Tag Archives: nuclear partnership

Defence And Strategic Affairs Blog

FMCT Negotiations: Games Pakistan Plays

1 Comment

By P R Chari
Indian Review of Global Affairs

Pakistan is at it again. Whenever it is in trouble, Pakistan turns up the volume of its anti-India rhetoric. Suicide terrorism is taking a daily toll of lives in Pakistan. Its Afghanistan policy is going nowhere. The Pakistan army is obsessed with gaining ‘strategic depth’ in Afghanistan, and has drafted the Taliban to achieve this objective. But, elements of the Taliban have turned against Pakistan, and are indulging in sustained, uncontrollable violence within the country. The assassination of Salman Taseer – a voice of reason raised against Pakistan’s medieval blasphemy laws – highlights the growing Islamization and chaos in Pakistan. Taseer’s murder was condemnable, but the horrifying fact is that his assassin has become a national hero. Rose petals were showered on him when he was produced in court. Lawyers are flocking to defend him. Liberal opinion in Pakistan, on the other hand, has been marginalized.

In true Nero-fashion Pakistan has now blocked negotiations on the Fissile Materials Cutoff Treaty (FMCT) in Geneva. Its Ambassador, Zamir Akram, has argued that by ceasing fissile materials production, Pakistan would concede a ‘strategic advantage’ to India. The WikiLeaks inform that Pakistan is currently manufacturing nuclear weapons faster than any other country, according to a cable sent by the U.S. embassy in Islamabad to Washington. A recent study by the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists also informs that Pakistan possesses more nuclear weapons than India, but is feverishly manufacturing fissile materials to further enlarge its inventory. Nuclear weapons are not comparable to conventional weapons, and adding to their numbers beyond a point makes no sense. But, this logic is unlikely to impress Pakistan, whose defense and foreign policy is basically driven by the obsessions of the Pakistan Army. Zamir Akram had another grouse. President Obama had pledged to assist India’s admission into the Nuclear Suppliers Group, the Missile Technology Control Regime, the Australia Group and the Waasenaar Arrangement during his visit to New Delhi last November. Delivering on that promise the United States has very recently removed export controls on several Indian space and defense-related organizations, signaling a new era in U.S.-India nonproliferation cooperation. Zamir argued that this represented a “paradigm shift in strategic terms.”

Pakistan is actually hoping to somehow revive the debate on the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal that was generated in 2008 when that deal was under process. The Bush administration had hammered that deal through the U.S. Congress, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), despite reservations voiced in some countries, collectively named the White Knights. Pakistan is seeking a similar dispensation, and China is working hard to provide Pakistan a comparable nuclear deal by supplying two more 300 MW atomic power reactors for its Chashma complex. Without going into the legal complexities involved, it should be noticed that China needs to place this matter before the Nuclear Suppliers Group for getting its prior approval. A similar approval had been obtained by the United States before finalizing the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal. China is reluctant to pursue this route in the knowledge that the NSG may not endorse this deal between two blatant proliferators in the international system.

Reverting back to the collaterally damaged and stalled FMCT negotiations Rose Gottemoeller, Assistant Secretary of State, has unequivocally declared, “Let me just place full emphasis and priority today on my main message, which is to launch the negotiations this year on a fissile material cutoff treaty in the Conference on Disarmament.” She added, “That is a kind of general time frame,” though 2011 was not a “specific deadline.” In diplomatic language these words amount to expressing extreme displeasure with Pakistan, and with good reason. The 65-nation Conference on Disarmament transcended a ten-year deadlock in 2009 by agreeing to address four issues: nuclear disarmament, a fissile material cut-off pact, the prohibition of space-based weapons, and an agreement on non-use of nuclear weapons by nuclear-armed countries against non-nuclear weapon states. Pakistan has reneged now after endorsing this plan, which derails President Obama’s hopes to operationalize his disarmament agenda; hence, Gottemoeller’s subsequent threat, “If we cannot find a way to begin these negotiations in the Conference on Disarmament, then we will need to consider options.”

