&w=3840&q=100)
Indo-US ties under 'test', can't be described as 'transactional': Experts
The online panel discussion saw participation from members of some of the think-tanks based in Delhi and Washington.
The topic was 'Negotiating a Transactional Relationship: India and the US', and the discussion was hosted by Delhi-based Centre for Land Warfare Studies (CLAWS).
Elizabeth Threlkeld, a Senior Fellow and Director of the South Asia Program at the Stimson Center in Washington, emphasised the broader "momentum and continuity in the relationship" between India and the US.
The online event was held nearly a month after the cessation of firing and military action between India and Pakistan after a four-day military conflict. While the US has claimed that it played a role in this cessation, India has asserted that Islamabad pleaded for a ceasefire on May 10 after India inflicted heavy damage to several air bases.
"This is a moment where the relationship is being tested in some ways. And the previous flashpoints that we could look back to, at least in my read of the situation, really galvanised an acceleration of what had been building in the US-India partnership, back in the Galwan crisis, in 2020," she said.
India-US relations were "fully aligned" in that context, in terms of their defence partnership, among other things, and the "relationship came out stronger." If both sides are going to be able to move forward, to look towards, e.g., the Quad leaders summit that is happening later this year, that is a moment to "build towards a relationship," the strategic expert said.
Daniel Markey, a Senior Fellow with the South Asia and China programmes at the Stimson Center, conjectured how Beijing looked at the conflict, and its regional ramifications if the situation had escalated.
"I don't think anyone wants to see a major war, India, Pakistan, the US or China, which is a huge positive thing we have going for ourselves," he said.
The event sought to put in focus where the Indo-US relationship stands, and where it is headed, "in a time of shifting global power equations, transactional diplomacy, and recalibrated alliances," according to a note by CLAWS.
Aparna Pande, research fellow at Washington-based Hudson Institute, cited foreign policy elements of several previous US administrations in the last seven decades, and said, if India-US relationship has "survived all of that it will survive what is here today." So, let us not get swayed by this reference of "transactionalism or mercurialism," she said.
"India has benefited for the last 35 years from, you can call it, strategic altruism from the American side. The American grand strategy or American policy makers believe India's rise per se is good for US national security interests and national economic interests," Pande said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
24 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Will the rules-based international order survive the Trump presidency?
Recent observations on the rules-based international order have suggested that this system of interlocking governance institutions that emerged since the end of World War II, known to some as Pax Americana, might survive or thrive despite the onslaught of political and economic confrontations foisted on the world by U.S. President Donald Trump. The real question is not about its survivability per se, but rather the extent to which it might mutate under pressure from Washington's coercive policy prescriptions inflicted upon developing and emerging economies, particularly across the Asian region. A few definitional remarks are in order at this point. Firstly, the rules-based international order, a liberal paradigm seen as a remedy to the devastation wreaked by the two World Wars, was brought into existence by the U.S. This was made possible by the U.S. pushing ahead with the Marshall Plan to rebuild war-torn Europe, returning it to a minimum threshold of economic advancement and political stability that would enable the continent to support the global narrative of a unipolar world as envisioned by Washington. Thereafter, a broad set of 'norms and institutions that govern international relations as well as broad patterns of power distribution and economic flows across the world, most of it backstopped by American power and leadership' came into force, including the World Trade Organisation (WTO), the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank (as well as the 'Washington consensus' that they implied), and a variety of related organisations. All these institutions existed to put guardrails in place for international politics — in other words these organisations were used as leverage to limit the regional and global ambitions of any potential rival to the aforementioned unipolar balance of power. The triumphs of Pax Americana The argument made by some who see the continuation of the rules-based international order even through the turbulence of the Trump years is that throughout the history of Asia's development, the U.S. has displayed the very same bullying tactics around the region that curbed and shaped the growth trajectory of Asian powerhouse economies. For example, Sandeep Bhardwaj argues that during the post-War years, when Japanese cloth imports of the U.S. outsold American domestic product, the U.S. in 1955 compelled Japan to agree to a voluntary export restriction that capped the latter's share of the U.S. market. However, the U.S. has equally nurtured the quality of openness within the rules-based order, allowing room for Asian and Latin American economies to periodically assert themselves and play a larger role within limited spaces, thus introducing the necessary element of system flexibility that has helped it endure despite a series of economic and political shocks over the past half century. Examples cited of such openness within Pax Americana include the U.S. and developed nations encouraging developing countries to join the United Nations umbrella of institutions; getting China to join the WTO in 2001 after going slow on global concerns about Beijing's human rights violations; supporting Japan's entry to the G-7 in 1973; strongly backing the entry of China, India, Indonesia, Japan, and Saudi Arabia into the G20; establishing the UN Millennium Development Goals to backstop the financing of industrialisation in emerging economies; and structural adjustment loans from the IMF. These loans, however, were a double edged sword, offering a financial lifeline for Asian countries while benefitting U.S. trade policy by forcing the opening up of these markets. The extent of U.S.' power There is no denying that the rules-based international order is far from an authoritarian hierarchy of forced policy prescriptions and expected political genuflection of so-called subordinate Asian nations. Yet, it is fair to ask whether such a warped balance of power in favour of the U.S. could ever emerge, given the Asian trajectory of rapid economic growth built on global trading and capital systems, the collective social emancipation of people, the propagation of individual and institutional liberty, and the growing state capacity for meaningful regional action and collaboration. If the sense of agency and autonomous power of Asian nation-states