« We Are Ugly from Overseas - American criticism | Main | The co-existence of pro-Americanism and anti-Americanism – a paradox? »
December 7, 2004
India and US
India has much to gain from its relationship with the United States. India's economy is booming thanks to outsourcing. India continues its nuclear programs and tests its weapons capabilities with little protest from American government leadership. India will also receive a visit from US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on Dec. 8 to discuss defense cooperation.
Things could be entirely rosy, were it not for neighboring Pakistan, which has been a constant thorn in India’s side. There is constant conflict over Kashmir and sectarian violence within India. Warming relationships between the US and Pakistan for its cooperation in the war on terrorism has diminished India’s leverage with the US. The battles have not been aided by US arms sales to Pakistan. Washington agreed to sell eight Orion surveillance aircraft, anti-tank missiles and other equipment worth $970 million .
But for all of America’s meddling, India is staying in the relationship.
There was no rash of anti American fervor upon George W. Bush’s reelection perhaps because of what is to be gained from America. Indian businesses feared a Sen. John Kerry victory because of his opposition to outsourcing jobs to India.
Even opposition against Pakistan is not as widespread according to Business Standard columnist > T C A Srinivasa-Raghavan. He writes in the aftermath of the election that politicians drive anti-Pakistani sentiment, not the people. Perhaps that is why the BJP, India’s conservative party, lost control of Congress this spring. Prime Minister Atal Vihari Vajpayee, resigned and a moderate party was launched into office. Vajpayee led many of the brutal retaliations against Pakistan over Kashmir most recently since 2002, bringing India and Pakistan close to war.
Bush and Vajpayee were both elected by conservatives. However, Indians found political conservatism not a good fit. This is according to The Indian Express’ senior editor and columnist Sagarika Ghose . India will maintain the caste system and shun interracial marriage in their personal lives. However, they don’t want politicians to be part of that lifestyle. Voting conservative is often a reaction to violence. She writes on Nov. 8:
There are naturally sharp limits to any kind of ideological constituency in a country where caste, region and bijli, sadak, pani are the touchstones of politics. Caste is far too empowering a device to ever be surrendered to umbrella categories like Hindutva. Unlike the American Bible-bashers, a poor electorate like ours generally doesn’t vote on ideological issues. In Mumbai in 1995, the Shiv Sena was able to emerge as a protector of Hindus because of the riots and bomb blasts of ’92-93. In Gujarat, Modi’s terrorism crusade delivered an election victory in 2002. But these results were exceptions, and born out of local incidents of violence which were used to create fear and mobilise the “threatened Hindu” voter.Without violence, in the “normal” course of things, it’s almost impossible to see a Republican-type large socially conservative class which visits the temple, plays the markets and votes BJP ever emerging in India. Sharp divisions in the political space will always create roadblocks for an ideologically driven conservative party and thankfully India will never see a right wing revolution. God may have taken Bush to power in America. But in India, even God is powerless against a dizzyingly heterogenous janta janardan.
India and US have a complex relationship where they are not the only players. America is under close watch. India adds more scrutiny because of their vested economic and nuclear interests and competition to be the favored recipient over Pakistan. While much of Europe and the Middle East is furious over the Bush reelection, Indians maintain their temperament because Bush policies have been favorable to them.
Posted by Ki-Min Sung at December 7, 2004 8:30 PM