And, what could be these options? Most effectively, by stopping financial assistance to keep a bankrupt Pakistan afloat. And, cutting off arms transfers, which includes spares and ancillaries, would heighten pressure on Pakistan’s armed forces who are its real rulers. Can the United States afford to ignore Pakistan’s logistics support to sustain the American and ISAF operations in Afghanistan? Will China bail out its distressed ally by defying the international community in this effort, and promoting a further closing of ranks by its neighbours? The United States and China will, no doubt, weigh all their options carefully. Pakistan seems likely to witness interesting times.

(The article originally appeared at www.irgamag.com. USINPAC and IRGA are content partners.)

India-US Relations Blog

The Obama Visit and U.S.-India Relations

1 Comment

During those remarkable years when Indian students were flocking to U.S. colleges, acquiring skills and reputations that eventually made them the highest earning ethnic group in the U.S, the two governments were doing their damnest to destroy the relationship. Many in both governments still don’t know any better, although it is the government in Delhi that is drifting closer into dangerous waters, led by a captain without the strength to curb odd ministers running their own foreign policy. The reasons the U.S. government didn’t like Delhi in those years lay chiefly in Indira Gandhi’s bizarre attempt to enter the nuclear club in 1974, and of course the CIA’s mischievous assessment that India was a Soviet ‘ally’. The end of the cold war and George Bush’s nuclear deal should have flattened those hurdles, once and for all. The hurdles are gone, but ending a bad relationship is not the same as getting into a new one. Manmohan Singh’s courageous and tenacious performance in Parliament on the nuclear deal saw Indian political leadership at its best. The U.S. government’s worldwide arm twisting to get India the NSG waiver, demonstrated what a super power can do, when it stretches itself for a friend. Since then it’s been all downhill.

France and Russia have got the civil nuclear contracts, after the U.S. did the heavy lifting. Russia has been given the fifth generation fighter contract after the U.S. promised 100 GE 414 jet engines for India’s collapsed jet fighter project. Despite the government’s directive to all ministries to crank up the agenda for President Obama’s visit, a huge hole was created by Antony’s Ministry of Defense which is facing in a different direction. The Ministry believes that the Communications Security Agreement (CISMOA) is a devious and deliberate American plot to eavesdrop on Indian communications, as if the National Security Agency in Washington has no other means to achieve the same objective. The Logistics Agreement would have been hugely beneficial to the navy and air force to extend their reach, using U.S. assets worldwide. It was an agreement that the PLA would have paid billions for. Reciprocal facilities for unpopular U.S. wars could always have been turned down in special circumstances as Turkey did in 2002.The Indian MOD has shut the Indian armed forces off from advanced world technology by refusing to consider both. The U.S. President’s visit was eventually carried off by President Obama and Michelle Obama’s hugely effective public posturing, and some heroic behind the scene actions by corporate India and the U.S.-India CEO’s forum. Even so, the French and the Chinese signed an equal if not larger clutch of business deals with India. The President of the U.S. has a limited charter, unlike New Delhi, where there are Ministers for Coal, steel, petroleum, water, fertilizer, shipping, airlines, roads etc. So New Delhi has not yet grasped the essentials of the new world that it has to live in.

China has overtaken Japan as the world’s second wealthiest nation. Its GDP is $ 5 trillion against India’s $1.3 trillion. By 2020 both GDPs could quadruple, thereby increasing the gap from $ 3.7 to 14.8 trillion (India $ 5.2 trillion vs. China $ 20 trillion). From dams on the Brahmaputra to the Tibetan border, to the Indian Ocean – China’s power and arrogance is something India will have to live with. But how?

