Press Release
Former US diplomat hopes the Modi government will revive the India-US nuclear deal as part of its economic agenda
That President (Barack) Obama accepted this invitation to be the chief guest at India’s Republic Day parade on 26 January in a very, very busy month for him—what does it say about the US-India relationship?
I think there is a great bipartisan agreement in the US that we ought to have a major strategic relationship with India and that we should make every effort we can to build that relationship. So, the fact that President Obama rescheduled his State of the Union address, which in our system is a very important annual event, speaks for the importance he places on the relationship. I thought that when President Obama came to India in the autumn of 2010, he made it very clear that India is a priority, that he supports India for a permanent seat in the UN Security Council, that he wants to work with India. The visit of Prime Minister Modi to Washington was very successful; the two of them—the president and the prime minister—appeared to get along well, which, in diplomacy, is important. And so, I think what you are seeing from the American side is a major signal that we want to build this relationship further. In 2012-13, the relationship took a step back... here is the opportunity ahead of Prime Minister Modi and President Obama...
One of the issues that America needs to hear from Prime Minister Modi is, what is his view of this relationship? When he came to New York and Washington in September 2014, he said very little in public about the American government and the US-India official relationship. He spoke more—and it’s understandable—about efforts to reform the Indian economy. But I thought it was a missed opportunity that he didn’t say more about his vision, his view of India’s relationship with the US. Now, in January 2015, there is another opportunity for that to happen, and I think any relationship is a two-way street...and I think it’s important to hear from the Prime Minister—does he view the US as a major partner of India? What form should that partnership take? The question that I would put on the table is this—there was no question under the UPA (United Progressive Alliance) Manmohan Singh government that India considered the US to be one of its most primary strategic partners... It was clear to me that that was the objective of the Manmohan Singh government. We haven’t heard that with the same detail or intensity yet. So I think this visit of President Obama is an opportunity for Prime Minister Modi to be more explicit and to be more clear as to where the US stands in his eyes.
In terms of deliverables, what can one expect?
The Obama visit will take place at a time when the relationship is strong. The US-India relationship has fundamentally changed for the better since 2002... I think there is a lot to celebrate in the relationship; it’s come a long, long way.
There are some problems—for instance, India and the US do not agree on global trade; the major US initiative in Asia is the Trans-Pacific Partnership—India is not a part of this, mainly because India does not meet the requirements. On climate change, the US has chosen to work with China rather than India because there are very divergent views on this. Iran is an issue that the US and India have not always seen eye-to-eye. So, during President Obama’s visit, you have to deal with both sides (the good and the bad) of this equation.
You were closely involved with negotiating the India-US nuclear deal. Are you disappointed that it hasn’t taken off?
Yes; it’s disappointing. This was the centrepiece of the relationship between 2005-2010 of the Bush and the Obama administrations, and what we had done with India and the fact that the nuclear liability law was passed and the fact that India could not fulfill the commitments it had made to the US to operationalize the civil nuclear deal is a disappointment for many Americans.
Certainly it is for me, as one of the people who negotiated the agreement for the US. And I hope that the Modi administration, the current Indian government, will take the opportunity to try and make the changes necessary to the law so that the agreement can be put into place.
This after all was an agreement that helped India to create a much larger civil nuclear industry to be able to diminish the dependence India had on imported oil and imported natural gas...I hope very much that the Indian government can now make the necessary corrections, that Indian Parliament will address this issue because this was such a high-profile issue for India not to fulfill its commitments. I think it’s disappointing.
The Modi government has taken steps on issues such as raising the foreign direct investment (FDI) cap in the insurance sector, making land acquisition easier—measures mainly to instill confidence in reforms and the Indian economy. Do you see an inclination on its part to make changes to the nuclear liability law?
Many people around the world, not just the US, would like to see substantial action taken, but I have not seen anything concrete yet. One would hope that would happen in 2015. I will say this—it’s impressive to see what Prime Minister Modi is trying to accomplish... He hasn’t been in power even for a year, so I think he deserves some time to move forward on his economic agenda, and reforms on civil nuclear power are just one of them. I think it’s understandable that the Modi government has not been able to get to this yet, but one would hope that in 2015, it would become a priority.
The next big idea to run with?
I think there are a number of things; the first is revive the civil nuclear deal and implement it. Second, we have to find a way to work together on global trade, on climate change, and we are not there yet. Third, we certainly want to work together on Afghanistan. We have similar interests, we want to see the Afghan government survive and prosper. We are both democracies, we want to see a world of peace and stability. We don’t want to see China dominate Asia, but we seek a cooperative relationship with China. We are victims of terrorism and we are working together to counter terrorism. So there is a lot on the agenda, which tells me that this is a very important relationship for the US, and I hope it is, too, for the Indian side.
In your assessment, what are the major challenges for South Asia in 2015?
There are several. Afghanistan is a major challenge. With the drawdown of the international forces, there are only 10,600 American troops left. With the diminishing of the international aid to Afghanistan, how can we help (Afghan) President Ashraf Ghani, (chief executive) Abdullah Abdullah and the other Afghan leaders to survive and move forward?
Secondly, from an American perspective, we would not want to see a rise in tensions between Pakistan and India—we see evidence of this happening. The US has a closer relationship with India than it does with Pakistan—in my judgment.
Third, the new government in Sri Lanka. To see this region stabilize from Sri Lanka to Bangladesh to Nepal, this is a very important part of the world, India is the lead country; I thought, symbolically, it was very positive that Prime Minister Modi invited regional leaders to Delhi (for his swearing-in ceremony). That to me was a very important symbolic gesture on the part of Prime Minister Modi. India is the natural leader of South Asia and as America, we would want to see a peaceful region.
Since then, India has called off talks with Pakistan.
It’s a very difficult question for governments to handle worldwide. Let me give you an American perspective. We have several difficult relations. With Iran, we don’t have diplomatic relations, we have just begun to talk to them in the past year; we haven’t had full diplomatic relations with Cuba since 1958—that’s changing. So, here is the lesson. We have a difficult relationship with Venezuela. My view is that it’s almost always better off as countries—even when we have difficult relations—we are talking, we are keeping the lines open... I can say this from experience because the US has tried this in the past with countries that I mentioned. It’s almost always better at least to talk, keep the lines open.
Now that the Afghan drawdown has happened, what are the lessons learnt from the Iraq experience that one can apply to Afghanistan against the backdrop of the emergence of ISIL (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant)?
It’s easy for me now to look back on Iraq and say: here’s what we should have done better, because we made some mistakes. But clearly, Iraq was not strong enough to tolerate the complete departure of the American forces and the huge reduction in American attention since 2011. So, when I look at Afghanistan, you try to learn those lessons. It would be a very grave mistake, in my judgment, for the US, for NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) to leave Afghanistan completely in 2016. Afghanistan is not ready for that. It is very dependent on NATO and the US, in particular, to help train the Afghan National Army, to help stabilize the country, to block the Taliban. I would want to see the US retain a military commitment with troops on the ground beyond 2016, until Afghanistan is ready.
Recommended citation
Roche, Elizabeth. "US has a closer relationship with India than with Pakistan: Nicholas Burns," www.livemint.com, January 12, 2015.