(http://www.newsweek.com/)  
 
 



 (javascript:window.print();)  

The Prize is India
A relationship Obama should  nurture. 

 
By _Fareed Zakaria_ (http://www.newsweek.com/id/173014)  | NEWSWEEK   
Published Nov 21, 2009  
>From the magazine issue dated Nov 30, 2009

 
Barack Obama has been criticized for kowtowing to the Chinese and the  
Russians over the last few months. But so far, this is all about atmospherics.  
The administration has not made any unilateral concession of substance to 
either  country. It is taking a strategic view that developing strong 
relationships with  both countries, particularly China, will yield long-term 
benefits. Strangely,  however, that strategic focus has been lost in dealing 
with 
Asia's other rising  giant, India.  
At one level the administration is being extremely friendly. India's Prime  
Minister Manmohan Singh comes to Washington this week for the first 
official  state visit of the Obama presidency. There will be toasts and 
celebrations and  many nice words said in public about the ties between the two 
great 
democracies.  But underneath this lies an unease about the state of the 
relationship. 
 
 



Indian officials worry that the Obama team does not have the same 
fundamental  orientation as the Bush administration regarding India's role in 
the 
21st  century. Some Obama officials publicly criticized the nuclear deal 
championed by  George W. Bush, a deal that the Indians regard as basic 
recognition 
of their  status as a major power. They worry that a Democratic 
administration could  succumb to protectionism. They worry that it is too cozy 
with 
China. 
These concerns will pass as the two sides get to know each other better. 
The  more lasting danger is that the Obama administration, now intensely 
focused on  the war in Afghanistan, will look at South Asia largely through 
that 
prism.  Since Washington desperately needs Pakistan's cooperation in that 
conflict, it  is tending to adopt Pakistan's concerns as its own, which is 
producing a  perverse view of the region. 
In his leaked report, Gen. Stanley McChrystal warned that "increasing 
Indian  influence in Afghanistan is likely to exacerbate regional tensions and 
encourage  Pakistani countermeasures." This is a bizarre criticism. India is 
the hegemon of  South Asia, with enormous influence throughout the 
subcontinent. Its GDP is 100  times that of Afghanistan (that is not a typo). 
As 
Afghanistan opened itself up  after the fall of the Taliban, the cuisine, 
movies, 
and money that flowed into  the country were, naturally, Indian. This is 
like noting that the United States  has had growing influence in Mexico over 
the last few decades. 
The Indian government's aid to Afghanistan has mostly gone to build schools 
 and infrastructure. And while New Delhi is trying to gain influence with 
the  Kabul government, U.S. officials tell me that Indian intelligence has 
limited  operations in Afghanistan. America can't and should not want India to 
banish  itself from its own subcontinent. In fact, India's objectives are 
exactly  aligned with America's—to defeat the Taliban and to support the 
elected Afghan  government. 
Pakistan's objectives, on the other hand, are not the same as Washington's. 
 Islamabad has long argued that it has a right to see a pro-Pakistani 
government  in Afghanistan. Asia expert Selig Harrison has noted that in an 
interview with  him in 1988, Pakistan's President Zia ul-Haq demanded "a regime 
to our liking"  in Kabul. Last year a Pakistani general told the director of 
national  intelligence that Pakistan had to support the Taliban in 
Afghanistan, "otherwise  India will reign." Having created the Afghan Taliban, 
Pakistan has still not  taken any steps to dismantle it. Even now, while 
attacking 
the Pakistani Taliban  in South Waziristan, it has not disturbed the 
leadership of the Afghan Taliban  in Baluchistan. 
The Obama administration has also seemed to endorse the idea that if only 
the  dispute over Kashmir were resolved, Pakistan would suddenly attack all 
the  terror groups it has supported over the years. Now, it's fair to say 
that India  is far too prickly about Kashmir, but the only path to any 
resolution there will  lie in building trust between Pakistan and India. That's 
unlikely to happen  while Pakistan refuses to go after the terror group that 
also planned the Mumbai  attacks, Lashkar-e-Taiba. 
Generals like McChrystal—no matter how smart or tough—should not make 
policy,  because they confuse the imperatives of the battlefield with a broader 
view.  Obama must keep in mind that South Asia is a tar pit filled with 
failed and  dysfunctional states, save for one long-established democracy of 
1.2 
billion  people that is the second-fastest-growing major economy in the 
world, a check on  China's rising ambitions, and a natural ally of the United 
States. The prize is  the relationship with India. The booby prize is 
governing Afghanistan. 
Fareed Zakaria is editor of NEWSWEEK International and author of _The 
Post-American World _ 
(http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/039306235X/?tag=nwswk-20)  and _The 
Future of Freedom: Illiberal  Democracy at Home and Abroad 
_ (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0393047644/?tag=nwswk-20) .  
 
Find this article at _http://www.newsweek.com/id/223794_ 
(http://www.newsweek.com/id/223794)  
© 2009 




_______________________________________________
Centroids mailing list: [email protected]
http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com
Archives at http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/

Reply via email to