Will we see another Krishna Menon cozying upto China, our great Asian ‘brother’, when eventually Nehru had to write to JFK for 12 squadrons of fighter bombers, ‘flown by U.S. pilots’? There are even more unanswered questions. Will the Indian Air Force and Indian Navy sit out a Himalayan war, as they did in 1962 in the collective belief that their contribution to help the army could only make things worse? We don’t need an alliance with the US. We don’t need to get into a fight with China- not now, not ever. But how do we avoid one? Only by playing to China’s belief in Real Politik. To do that, India needs the U.S’ world class defense technology. Israel, France and Russia are alright for the middle level stuff. To get the world class stuff from the U.S. we need a relationship run by governments. The U.S.-India business councils, the Indian-Americans and the CEO’s forum can only do so much. India’s MOD cannot run its own foreign policy either.

India-US Relations Blog

The Year in India-US Relations

Leave a comment
If the year in India-U.S. relations could be conveyed through pithy phrases, two immediately come to mind. 2010 was the year in which the wheel turned full circle, with the U.S. once again turning its attention towards India after its advances were rejected by a rising China, intent on blazing its own path on the world stage. After the heady highs of the Bush Administration, the Obama Administration’s half-hearted and confused approach towards India had been a party pooper, and even the Singh state visit at the end of the previous year couldn’t hide the perceptible decline in spirits.  Keeping President Obama’s November visit as a deadline, both governments searched high and low for the next big idea, a la the nuclear deal to bring the zing back into the relationship. The nuclear deal itself became the sum of many deals as the Reprocessing Agreement signed in March of this year was followed by the passage of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill by the Indian Parliament. Both procedure and outcome were mired in controversy, with India then signing the Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage (CSC) to resolve concerns expressed by both the U.S. government and American companies over their liability in case of a mishap.
The other phrase that comes to mind is reinventing the wheel. June 2010 saw three Indian ministers accompanied by a phalanx of bureaucrats descend on Washington for the Strategic Dialogue that had been upgraded to ministerial level. Eighteen separate dialogues took place under the overall umbrella of the Strategic Dialogue, but they ultimately amounted to picking up the threads from where the Bush Administration had left off. Among the new areas dialogued about were co-operation in science and technology, research for clean energy and monsoon prediction, health and education, and women’s empowerment, but these were largely derided as soft issues to shift focus from an absence of dialogue on the hard issues to do with regional security. With the partnership now being tagged as “indispensible”, the million dollar question was what was so indispensible about India to the United States other than its large market? While an Indian Prime Minister had coined the phrase “natural allies” to describe the relationship, the geo-politics of the day and the shifting sands of international relations have put paid to that proposition for the time being.
It may well be said that such rhetoric is meant for public consumption, but even the most hyperbolic statement would still contain a kernel that would provide an indicator of the future direction of the relationship. But in this particular instant, even a word cloud analysis does not throw up any indicator of future trends. At best, the removal of sanctions on many Indian science entities might pave the way for increased technology sharing. (For the full wish list, go here).  The quid pro quo could well be India signing the so called foundational agreements that would enable the U.S. to sell its state-of-the-art military equipment to India. There has already been movement in this direction with reports of a bilateral technical group to look into the issues being set up immediately post the Obama visit. The visit itself saw Obamamania sweeping the country; with wall-to-wall coverage and media frenzy of the type that the President would probably have last seen on his election night.
Coming to other straws in the wind, and seeing as this has become a free-wheeling blog post, there were other sets of wheels that showed that American companies were finally making their way into the Indian mind and the Indian market. Harley Davidson made it to Indian roads, though with a little help from Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold, by his own admission, and ably backed up by Wikileaks. And an American car, the Ford Figo became the new kid on the block, selling almost 60,000 units and being voted as the Indian Car of the Year. Thanks to the Figo, Ford recorded an incredible 185% increase in sales in India year on year.  Ford, like other American companies has found it a hard slough in the Indian market, but it has ultimately paid off. While the American market is an equally tough one to crack for Indian companies other than the well established ones, hopes that the Adam tablet from the Indian startup, Notionink, the first to crack the competitive high technology American consumer space were belied by delays in production that even led to talk of Adam being vapourware. Not the best way to go about being a trailblazer.
What else, the soft power of the two countries would have been at equilibrium, but for the sudden appearance of Pamela Anderson on the sets of Big Boss, the Indian equivalent of the reality show Big Brother. Hollywood films ran rampant on Indian screens, with the top ten movies, dubbed and otherwise, grossing almost $450 million in the Indian box office. Unlike 2009, however, when Avatar had beaten My Name is Khan to become the top grosser in India, this year, at least, Hindi films managed to hold their own. The Indian Diaspora in the United States contributed substantially to the bottomline of the Hindi film industry with the top ten movies grossing about $ 20 million at the American box office. One of the more bizarre suggestions that one got to know of through Wikileaks was that of harnessing Bollywood’s soft power and have Bollywood stars do the equivalent of a USO tour in Afghanistan to lift up the spirits of the locals, but one that was apparently never acted upon.
What will 2011 bring? More leaks from the U.S. Embassy in Delhi, for sure. With just 1947 out of the 251,287 cables released, there should be at least a few more to add to the 39 embassy cables that have so far seen the light of day. In the bilateral context, the cables show that Indian and American diplomats are formal in their interlocutions, judicious in their words, play their cards close to their chest, and give as good as they get.  The terms of endearment are evidently different in this still somewhat prickly partnership. But is that the reason why the wheel had to turn full circle is something to be considered as we enter the New Year.

