|
|
|
|
|
guest column
Touchstones |
|
|
GROUND ZERO
|
|
As Modi plans US trip, defence on everyone’s mind While big-ticket deals—such as the possible sale of Apache and Chinook helicopters—have been in the news, perhaps the most important discussions will focus on smaller cooperative projects that align with Modi’s vision for ‘defence indigenisation’. Joshua T. White & Michael Krepon
Prime
Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Washington in September will be an occasion for glowing speeches about the future of Indo-US relations. Behind the public effusiveness, however, there will be a mutual sense of strategic reserve. New Delhi prizes its strategic autonomy and not doing Washington’s bidding. Washington now has a more realistic understanding of what kind of partnership it can expect, and that New Delhi will pursue its own interests, in its own way. The Bush administration’s high hopes that the civil-nuclear deal would become a bilateral game-changer proved unrealistic. Soon after the deal, India’s nuclear liability legislation stymied US firms and New Delhi decided to purchase European instead of US fighter aircraft. This time around, ambitions will be tempered, but tangible gains on mutual interests, especially on defence cooperation, are within reach. The most important outcome would be a revision and extension of the 10-year ‘New Framework’ for the US-India defence relationship, which is up for renewal in 2015. A forward-looking ‘New Framework’ agreement could, for example, outline clearer priorities to shape US-India military exercises and sales, reflect aspirations for information-sharing agreements, and pave the way for more substantive exchanges by both civilian and military leaders. Washington expects new defence sales to be advanced during Modi’s visit. While big-ticket deals—such as the possible sale of Apache and Chinook helicopters—have been in the news, perhaps the most important discussions will focus on smaller cooperative projects that align with Modi’s vision for ‘defence indigenisation’. These talks take place under the rubric of the Defence Trade and Technology Initiative (DTTI), inaugurated by Defence Secretary Leon Panetta in 2012. The DTTI is an effort to systematically address barriers to expanded defence trade and technology transfer in both countries. For its part, the US government and industry have proposed dozens of innovative co-development projects, which reportedly include cooperation on subjects as diverse as surface-to-air missiles, magnetic catapults, and big data exploitation. The most likely major DTTI deliverable for September is an agreement to co-develop the next generation of the Javelin anti-tank missile—a project that would involve significant technology transfer, and would meet stated Indian Army needs. Regardless of the specific deal, however, defence cooperation will remain disappointing without a flagship co-development project. The ball is now largely in India’s court for decision. As important as Modi’s visit may be, the real work of deepening defence ties will require leadership and follow-up by India’s new Defence Minister. Observers in the United States will be on the lookout for three developments. The first is whether the Indian bureaucracy can begin to move long-languishing deals through the procurement pipeline. Washington would like to see what Indians have also been hoping for: a decisive Ministry of Defence that can take military procurement decisions and stick to them. US industry does not expect to win every deal, but is confident that its comparative advantages in technology and transparency will solidify its place as a key defence provider over the long term. Second, while the Modi government’s decision to raise the baseline foreign direct investment (FDI) cap in defence to 49 per cent was welcomed in the US, it is probably insufficient to drive significant foreign investment. The most pressing obstacle to high technology transfer is arguably no longer US government approvals, which on account of DTTI are more readily forthcoming, but creating compelling incentives for US industry to engage in real partnerships with Indian firms. That means raising the FDI cap to at least 51 per cent, and dealing with India’s onerous offset requirements. Third, and perhaps most important, Washington is ready to engage in more substantive dialogue over regional security. US-India talks on Afghanistan and East Asia have already deepened dramatically over the past two years, largely without public notice. But still there is more to discuss, especially in the light of the risks of the US and NATO drawdown in Afghanistan, the heightened nuclear competition between India and Pakistan, and China’s increasingly aggressive manoeuvring with respect to maritime disputes in East Asia. Modi’s visit to Washington can lend impetus to another new beginning in US-India relations. The last new beginning produced a historic civil-nuclear deal, followed by mutual let-down. Modi and Obama will not produce anything as dramatic as a civil-nuclear deal. Nor do they have to. The test of improved bilateral relations will now be to sustain and grow defence cooperation, to create favourable long-term incentives for the respective private sectors to partner together, and to have meaningful consultations on regional
security. The writers work on South Asia at the Stimson Centre in Washington
|
|
Touchstones
I bring this topic up now because all around me I see signs of a winding down of our moral values. A land renowned for its high moral fibre is now gaining international notoriety as one of the most corrupt nations of the world. India once welcomed people of every faith and religion and our pluralistic society was considered unique in the world. We practised different religions and spoke in different tongues yet we were never accused of discrimination against people who were not the same as us. I think that in some measure this was because writers like Ananthamurthy constantly set our moral compass right.
