Managing Perceptions in Indo-US relations

It will be inadvisable and invalid to perceive relations with the US and Iran as an 'either-or' kind of zero sum game, says C Uday Bhaskar

The September 14 meeting in New York between Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and US President George Bush is significant in that the latter reiterated that he remains "fully committed to the implementation" of the July agreement between India and the US on civilian nuclear co-operation. This assertion comes in spite of criticism from certain constituencies within the US. The critics are unhappy with India's relations with Iran, whose nuclear activities are currently animating the global community.

The two issues need to be analysed contextually. The India-US bilateral agreement was mooted in a March 25 background briefing by the US State Department that gave indication of the resolve of the Bush administration to recast the relationship in a radical manner. The nettlesome nuclear issue that has been one of bitter contestation for almost three decades was sought to be diluted in favour of cooperation in the civilian power sector. Mutually acceptable reciprocal arrangements were identified to allow India access to global nuclear commerce through the existing regimes and groups. The US President was also committed to lift or amend specific legislation to facilitate India. In turn, India accepted specific conditions regarding separation of its civilian and military nuclear facilities, strengthening of export controls and the like.

As part of this initiative, the US also indicated that it would support India's emergence as a major power and this commitment has the potential to alter the global strategic systemic by way of bilateral relations among the major powers. The salience of the new US policy lays not so much in the quantum of nuclear power that would be enhanced in the Indian energy grid (paradoxically India currently generates more electricity from non-conventional sources than nuclear reactors!) as in the symbolism of having the 30-year-old nuclear related sanctions lifted. In short, India that was until recently at the receiving end of global opprobrium for perceived nuclear defiance and transgression is now being gradually admitted into the global management fold.

This perception shift is of immense strategic value to India. It provides the larger context for reviewing current developments. The Iran issue is being linked with the bilateral relationship and some comments from Washington are projecting New Delhi's stance on Tehran as a litmus test for India. This will be misleading and will muddy the current potential for improving India-US relations in a substantive manner. The US and India have agreed to the July framework since it is in their respective national interests in the long run and specific bilateral relations were not part of the calculus. While India and the US have divergent perceptions about Iran, the Indian foreign office has reiterated India's position, namely that it is not a party to the NPT but remains committed to the principle of non-proliferation and expects states to fulfil their obligations. India has also urged that the issue be resolved in a negotiated manner without recourse to confrontation.

While the US is convinced that Iran is secretly trying to acquire nuclear weapon capability and is pushing for a showdown, the EU states, Russia and China are
seeking to evolve a modus vivendi that will be acceptable to all parties. This will call for deft diplomacy and perhaps India can play a constructive role in bridging the Washington-Tehran chasm. The linked issue is that of India entering into a gas pipeline deal with Iran and Pakistan, and this has also generated deep concern within the US. While India's energy compulsions are recognised, it will be inadvisable and invalid to perceive India's relations with the US and Iran as an 'either-or' kind of zero sum game. Hence, Iran is to be located in a different context that is more NPT specific with an extrapolation to the regional energy matrix.

Perceptions play an important role in a global polity where information is continuously generated and accorded a 'spin' to advance sectarian interests and they often feed into each other. Both India and the US have a stake in managing the perception-distortion debate with special reference to the more relevant constituencies, to ensure that the big picture agreed to at the Bush-Manmohan summit is not muddied by other determinants however emotive and urgent.