If the year in India-U.S. relations could be conveyed through pithy phrases, two immediately come to mind. 2010 was the year in which the wheel turned full circle, with the U.S. once again turning its attention towards India after its advances were rejected by a rising China, intent on blazing its own path on the world stage. After the heady highs of the Bush Administration, the Obama Administration’s half-hearted and confused approach towards India had been a party pooper, and even the Singh state visit at the end of the previous year couldn’t hide the perceptible decline in spirits.  Keeping President Obama’s November visit as a deadline, both governments searched high and low for the next big idea, a la the nuclear deal to bring the zing back into the relationship. The nuclear deal itself became the sum of many deals as the Reprocessing Agreement signed in March of this year was followed by the passage of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill by the Indian Parliament. Both procedure and outcome were mired in controversy, with India then signing the Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage (CSC) to resolve concerns expressed by both the U.S. government and American companies over their liability in case of a mishap.

wordcloud

The other phrase that comes to mind is reinventing the wheel. June 2010 saw three Indian ministers accompanied by a phalanx of bureaucrats descend on Washington for the Strategic Dialogue that had been upgraded to ministerial level. Eighteen separate dialogues took place under the overall umbrella of the Strategic Dialogue, but they ultimately amounted to picking up the threads from where the Bush Administration had left off. Among the new areas dialogued about were co-operation in science and technology, research for clean energy and monsoon prediction, health and education, and women’s empowerment, but these were largely derided as soft issues to shift focus from an absence of dialogue on the hard issues to do with regional security. With the partnership now being tagged as “indispensible”, the million dollar question was what was so indispensible about India to the United States other than its large market? While an Indian Prime Minister had coined the phrase “natural allies” to describe the relationship, the geo-politics of the day and the shifting sands of international relations have put paid to that proposition for the time being.

It may well be said that such rhetoric is meant for public consumption, but even the most hyperbolic statement would still contain a kernel that would provide an indicator of the future direction of the relationship. But in this particular instant, even a word cloud analysis does not throw up any indicator of future trends. At best, the removal of sanctions on many Indian science entities might pave the way for increased technology sharing. (For the full wish list, go here).  The quid pro quo could well be India signing the so called foundational agreements that would enable the U.S. to sell its state-of-the-art military equipment to India. There has already been movement in this direction with reports of a bilateral technical group to look into the issues being set up immediately post the Obama visit. The visit itself saw Obamamania sweeping the country; with wall-to-wall coverage and media frenzy of the type that the President would probably have last seen on his election night.

