[As far as the US is concerned, the red carpet welcome extended to Modi, the Indian Prime Minister -- despite the glaring issue of severe democracy deficit -- is, understandably, on account of three factors.
I. "Strategic": As a very useful partner in the game to keep the burgeoning China -- both militarily and economically -- in check. II. Economic: AA. India is, of course, a vast market. Apart from everything else, it's also the biggest arms importer on the globe (ref.: < https://www.statista.com/statistics/267134/share-of-individual-nations-in-the-import-of-conventional-weapons/ >). BB. It has also unmistakably emerged as a potential manufacturing hub which may be in a position to rival/displace China. Here, one has to keep in mind that China's own, allegedly, terrible records didn't impede the US in developing close trading relations with and even facilitating it to grow to become by far the biggest manufacturing hub globally. An authoritarian ruler may in fact be considered helpful, or even necessary, to push the cost of production down. Not to mistake, even otherwise, the US has a long history of nurturing cordial relations with Saudi Arabia or propping up a number of despots in its own backyard (and also elsewhere). III. In addition to the above two obvious abiding ("bipartisan") attractions, there, it seems, is also an immediate third driver for Biden. It's the lure -- particularly in the context of the coming Presidential poll -- of being in the good books of the voters of Indian origins, which has grown fairly large by now.] <<I think for both sides, the other is an increasingly important partner in this new world that’s emerging. And I think what you see in the joint statement [< https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/06/22/joint-statement-from-the-united-states-and-india/>] is a lot of strategic convergence. China is the glue, there’s no question. Both sides are increasingly bothered by what China’s rise means, how China has behaved, but it’s more than that. From an Indian point of view, I think the US is an essential partner in India’s transformation. If we want to build a modern, technologically capable state, then I think you can’t do that if you have bad relations with both of the two biggest economies in the world and certainly the source, the major source of technology in the world is the US today. So, there is that congruence on technology. >From the US point of view – and for me this is the qualitative change that I see. There aren’t very many places where you can actually use technology and manufacture cheaply. Not just, I don’t mean just assembly, but where you can actually find process engineers; find firms which are capable of helping you to produce things cheaply. Producing outside China, when you go to Japan or Korea or Western Europe or America, these are all expensive places to work in. So, India offers more than just the market. It offers, today, since it’s developed and grown and changed so much in the last 30 years… therefore, it offers a place where you can actually start thinking seriously of some co-production; of locating some manufacturing and that’s a thread that runs through the joint statement. If you look at most of these technological things that they’re talking about, ultimately from an Indian point of view, the aim is to produce in India. But, it would mean integrating into global value chains and supply chains, most of which originate one way or the other in the US – or end in the US. So, for me, that’s the big advance, if there is one. And the deal is simple, frankly. We agree on how the world looks; we’re both worried about the same thing, so you see the reference to the Quad right at the beginning; you see what they both say about the Indo-Pacific; you’ve seen the speeches that they’ve made. But more than the geopolitics I think, there’s now also an economic basis. Because for a long time, it was the politics that drove the relationship, not so much the economic complementarity. But, by bringing high-tech into it, I think you’re now seeing much more. Now, that means both sides have to, I think find a new balance in that economic relationship. It’s not easy because protectionism has risen on both sides. So there is a lot of work still to be done to realise this. Just so we understand clearly, in the area of defence and critical emerging technologies, part of the political economy of de-risking – if that’s the current trend on the part of the US – is to look for partners which are much less risky than say, of course China, but also Taiwan, Vietnam – places that may be vulnerable to disruption in a way that India perhaps would not be. Yeah. I think you’re right and for any company that’s looking for a “China plus one” strategy, it’s not necessarily moving things out of China but looking to hedge their bets, then India is a logical place to come and India has been growing. India looks today as a good, as a very good prospect.>> (Excerpted from: < https://m.thewire.in/article/diplomacy/full-text-shivshankar-menon-india-us-modi-visit >.) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/greenyouth/CACEsOZjzDHb65nYnEDuhos6mwaFqxaqZ%3D7q9cKCPrn3tscguWg%40mail.gmail.com.
