Round
The World
New Delhi, 20 July 2018
Trump-Putin Summit
TAKEAWAYS FOR INDIA!
By Dr D. K. Giri
(Prof. International Politics, JMI)
The meeting between Donald Trump and Vladimir
Putin was watched by the entire world. One reigning superpower, and one former,
Russia, have the military power to determine the fate of the world. Although
Russia has diminished after the break-away of the Soviet Union, no one,
including the US could ignore it and its power of resilience.
Obviously, Russia has gone down economically
and has been hit by the sanctions imposed. Yet it still calls the shots on its
foreign policy as the rest of the world could not resist Russia’s actions in
Ukraine or Syria. Neither tangible military solution nor durable security
can be ensured without Russia whenever it is involved. Therefore Trump, at odds
with his country’s attitude towards Russia, is reaching out to Putin.
What could be the fallout for India from the
summit? India is “coming close” to the US and has been a close ally of Russia
and former Soviet Union, the whole of the 20th century. New Delhi
had begun with non-alignment as the main principle in its foreign policy with a
pro-Soviet tilt, as was evident in the Soviet invasion of Hungary in 1956 and
its intervention in Afghanistan in 1979 etc. Apparently, New Delhi has
diluted or discarded its non-aligned position in moving closer to Israel, the
US and Japan and so on, but non-aligned posturing keeps coming back in its
approach, as it obsesses with playing a
balancing role in world politics.
Will India maintain the
non-aligned position with a pro-US tilt now, or as one observes, New Delhi
would play a balancing role, which is in a sense, pro-active non-alignment.
A word on the summit. Although watched keenly
by the world, no earth-shattering common understanding was expected of the
meeting and nothing substantial came out of it. Additionally, worst fears and
speculation didn’t come true either. Many observers believe that Trump would
raise Crimea’s terrible accession to Russia, discuss Russia’s meddling in US
elections, which ‘helped’ Trump to win. It was also anticipated Putin would
raise the issue of sanctions against his country. None happened and no
agreement signed. Yet, the summit seemed to have been a success. There
were many winners.
Trump and Putin seem to have discussed and
agreed, in principle, on three things. One, they will not interfere in each
other’s internal affairs, which has been a bone of contention between the two
countries. Second, they would have agreed on potential cooperation in Europe,
Middle East and Asia, especially ending the Iran and Saudi Arabia proxy war, finding
a solution to control war-torn Syrian imbroglio. Third, they would have agreed
on nuclear and conventional arms countries, as well as the current cyber
warfare.
In the one-to-one meeting they would have
touched on things that have not come out in their joint press conference or
joint-communiqué etc. However, current issues such as nuclear disaster,
terrorism, Syria, Russia’s military exercise in Baltic-Sea figured in their
bilateral delegation meetings. They agreed to set up an expert body which will
work on improving American-Russian relationship.
What was, however,
noteworthy was the run-up to the meeting queered mainly by Trump, and the friendly,
harmonious end to it. Experts conclude there was a dramatic run-up and
successful conclusion of the summit, but the middle was void. Yet there was more
than one winner. Putin scored big as he was not asked on Ukraine or his alleged
manipulation for Trump's elections. His political status went high as Trump
sought him out and blamed his own country, the US for deterioration in
Russia-America relations. The summit gave an impetus to Putin in renewing his
contract with the West, G-7, NATO, EU, etc.
The second winner is world peace and
security. If both the US and Russia have a shared approach towards it there
would be less fear of violence and disruption.
Despite heavy criticism of Trump's worldview,
he thinks a friendly relation with Russia will be good for the US and rest of
the world. His reaching out to North Korean President Kim Jong-Un was
much appreciated. He expects similar approval at home for his outreach to
Putin, reservations of his political establishment notwithstanding.
What should be India’s
concerns and challenges viz the Summit? India was decidedly moving closer to
America. But with Trump taking over the presidentship, and his deconstruction
of Europe, disruption of the conventional approach, dismantling of NATO etc
seem to have rattled India. New Delhi is wary of the ‘demolition man’ Trump and
his unpredictability. Therefore, perhaps, it is seeking to relate strategic
autonomy from the west.
Interestingly, it is not too
hard to discover a ‘method in Trump’s madness.’ He has a purely transactional
approach hinging on ‘America first’ principle. He is reversing the trade
deficit the US has with other countries, mainly China. He is telling Germany,
which pays millions of dollars to Russia for the gas pipeline, that Americans
send their tax payers money to defend Berlin from Russians. Trump is saying
Europeans should pay up for their own security as Americans cannot subsidise NATO.
He is telling off India for imposing non-reciprocal tariffs and to the
Pakistanis for spending American money in supporting terrorism.
Without holding a brief for
Trump, one could concede that he is speaking for America first. He doesn’t want
to show economic generosity to other countries for being a “superpower.” His
predecessors maintained a generous attitude towards smaller countries and
lesser powers. Trump is not them. The other problem with Trump is that, while
he strikes the right notes for his country, he is unsteady, impetuous and
unpredictable. He will talk tough about a country and its leader, but melts at
personal meetings, as it happened with Kim Jong-Un.
New Delhi needs to take into account Trump’s personality. Many consider him an
aberration in American politics, but he is a reality. The ‘Trump World’ exists.
How should India react to
Trump? Deal with Putin? Will New Delhi play the balancing role, revert to a
non-aligned stance in some form or the other?
Confused by Trump’s ‘blow hot and cold’
approach, New Delhi seems to have stepped back a bit from its pro-America
stance. It is attempting to befriend China, like the recent ‘informal’ summit
between Modi and Xi Jinping, and win over Russia by buying S-400 anti-missile
system from it in the face of American opposition. The US would like India to
buy its THAD and is quoting CAATSA (Countering American Adversaries Through
Sanctions Act) to deter India. New Delhi maintains that CAATSA is the US law,
not by a UN resolution, and is not bound by it. But it is a technical
arrangement, not a political-strategic one.
Can India run with the hare and hunt with the
hound? Or it takes a position whether it is with Americans broadly, or not? Why
is India active in ‘Quad’ comprising US, Japan,
Australia and India, which is meant to surround and check China? Why is
New Delhi resisting, boycotting, Chinese projects in the region, the BRI
etc? Why is New Delhi not able to settle border disputes with China,
Pakistan in a bilateral framework? India will have to maintain its own security
or will have to lean on friends and partners to enhance its power of
deterrence.
In an ideal world one could
have good, healthy and normal relations with each country but it is not. One
will have friends and foes. New Delhi will have to choose friends and
identify foes. If Russia is embracing the dragon (China), then it is an
adversary’s friend is also an adversary. In the past, Soviet Union would not
have joined hands with China if India was opposed to it? Putin's Russia is
a different kettle of fish. Is New Delhi not able to see the transition? It is
the economic-military powers of a country that counts. Russia is a military
power, China is an economic power and both are authoritarian regimes, whereas the
US is both military and economic power and a democracy. Is the choice not obvious?---INFA
(Copyright,
India News & Feature Alliance)
|