Coming to other straws in the wind, and seeing as this has become a free-wheeling blog post, there were other sets of wheels that showed that American companies were finally making their way into the Indian mind and the Indian market. Harley Davidson made it to Indian roads, though with a little help from Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold, by his own admission, and ably backed up by Wikileaks. And an American car, the Ford Figo became the new kid on the block, selling almost 60,000 units and being voted as the Indian Car of the Year. Thanks to the Figo, Ford recorded an incredible 185% increase in sales in India year on year.  Ford, like other American companies has found it a hard slough in the Indian market, but it has ultimately paid off. While the American market is an equally tough one to crack for Indian companies other than the well established ones, hopes that the Adam tablet from the Indian startup, Notionink, the first to crack the competitive high technology American consumer space were belied by delays in production that even led to talk of Adam being vapourware. Not the best way to go about being a trailblazer.

What else, the soft power of the two countries would have been at equilibrium, but for the sudden appearance of Pamela Anderson on the sets of Big Boss, the Indian equivalent of the reality show Big Brother. Hollywood films ran rampant on Indian screens, with the top ten movies, dubbed and otherwise, grossing almost $450 million in the Indian box office. Unlike 2009, however, when Avatar had beaten My Name is Khan to become the top grosser in India, this year, at least, Hindi films managed to hold their own. The Indian Diaspora in the United States contributed substantially to the bottomline of the Hindi film industry with the top ten movies grossing about $ 20 million at the American box office. One of the more bizarre suggestions that one got to know of through Wikileaks was that of harnessing Bollywood’s soft power and have Bollywood stars do the equivalent of a USO tour in Afghanistan to lift up the spirits of the locals, but one that was apparently never acted upon.

What will 2011 bring? More leaks from the U.S. Embassy in Delhi, for sure. With just 1947 out of the 251,287 cables released, there should be at least a few more to add to the 39 embassy cables that have so far seen the light of day. In the bilateral context, the cables show that Indian and American diplomats are formal in their interlocutions, judicious in their words, play their cards close to their chest, and give as good as they get.  The terms of endearment are evidently different in this still somewhat prickly partnership. But is that the reason why the wheel had to turn full circle is something to be considered as we enter the New Year.

Defence And Strategic Affairs Blog

Peace and Stability in 2011: Turbulence will Continue

1 Comment

From the point of view of international peace and stability, 2010 ended on a positive note with the ratification by the U.S. Senate of the new START treaty that will further reduce deployed strategic nuclear weapons of Russia and the U.S. to 1,550 in seven years. However, in view of the ongoing conflicts and possible conflagrations, 2011 is likely to be a turbulent year.

The strategic stalemate in Afghanistan will continue with the Taliban and NATO-ISAF forces alternately gaining local ascendancy for short durations in the core provinces of Helmand, Marja and Kandahar. While U.S. forces may be expected to step up drone strikes in Pakistan against extremists sheltering in the NWFP and FATA areas, the results are not likely to appear justifiable in view of the diplomatic fallout in Pakistan. The Afghan National Army is still many years away from achieving the professional standards necessary to manage security on its own. Hence, it will be difficult for the U.S. to begin its planned drawdown of troops in July 2011.

The military stand-off along the 38th Parallel in Korea has further exacerbated the already unstable situation in East Asia caused by increasing Chinese assertiveness that appears out of character with its stated objective of a peaceful rise. Though the international community may be able to ensure that a major conflict does not erupt again between the two Koreas, the sub-region will remain volatile unless the Chinese use their influence with North Korea to persuade it to back off from the path of confrontation. As of now they do not appear inclined to do so.

