Why a uni-dimensional view of Indo-US ties?: Former Foreign Secretary Kanwal Sibal

Sibal said that India has its own understanding of its national interest, its priorities, its thinking about the kind of relations it wants to build with the US.

He pointed out that both sides have expectations from the relationship that will drive the ties. There cannot be one-sided “bets” and “returns” the US believes ties with India should yield. "It is not a lottery being played with either a bonanza or a loss at the end,” he said.

Sibal pointed out that, if, as Tellis says, “for the past two decades, Washington has made an enormous bet in the Indo-Pacific — that treating India as a key partner will help the United States in its geopolitical rivalry with China,” the question arises: why this almost one-dimensional view of India as a partner?

“Should there not be more to Indo-US ties than dealing with the threats that arise for both countries from China?” asked Sibal.

Sibal said that India has been a democracy since 1947, but it has not built its ties in Asia, including in its neighbourhood, based on the form of government a particular country follows and the ``freedom’’ its residents enjoy.

The US itself has forged close ties with Asian countries not based on their place on the freedom index, but cold geopolitical considerations, he added.

India does not believe in spreading democracy by force, said the former Indian foreign secretary.

Tellis claimed in his articles that “the US administration had launched an ambitious new initiative to expand India’s access to cutting-edge technologies.”

But Sibal added that in the race to maintain America’s pole position in new technologies, which is being challenged by China, the US needs partners.

“India’s technological prowess, the role its diaspora plays in boosting America’s technological strengths, and its capacity to scale up production with its vast manpower and talent, is an asset for the US in this race, “ Sibal explained.

Sibal pointed out that if the US has “further deepened defence cooperation,” it was with the goal of building a defence bridge with India that was hitherto absent and was a chink in its international ties. It was also to displace Russia as India’s biggest defence partner, and ensure that Asia’s second largest country draws closer to the US in the geopolitical arena.

To say that the Biden administration has “overlooked India’s democratic erosion and its unhelpful foreign policy choices, such as its refusal to condemn Moscow’s ongoing aggression in Ukraine,” is being presumptuous, he added.

The former diplomat wondered whether India should take the high chair and say that it is overlooking the “democratic erosion” in the US while seeking to develop ties with it?

As for not condemning Russia’s ongoing aggression against Ukraine, it is because that doesn’t align with India’s views and interests, and because India doesn’t see eye-to-eye the with the US on supporting Ukraine with weapons and finance, rejecting any dialogue, seeking Russia’s economic isolation and defeat, and trying President Putin as a war criminal.

He asked, ``Would the US join India militarily if an India-China conflict erupted? Will the US involve itself in an India-China confrontation if its security is not directly threatened?”

Similarly, while deterring China is a strategy India shares with the US, that does not mean joining the US war over Taiwan, says the veteran Indian diplomat.

Sibal pointed out that the relationship between the two sides is based on a whole gamut of issues like trade, technology, resilient supply chains, climate change, energy transition, education, and more.

He said that India believes in acceptance of diversity, more democracy and equity in international relations, more say of developing countries in global governance, reform of international political and financial institutions, and so on.

The former foreign secretary stressed that India is not only a functioning democracy but also the largest one.