is overlooked, then it leads to a false sense of U.S. munificence in 'bestowing' openness and flexibility upon the rules-based order. In reality, the U.S., for all its economic heft and technological prowess had no choice but to find its own place within this complex matrix of competing nations worldwide, each strong in specific economic sectors, but perhaps less so in other areas. Within this more reasoned paradigm of the global political economy, which neither denies the unipolarity of the present moment nor overstates the U.S.'s ability to impose its hegemonic ambitions on other nations in today's multi-alliance, interconnected and interdependent framework of international engagement, it becomes clear that damage done to the rules-based liberal international order under the second Trump administration will transform the order to the point of it resembling a new order entirely. Ironically, at the heart of this act of reshaping the rules-based liberal international order, are not so much the consequences of what the U.S. is inflicting upon Asian nations but rather its abrupt pulling of the rug from under the heels of Europe by undermining the ideological cause and financial prospects of NATO and leaving the continent exposed to the risk of ever-increasing depredations of Russia. Similarly, the resoluteness with which Mr. Trump has tied his administration to the whims and fancies of the genocidal and warmongering causes of Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu will rewrite the playbook for everyone. This will impact the rulers of Saudi Arabia and Türkiye, rethinking regional political dynamics, as much as it will aspiring college students from India seeking admissions in countries other than the U.S. in the wake of compulsory social media scrutiny as a condition of visa issuance. A new order Yes, the silhouettes of the old rules-based liberal international order will continue to fall upon the new arrangements that the world will find itself forced to confront by the end of the second Trump term. However, there can be no denying that it will indeed be a new order built on the rise of bilateral agreements in place of broader regional ones. The newer order will feature the widespread use of economic sanctions to penalise political opponents across the globe in contravention of WTO norms; ever-growing skirmishes and limited wars; a reliance on drones and AI to settle territorial and other disputes; as well as a steady, catastrophic dismembering of global institutions fostering cooperation, reducing transactions costs and speaking up for human rights and standards of international engagement more broadly. Pax Americana may well give rise to the next phase of its own evolution, Flux Americana.
The Hindu
24 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Trump meets with Intel CEO after demanding he resign
U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday said he had a "very interesting" meeting with the chief of US chip maker Intel, just days after calling for his resignation. Mr. Trump said on his Truth Social platform that he met with Lip-Bu Tan along with Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick and Secretary of Treasury Scott Bessent. "The meeting was a very interesting one," Mr. Trump said in the post. "His success and rise is an amazing story." Mr. Trump added that members of his cabinet are going to spend time with Mr. Tan and bring the president "suggestions" next week. "Mr. Tan had the honor of meeting with President Trump for a candid and constructive discussion on Intel's commitment to strengthening US technology and manufacturing leadership," the company said in a posted statement. Intel added that it looks "forward to working closely with him and his Administration as we restore this great American company." Mr. Trump demanded last week that the recently-hired boss of Intel resign "immediately," after a Republican senator raised national security concerns over his links to firms in China. "The CEO of INTEL is highly CONFLICTED and must resign, immediately. There is no other solution to this problem," Mr. Trump posted on Truth Social last Thursday. Mr. Tan released a statement at the time saying that the company was engaged with the Trump administration to address the concerns raised and ensure officials "have the facts." Intel is one of Silicon Valley's most iconic companies but its fortunes have been dwarfed by Asian powerhouses TSMC and Samsung, which dominate the made-to-order semiconductor business. In a statement, Mr. Tan said there has been "a lot of misinformation circulating" about his past roles at Walden International and Cadence Design Systems. "I have always operated within the highest legal and ethical standards," Mr. Tan said. The Malaysia-born tech industry veteran took the helm at struggling Intel in March, announcing layoffs as White House tariffs and export restrictions muddied the market. Intel's niche has been chips used in traditional computing processes, which are steadily being eclipsed by the AI revolution.
Mint
24 minutes ago
- Mint
Intel CEO has ‘amazing story': Trump praises Lip-Bu Tan after calling for his resignation
In a surprising turn of events, US President Donald Trump praised Intel Corp CEO Lip-Bu Tan just days after publicly demanding his resignation. This shift came after Lip-Bu Tan met with the President at the White House on Monday to clear up what the CEO called 'misinformation' about his track record, Bloomberg reported. The American chip icon's shares jumped more than 2% in extended trading following Trump's positive remarks about the meeting on Monday, reported the news agency. Last Thursday, Trump accused Tan of having a conflict of interest due to his ties to Chinese firms. In a post on Truth Social, Trump said Tan should immediately step down as chief of the American chipmaker, describing him as 'highly CONFLICTED.' Trump's attack came after Republican Senator Tom Cotton wrote to Intel's board questioning Tan's ties to China. Cotton's letter highlighted Tan's investments in Chinese semiconductor companies and other such firms with connections to the country's military, the news report said. The post had a significant impact on Intel's stock, which fell 3.1% on August 7, the day of President Trump's initial remarks. Following the controversy, Tan, who said he had the full backing of Intel's board, reached out to the White House, writing to his employees on Thursday that he was 'engaging with the administration to address the matters that have been raised and ensure they have the facts.' After the meeting, Trump posted a positive message on social media, saying, 'The meeting was a very interesting one.' He called Tan's 'success and rise…an amazing story,' and announced that his Cabinet members would continue to meet with Tan and bring suggestions to him in the next week. Intel, in a statement, said Tan and Trump had discussed the company's 'commitment to strengthening U.S. technology and manufacturing leadership,' casting the talks as 'candid and constructive.' The company added, 'We appreciate the President's strong leadership to advance these critical priorities and look forward to working closely with him and his Administration as we restore this great American company.'
