US President Barack Hussein Obama, beginning his India tour from Mumbai, staying at the Taj, having a meeting at the Gateway of India and both Mr Obama and his wife Michelle dancing with kids to the tunes of Rang de Basanti, most certainly make a major symbolic statement.
And even if it was a public relations bonanza, conceived by the President’s spin doctors, there should be no doubt about a strong message conveyed.
Removing the Indian Space Research Organisation, the Defence Research and Development Organisation and the Bharat Dynamics Limited from the US’ “blacklist” too is most welcome, but quite overdue, considering the kind and level of strategic cooperation, which also involves trying to sell a substantial package of systems without guarantees of sustenance.
Access to Daood Gilani, alias David Coleman Headley, the Pakiatani American double agent/Lashkar-e-Tayyaba specialist too came rather too late and quite obviously as a pre-visit sop.
As television networks went gaga with some repeated visuals, not to miss the one about his left-handed, reversed pen style of writing, obvious implying what all he will sign during this tour, anchors kept panel discussants embroiled on what Mr Obama will or will not do or should or should not do. Barely a week ago, national security adviser Shivshankar Menon, interacting with the media about certain long-pending agreements, had made a statement: “These (proposed pacts) are something brand new for us. We are not used to dealing with such agreements. We have to see whether this is a feasible route.” The agreements he was referring to are the Logistics Support Agreement (LSA), Communication and Information Security Memorandum of Agreement (CISMOA), Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement for geo-spatial cooperation (BECA) are crucial for the execution of defence deals between the two countries. Lockheed Martin and Boeing are in the fray for the world’s single-largest $12-billion defence deal for supplying 126 fighter jets, F-16 and F-18 to the Indian Air Force.
While American defence manufacturers have been looking forward to this visit, with the hope that Mr Obama seals billion dollar deals, New Delhi, which, for three years has refused to sign these pacts necessary for implementation of sales, is not expected to do so now owing to apprehensions about them having an adverse impact on its other allies like Russia. While the LSA will facilitate Indian and American forces, aircraft and ships to logistics support from each others’ bases, CISMOA will enable transfer of high technology. Featuring in all India-US high-level interactions mainly at the behest of the US defence secretary Robert Gates, the issue again figured prominently in defence minister A.K. Antony’s talks with his hosts in Washington in early October this year.
A major prickly issue which India must raise effectively during this visit, albeit behind closed doors, is the Obama administration’s massive aid to Pakistan, including weapons not required for fight terrorism and its AfPak policy.
During a White House briefing along with visiting Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in June this year, Mr Obama had said: “The reason we’re there (in Afghanistan) in the first place is because 3,000 Americans were killed from an attack launched in that region. We are not going to have that repeated. In order to achieve that we have to make sure that we have a stable Afghan government and we also have to make sure that we’ve got a Pakistani government that is working effectively with us to dismantle these networks.” And that is exactly what the Pakistan Army, which calls the shots/shadowruns the government in Pakistan and has its terror network deployed/linkages with Taliban in Afghanistan, is not doing. Not only is it indirectly responsible for thousands of American and other coalition countries’ soldiers being killed, but will continue to be the cause of further casualties in the future. With whatever Mr Obama has said, Pakistan so far remains a hot favourite of his administration, getting even F-16 fighter aircraft and drones, after getting many other weapon systems, including a number of which are not required for its counter-terrorism operations, but which are additions to its anti-India arsenal.
Regarding how President Obama’s AfPak policy has fared so far, it will be relevant to note the graph of the US Army’s fatal casualties in Afghanistan, which, from 2001 till 2010 are 12, 49, 48, 52, 99, 98, 117, 155, 317 in 2009 and 261 in half of 2010. And, interestingly, out of these figures, the number of deaths caused by indigenous explosive devices (IEDs) shoots up significantly from 2008, i.e. 152 out of 155 in 2008, 275 out of 317 in 2009 and 210 out of 261 in 2010 so far. This pattern is a major indication of an increase in numbers of terrorists, extension of their intelligence and reach and, thereby, expansion of their areas of domination. This could not have happened without substantial assistance from ISI — be it its serving or retired operatives or both. Yet, large amounts of American taxpayers’ money is being given — that too during a period of recession — to Pakistan, whose Army is known to be the very cause of many US and other ISAF Armies’ personnel dying and getting maimed. It remains to be seen how far the US will go in indulging Pakistan and for how long.
The latest, in October this year, is the Obama administration pledging to raise its military aid to Pakistan to $2 billion a year — a total increase of $10 billion over five years — to help the country fight extremism, even as US state department officials are reported to have said that aid will be denied to any Pakistani Army units linked to human rights abuses. The aid pledge, announced by secretary of state Hillary Clinton, provides a long-term US security commitment along the lines of the five-year, $7.5-billion civilian aid package for Pakistan approved by Congress last year. Ms Clinton reportedly said that the Obama administration will ask Congress for $2 billion in military aid for Pakistan for each year from 2012 to 2016. The annual pledges amount to a significant increase in the roughly $1.5 billion per year military aid provided to Pakistan in recent years, and give it an assurance of continuity in US support.
Whether the Obamas’ Mumbai and Hotel Taj Mahal experience and maybe, a reminder of what happened there during this month two years ago, much like what happened on 9/11, make any difference as India feels it should, only time will tell. All I can say is that within the past week, neither Brookings’ Stephen Cohen, nor General Sir Rupert Smith (Retd), British Army, attending the National Defence College Golden Jubilee seminar, both of who I asked for comments about Pakistan’s role as the US’ ally in Afghanistan, totally avoided uttering the words “Pakistan” and “terrorists”. Also a question I have asked a number of times and which came up again in television discussions during this visit was “what will India’s reaction be to another repeat of 26/11?” The US must dwell seriously on how it will react to another 26/11 on its soil.
Anil Bhat, a retired Army officer, is a defence and security analyst based in New Delhi