actions of China rather than the actions of the US and India.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (9 votes, average: 3.78 out of 5)
Loading ... Loading ...
  • http://www.seo530.com รับทำ seo

    nice a day Foreign Hand , i review your blog , this a nice blog and greatly. Great for me. bulk World and Chinese content. i will visit to read and review your website.

    [Reply]

  • Nilofer

    I live in VA for a long time and I agree with xmxm.

    [Reply]

  • kyle davis

    Another very mis leading blog. Facts people Facts. You cant handle truth. Ron Paul is the best candidate to go against This Obomanation of our country!!!!

    [Reply]

  • RajX

    The media is shamelessly promoting dynastic politics. Sick.

    [Reply]

  • Anonymous

    May be but not of Rahul Gaandhy anyway! [Incidentally, this spelling of surname with 7 (seven) alphabets will bring a lot of good fortunes in his political career, but the question is will he listen and change his?]

    [Reply]

  • http://www.mycarhelpline.com Mycarhelpline

    If its True, this is shocking… Where has the basic courtesy gone when a dealer representative is selling car of 5 lac to customer — Even a neighborhood retail store nw treats customer with a lot of dignity.
    But – a second thought to me seems that either the execs have poor incentive slabs which has been my personal experience while various interactions with dealer owners on time to time basis or quality. Whatever it is – there is bound to be poor customer experience while buying cars.

    [Reply]

  • Randheer Singh

    i believe in tata moters and qality but i m not interested in tata nano main reson not satisfied back side engine and desal tank in frunt side which arise to the fire and not safe for future so plz change looks and week point which is present time
    narendra gangwar 9927810626

    [Reply]

  • Plumbline

    1 Corinthians 13:13
    Now these three remain: faith, hope, and love. But the greatest of these is love.

    [Reply]

  • Samaritan

    Dear All,
    I’d only like to say this —
    Tata Motors is well aware of their technology & their competition. Acquiring JLR fr USD 2.3 Billion isnt something a business house would do 5 times a year, would they?? The improvements have already begun; the technological expertise from JLR & the various R&D centres that Tata Motors had bought worldwide does reflect in the ‘products’ that roll out of the TM factory in the last 2 years [ the 2012 Nano, the 2012 Manza, the 2012 Indica, the ACE truck 'Tata ka chota haathi' & the World Truck 'Prima' (Commercial Vehicle M&HCV segment)] are true master pieces in their respective segments…
    Cheers!! to the most ‘ETHICAL’ business house that our country India will ever see & have as an economical asset!!
    Xoxox
    ‘The Samaritan’

    [Reply]

    PLS Reply:

    TATAs are just a business – no better no worse than any of the other Indian businesses. There is nothing holy or good about them – they are out to make as much money as possible. They started out as a opium peddling drug-dealer in the 1800s , cleaned up their act in early 1900s, degenerated into placidity in 1960s and became yet another political influence peddling money hungry business in 1990s and 2000s. Anybody who has any experience with Tata Telecom or Tata Docomo will vouch for the fact that they are no longer an ethical business

    [Reply]

  • DEEPAK VOHRA

    all officals responsible for protecting and looking ater these animals shoiuld be criminally prosecuted & fired. All responsible for killing, poarching, maiming, poisioning, trapping, torturing these animals should be hanged.

    [Reply]

  • raji

    devastation of nature due to modernism/commercialism/deforestation/.. Nature does well with minimal human intervention. Our help is only needed when we have almost devastated them to extinction. And does india have the expertise and sincerity!!!

    [Reply]

  • gee

    It is alarming to read about this kind of poaching activity. Sooner the GOI wakes up the better it is for the jungles of India. Our famous jungles will fall silent soon with this rate of poaching. The nation requires an answer from authorities being paid by the nation. You are paid to protect and your failure needs an explanation and quick remedy.

    [Reply]

  • http://www.facebook.com/siggavala2 Sigridur Johannsdottir

    i live in iceland but i want to help.. how can i?

    [Reply]

  • Stacey

    It all comes down to funding and education. Our governments do not give protection of our living world sufficient priority, because the masses of most countries are more concerned with being able to afford the latest gadget from Walmart than saving a species. We need to start educating at a very earlier age that the world with all it’s ecosystems it’s more important to our well being than the acquisition of any “thing”.

    [Reply]