The main thrust of Obama’s  discovery of India  was his acclamation of its unique democratic roots. He saw this for what it is,  a truly incredible example, warts and all, of freedom with unity in diversity  for a fifth of mankind, at a time when France  has banned the burqa and Switzerland  minarets  | 
             
             
          Forging A New Relationship
          	Now that the dust has settled, Obama’s visit can be properly adjudged a success. Now as the two democracies move forward, why re-hyphenate Pakistan? 
            By B G Verghese 
            Deccan Herald, 14 November, 2010 
            Now that the dust has settled,  Obama’s visit can be properly adjudged a success. As usual, a section of the  press and commentators, the BJP and Left came to dire conclusions before the  event and made a strategic retreat as events unfolded. It is astonishing how  gullible and chauvinistic some channels and opinion makers can be while  remaining unabashed despite getting it wrong every time. India  has not sold out to anybody and a new and constructive Indo-US engagement is in  the process of being forged. Hurdles remain, as they will among friends and  democracies. But they do not undermine the basic bonds that are  strengthening. 
            Obama did not appear a weakened  President despite his mid-term Congressional reverses while Manmohan Singh said  what he needed to say with quiet and convincing dignity. The President  estimated the $10 billion agreements signed would create 54,000 jobs in the US.  The economic and technological relationships now evolving between the two  countries are mutually beneficial and no strategic relationship will be to India’s  disadvantage. One message that has come through clearly is that both sides know  they need the other and should not permit ancient divides to cloud their future  partnership, though tough bargaining remains on the cards. 
            It is disconcerting that Indian  commentators made so much of what Obama said or did not say about Pakistan  and its being a safe haven for terrorism. The very fact that he stayed at the  Taj Mahal Hotel in Mumbai, laid flowers at the 26/11 memorial with families of some  of its victims gathered around and said that those responsible for the carnage  must be brought to justice and their safe havens in Pakistan  denied, was eloquent enough. In turn India  made known its disappointment at the delayed and limited collaboration earlier  manifest regarding Headley, a double US-Pakistan jihadi agent. 
            It is demeaning that India  looks for a US  gift of a permanent seat in the Security Council. Obama endorsed that but  suggested that India  speak up on human rights violations in Burma,  where fake elections have just been held, and on Iran.  The snub was misplaced. Washington  has been pusillanimous where its geo-political interests are involved. Chevron  has stakes in Myanmar’s  Yadana offshore gasfield despite sanctions. On Iran,  India got the US  to commit itself to “continued diplomacy” (not regime change) while its quiet  advice to the junta in Burma  has always been to move towards democratic freedoms. 
            The main thrust of Obama’s  discovery of India  was his acclamation of its unique democratic roots. He saw this for what it is,  a truly incredible example, warts and all, of freedom with unity in diversity  for a fifth of mankind, at a time when France  has banned the burqa and Switzerland  minarets, and Angela Merkel says multiculturalism has failed in Germany.  He spoke of partnering India  in rebuilding Afghanistan  and of strategic consultations with India  on East Asia, and the Indian and Pacific   Oceans. 
            On J&K, Obama made the obvious  point that a stable and prosperous Pakistan  is in India’s  highest interest, and that the US  will only intervene if asked by both sides. However, some Indians constantly  re-hyphenate India  with Pakistan.  The real damage to national interest comes from the Government’s extraordinary  inability to state the Indian case factually and forcefully rather than merely  respond to Pakistan’s  negative founding ideology of being India’s  “other”. Its consequent compulsion to “defend” Islam against perceived “Hindu  imperialism” (read Kashmir) has created and sustained  the military-mullah complex that holds its people in thrall. 
            The US has for 60 years armed  Pakistan to the teeth, underwritten its economy and allowed it to acquire  nuclear weapons and blackmail the world, mistakenly upholding its frontline  ally – currently to secure Afghanistan and fight terror – though aware of its  devious conduct in using terror and jihad as instruments of state policy.  American policy has underwritten state power in Pakistan’s  military and enabled it to suppress democracy. This is grim irony. The  Kerry-Lugar Act, designed to hold Islamabad  to its pledge to devote the many billion of dollars of military assistance it  is giving to fight al Qaeda and Taliban terror, has been a dead letter. But Washington  is up a gum tree and refuses to get down while Islamabad  waits for the Americans to quit before taking over a client Afghanistan. 
            US  militarization of Pakistan  has dried the roots of incipient democracy in that unhappy country. Its  misguided and muddled AfPak policy, of which Bob Woodward writes, has become  part of the problem rather than the solution. Washington’s  fear is that if it stops supporting the Pakistan  military’s extra-curricular activities, the al Qaeda-Taliban and other jihadis  will take over a failing state and access its nuclear wherewithal. The answer  is to make a sufficiency of US  economic and military aid strictly conditional on monitored performance and to  support policies that regionalize the war on terror in AfPak. If Pakistan  walks away, the threat of imminent economic collapse will bring the military to  heel despite Chinese and Saudi assistance even as it institutionally  strengthens the civil regime. 
            Pakistan  has a stake in Afghanistan  and needs a secure though soft border along the Durand Line. But Afghanistan  must be enabled to remain neutral and not pressured to submit to Islamabad’s  hegemony. India  has no designs on Afghanistan  and would readily support such a regime in cooperation with Pakistan  and Iran. 
            Regionalisation of the AfPak war  has hitherto failed because of Washington’s  visceral hostility towards Iran  and its consistent bias against the Arabs in Palestine  despite Obama’s latest broadside against Israel’s  West Bank-East Jerusalem settlement policy even amidst peace talks. Despite  Obama’s reaching out to the Islamic world, Washington  remains mired in a flawed West Asian policy with few knowing what to expect in Iraq. 
            These  are the holes of its own making from which the US must dig itself out.  The new Indo-US partnership lays a basis for mutual cooperation between Delhi and Washington to achieve peace and  stability in this critical region and allow a democratic Pakistan  to come into its own.  |