Commentary:
I followed closely the recent official state visit to Washington, D.C., by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The Biden Administration rolled out the red carpet for Modi and hosted a state dinner in his honor. He was asked to address Congress and spoke of the close relationship that India has with the U.S. During his visit, U.S. Trade Representative Kai Tai, in a timely manner, announced that “Both countries have finalized an agreement resolving several outstanding trade issues, including the termination of six WTO disputes and the removal of retaliatory tariffs.”
With a population of more than 1.4 billion, India is the world’s most populated country, and the world’s largest democracy. It is a U.S. ally, whose friendship, as was displayed by the pomp and circumstance of Modi’s visit, is highly valued by both the Biden Administration and both houses of Congress. U.S. trade with India keeps rising, which according to the U.S. Census Bureau, climbed to more than $132 billion in 2022. India is one of the U.S.’s top trading partners, and the U.S. is one of the few countries with which it has a trade surplus – more than $38 billion last year.
However, under Modi, who has been Prime Minister since 2014, India has marched to its own drum, which does not necessarily mean that it is on board with policies that the U.S. deems critical or important. Modi has been accused of allowing his country’s minority groups to be persecuted and marginalized. He also has allowed censorship of the press. Indeed, he rarely likes to speak to the press or have press conferences.
He is accused of helping build a lifeline to Russia in its war with Ukraine by refusing to condemn Russia and continuing to buy Russian petroleum – a frustrating point for the Biden Administration, as it tries to shore up international support against Russia for its actions. Under Modi, many critics have stated that the foundations of democracy in India have been eroded. Several members of Congress refused to attend his speech in protest.
So then why isn’t the U.S. more openly focusing on what it considers these negative factors that Modi has generated or allowed? Is not wanting to spoil a pleasant visit by Modi the reason for not airing these issues? While India is not North Korea or Iran that strongly support terrorism and cause instability in the region, the issue is more complicated.
Throughout its history, the U.S. has understood and played what I call the “courtship game” with nations often more powerful than it. As a student, I loved reading about how during the American Revolution, the U.S. courted friendship with France and Spain, enemies of Great Britain, to its advantage in support and supplies. In fact, the classic uniform worn by the revolutionaries was provided by Spain.
India is playing the same courtship game. It is a stabile country in Asia that shares a 2,100-mile border with China, which is often disputed and has resulted in conflict, most recently last December. Throughout its history, India has sent students to the U.S. to receive their college education. Many of these students are brilliant in math and the sciences and have settled in the U.S., thus helping the U.S. to maintain its competitiveness in these fields. Many U.S. companies collaborate or have joint-venture agreements with Indian companies.
India was very bitter and resentful of the United Kingdom after its independence from that country in 1947. Thus, During the Cold War its friendship with Russia deepened. Today, India benefits from cheap Russian petroleum. Russia is also the largest arms supplier to India, and its military consists of Russian guns, planes, and tanks. It is estimated that Russia has supplied India with more than $13 billion worth of arms in the past five years alone. It also uses its strong relationship with Russia as a counterweight against China.
Both India and the U.S. understand that they need each other for diplomatic, strategic, and trading purposes. It is not necessarily a case of who needs whom more, but the value in the strength of a bilateral relationship that helps to achieve each partner’s objectives. This doesn’t mean that the U.S. can’t dislike some of the things that Modi is accused of doing. What it does mean is that certain countries with which the U.S. is allied might have different levels of democracy, different political regimes, and different interests that suit them more than the U.S. in the world. It also does not mean that individual Americans, including people in Congress, can’t be vocal about what they perceive to be happening in certain sectors in India. What it does mean is that like death and taxes, the courtship game is alive and well and will be with us for a long time.