They did not care for political patronage or power: their eyes were focussed on an ideal that gave them the strength to take on governments and critics fearlessly. I had the pleasure of once spending an afternoon with Prof Ananthamurthy when he told me a charming story about the Dalai Lama. It was his way of answering a query I had made to him about why we were dissembling as a society. The story goes like this: the Dalai Lama was once giving a lecture on why compassion towards fellow beings is one of the central tenets of the Buddhist faith. Suddenly, Prof Ananthamurthy told me, he stopped speaking and seemed to be totally focussed on something on his lectern. The audience waited politely for the great man to continue when His Holiness picked up an ant on his finger and gently dropped it off on a nearby table. He then gave a dazzling smile to his audience and continued with the lecture. It was a moment of revelation for all of us that day, said Prof Ananthamurthy to me, as we were made to realise that there can be no difference between what you say and what you do. Here was one of the greatest religious teachers of the world and what he showed his audience by that gesture was that the Buddhist quality of compassion towards all fellow beings extended to even the tiniest living being on earth. Contrast this with the empty platitudes mouthed by our political parties: their venal self-serving misuse of religion and faith have brought not just our country but every nation to the brink of disaster. Prof Ananthamurthy remained a proud agnostic all his life and each one of his novels is a critique of the religious malpractices he saw all around him. Yet I class him among the greatest Hindu leaders of his times simply because he practised a form of public morality that came from the deepest recesses of a man grounded in an ethical universe that transcends mere religious practice. BKS Iyengar was a man of a completely different calling. He saw the human body as a temple whose purity was destroyed by wrong postures, practices and behaviour. Millions came to him for healing physical problems and went away enriched and restored spiritually. I last saw him a few years ago when he visited Delhi and was already well into his nineties. He walked briskly to the stage and his shining face sans a single wrinkle radiated an energy that could not be missed. He wore no glasses, no earpiece and nothing escaped his eagle eye. His students worshipped him and bore his fierce temper happily because they knew that he wanted nothing but excellence in whatever he taught them. He never discriminated against those of another faith, although his own was the pivot of his life. In every sense of the word, he was a true yogi. In the rapidly changing world around us, when family, faith and nation are losing their power over individual lives it is vital for us to believe in continuity. Belief in the eternal values of compassion, selflessness and service are good touchstones to keep in mind when faced with tough moral choices. Sadly, expediency, selfishness and intolerance are becoming the mantra for success. I want to end this piece with some cheer and recount a wonderful trip to Kumaon that we took recently. Not since my childhood had I seen the magic of the monsoon in the mountains. And since our part of India has had hardly any rain this year, I cannot describe the colours and the views we were blessed with. Every little stream was a raging torrent, while the lush green of the washed and sparkling hillsides restored our parched souls. Just the simplicity of a life shorn of traffic noises is indescribably restorative. Picture this: sitting with a good book, a glass of steaming ginger tea in hand, listening to the rain pounding a tin roof and the aroma of fresh bhuttas being roasted for you in the kitchen. I tell you, I experienced nirvana.
|
|
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Letters | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
It may be a perverse view of India’s decision to call off foreign secretary level talks with Pakistan, but Nawaz Sharif should be feeling a trifle relieved. For if the talks were held as scheduled, Indian Foreign Secretary Sujatha Singh would have been in Islamabad tomorrow and with the Pakistan capital remaining shut down because of Opposition protests, she would have faced great difficulty in reaching the venue. Instead of such embarrassment, Sharif can now conveniently blame India for walking away.
Two
