The Daily Beast
 
 
Tunku Varadarajan on the cost of ignoring our  allies.
 
 
 
 
 
Obama's Forgotten  Friends
by Tunku Varadarajan
November 24, 2009 | 1:20am


 
With India disappointed with Obama, the president has vowed to  "work even 
closer" with its prime minister.  
On Tuesday evening, the world’s most consequential turbaned man, Manmohan  
Singh, will glide through White House security and take his place at a 
dinner  table beside Barack and Michelle Obama. He is the prime minister of 
India, a  country that could, if Mr. Obama shoots his diplomatic hoops right, 
come to be a  preeminent American ally in the 21st century, taking its place 
alongside  Britain, Israel, and, assuming the bolshie Yukio Hatoyama doesn’t 
live forever,  Japan. 
It doesn’t take a genius to recognize the political, strategic, and moral  
worth to America, the world’s most powerful democracy, of a strong alliance 
with  India, the world’s largest. Mr. Obama, by no stretch a man of tepid  
intelligence, has calibrated things artfully: Not only is Mr. Singh the first 
 state visitor to Washington since the president took office in January, 
his trip  is the first time that India has headed an American president’s list 
for a state  visit—ever. (Richard Nixon must be turning in his grave.) 
For all his emphasis on diplomacy in  dealing with hostile states, Mr. 
Obama has failed to grasp the diplomatic  importance of tending to alliances. 
And yet, until this moment, Mr. Obama has been indifferent to India. No 
doubt  his mind has been focused on other matters: the American economy, the 
wars in  Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian and North Korean nuclear shenanigans—
not to  mention health-care reform (although one must ask what prompted him to 
add that  burden to an already heaving haversack of misfortune). What has 
been left of Mr.  Obama’s attention has been consumed by China, itself 
inseparable in so many ways  from any resolution of America’s economic crisis. 
(Treasury Secretary Geithner  has done more hard yards on China than Secretary 
of State Clinton.) 
Given all this swirl, Mr. Obama has had scant inclination to pay much  
attention to, let alone court, Delhi. This has not gone down well in India, a  
country surrounded by a wall of thin skin. India had grown used, under Mr.  
Obama’s predecessor, to alpha-dog treatment. George W. Bush was the best  
American president India ever had, and Mr. Obama’s ability to take India for  
granted is, in some measure, a tribute to the extent to which Mr. Bush locked 
 the two countries into a presumptively inseparable alliance. But for all 
his  emphasis on diplomacy in dealing with hostile states, like Iran, or 
inveterate  competitor-states, like China, Mr. Obama has failed to grasp the 
diplomatic  importance of tending to alliances, whether they be old and true 
ones, such as  the one with Israel, or young and sensitive ones, such as the 
one with  India. 
India is not the India of Eisenhower’s time, or Nixon’s, or Carter’s, or  
Reagan’s. Sometime in the early 1990s, India finally acquired a “foreign 
policy”  to replace the vexatious, preachy “postcolonial policy” that had 
previously  guided its international relations. Equally, the United States, 
under Bush,  finally acquired an “India policy,” as opposed to a “Pakistan 
policy” of which  India was a mere byproduct. In fact, under Mr. Bush, improved 
relations between  the two democracies came to acquire an almost moral 
imperative, one than can—and  must—survive the short-term reliance on Pakistan 
in the war against the Taliban  in Afghanistan. 
In any case, this is a war in which the U.S. has not, so far, been able to  
count on worthwhile Pakistani support. True, that country has taken pains 
to  maintain the appearance of an ally; but every passing day brings new 
strains,  and new cynicism. Pakistan is “in” so that it can use the war to its 
advantage  in its messianic conflict with India. Besides, its overriding aim 
is to  re-establish a Taliban regime in Kabul: How much plainer does its  
dissonance with American aims in Afghanistan have to be before Mr. Obama 
works  out that his country’s long-term interests in the region lie with New 
Delhi, not  Islamabad? 
Finally, a broader word about India and its relationship with America: 
Unlike  China, which is inherently competitive for global leadership—and which 
will  never accept American leadership or direction—India is a country that 
would,  like Britain or Japan or Germany, settle for a partnership with the 
United  States that guaranteed mutual benefit and respect. India’s natural 
state, if  nations can be said to have such a thing, is neither triumphalist 
nor  antagonist; it is cooperative and redemptive, much as America’s tends to 
be. One  trusts that Mr. Obama will come to see these qualities as clearly 
as his  predecessor did. If not, this could be one area in which history 
will judge Mr.  Obama to have been “dumb,” and Mr. Bush to have been the “smart
” one. 
Tunku Varadarajan is a  national affairs correspondent and writer at large 
for The Daily Beast. He is  also a research fellow at Stanford’s Hoover 
Institution and a professor at NYU’s  Stern Business School. (Follow him on 
Twitter here. 
[email protected]._ (mailto:[email protected].) 
  
URL:  
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-11-24/obamas-forgotten-friends/p/



 



_______________________________________________
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