Turmoil in West Asia will continue through 2011 as Israel stubbornly refuses to halt the construction of new settlements in the West Bank and the Palestinian militias are getting increasingly restive. Iran’s nuclear ambitions and the vaguely stated threats of several of its neighbours to follow suit will continue to add to instability in the region. Saudi Arabia, in particular, may fund Pakistan’s nuclear expansion programme as a hedging strategy against the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Iran. Such a course of action would be a disastrous blow to international non-proliferation efforts.

It can be deduced form recent arrests in the U.K. and elsewhere that international fundamentalist terrorists may succeed in launching another spectacular strike in the West. A successful strike would resurrect the al Qaeda and enable it to rally its wavering cadres. All in all, 2011 will see a continuation of ongoing conflicts without major let up.

(Gurmeet Kanwal is Director, Centre for Land Warfare Studies (CLAWS), New Delhi.)

India-US Relations Blog

An Untold Story of US-India Relations

1 Comment

My belief and experience is that the U.S. and India have a great deal in common, both as people and as nations. Some of these commonalities are rather obvious such as the democracies in the two countries, and the multi-racial, multi-cultural and multi-religious societies. People in both nations cherish their diversity. Both nations have taken practical steps to build institutional safeguards to protect the freedoms of minorities. They are welcoming of immigrants such that the U.S. is even recognized as the land of immigrants. Maybe very few people know though that India has been for centuries the land of immigrants.

As the world gets more complex, both nations are discovering that they have a similar view towards major geo-strategic issues facing the world. Both view China as their major economic partner and a potential adversary. India and the U.S are interested in a stable Afghanistan with strong institutions even if not fully democratic one. Both nations have tremendous stake in protecting maritime links and freedom of navigation. Both are victims of Islamic terrorism and face the prospects of constant terrorist attacks.

These factors make India and the U.S. natural allies in today’s world. There is therefore also a bipartisan support for President Obama’s initiatives for a broader India-U.S. interaction and partnership.

However, one area has escaped attention, and could very well be the most relevant area of U.S.-India congruence. It is a shared view of economic and monetary policy. The United States is an open economy, an economy that has invited companies from other countries to export their goods and services to America. This posture of the United States has benefited the U.S. consumer by bringing goods to them at a lower price, and it has benefited the exporting countries by increasing their prosperity. Threatened by neo-mercantile countries, America has begun to feel that it is the only country with such an open-minded posture.

At this time, it is important to note that India shares this American vision. India is increasingly open to trade and to foreign companies exporting their goods and services to India. A quick visit to India confirms this. American and European companies are increasing their presence in India and, unlike in China, these companies are making money.

Both the U.S and India are principally domestic consumption economies. This may not be obvious to many. India is now anchored in people’s minds as a technology outsourcing economy and the global success of U.S. brands makes America appear intent on dominating the world. But under this imagery lies the reality of domestic consumption as the principal driver of American and Indian economies. Both countries have physically large and deep markets with the capacity to absorb foreign goods and foreign capital. Perhaps because of this, both the U.S. and India have large current account deficits and trade deficits. These two countries are also dependent on foreign capital to sustain their growth.

This makes the U.S.-India pair relatively unique in the G-20. China, Germany, Japan and Brazil are export dynamos. Most of the Asian countries are semi-mercantile exporting economies. They depend on weak currencies to make their products less expensive. They have gathered a huge hoard of foreign exchange reserves in the past 10 years. These forex reserves are now approaching $6 trillion and have grown ten-fold in the past 10 years. The principal beneficiary is, of course, China that has accumulated about $2.5 trillion in reserves, almost 50% of the total growth in the past decade.

These neo-mercantile countries are engaged in exporting their capital to domestic consumption countries like America and India in addition to their products. They need domestic consumption countries to increase spending and consumption, increase imports and maintain strong currency levels.

This is where the global battle lines are being drawn today. The U.S. and India find themselves on the same side & as partners in this battle. This is why Prime Minister Singh seconded President Obama’s strong partnership mantra and said, “A strong, robust, fast-growing United States is in the interests of the world.”