Raja Mandala: Transacting with Trump

Delhi needs to be open to several outcomes from the turbulence created by the US president

Written by C. Raja Mohan | Published:June 6, 2017 12:05 am
Donald Trump, US President, Paris Climate Deal US President Donald Trump

Delhi tends to use the word “transactional” pejoratively. This is particularly true of the Indian discourse on the partnership with the United States. The political elite of independent India had convinced itself that foreign policy was mostly about articulating principles. It frowned upon the idea of deal-making for mutual benefit. This approach, coupled with the inability to see the world through the lens of power politics, has meant India’s international performance has always been sub-optimal.

Delhi often complained that Washington, under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama, was too focused on the quid pro quo in its engagement with India. But as Prime Minister Narendra Modi heads to Washington later this month — the trip is yet to be confirmed by the two governments — President Donald Trump makes Bush and Obama look like philosopher-kings who dealt in abstractions like promoting democracy and mitigating climate change.

If Delhi thought Bush and Obama were too transactional, it must now come to terms with a leader who is proud of his self-image as a deal-maker. The Art of the Deal — the

title of a book that was published in Trump’s name three decades ago — is supposed to define the man and his method.

Adapting to Trump will not come easily to the Indian system that has refused to be transactional in its approach to the United States over the last two decades. In the process, it missed big opportunities in converting the goodwill of two presidents into tangible gains. Consider the historic civil nuclear initiative offered by Bush. Delhi spent years examining this gift horse in the mouth. Nor has it taken full benefit of the opportunities for defence cooperation with the US and its allies in the last few years. The inability to seize the fleeting moments of opportunity created by Indian diplomacy has long been a characteristic of India’s overall governance.

If Delhi wants to secure India’s interests in the turbulent Trump era, it must necessarily overcome the internal inertia against transactional diplomacy. Interest-based bargaining is at the heart of the dynamic interaction between sovereign states. This will now acquire greater salience, as Trump challenges America’s long-standing foreign policy assumptions and turns its traditional diplomacy inside out.

India’s difficulty in effectively combining power, principle and pragmatic diplomacy stands in contrast to China’s felicity in this domain. The communist elite of the People’s Republic of China had a much larger ideological burden than Delhi’s bourgeois ruling classes. Yet, the Chinese communists brought a certain realist sensibility to their diplomacy.

Chairman Mao Zedong fought a costly war with America in the Korean Peninsula during 1950-53. Less than two decades later, Mao embraced the US to counter the fraternal communist regime in the Soviet Union. Mao’s successor, Xi Jinping, demonstrates the same commitment to pragmatism.

No country was more vehemently targeted by Trump during the 2016 election campaign. He accused Beijing of raping the American economy, spoke of raising tariffs on imports from China, promised to designate it as a currency manipulator and confront its assertive policies in Asia. Barely five months after the election, Trump has turned 180 degrees and is now talking of “my friend, Xi Jinping”.

Behind Trump’s flip-flop was an extraordinary diplomatic effort by China to turn the new US president from a likely adversary into a potential partner. Sceptics say the deal is too fragile to survive Trump’s caprice and the complex political situation on the ground. Others will point to the fact that not all countries can bring the kind of economic resources and political leverage at China’s command to bear upon America.

But the Chinese effort does underline the value of pro-active diplomacy in coping with the current dynamic in Washington. Although pragmatism has often crept into Indian diplomacy since the end of the Cold War, it has not really overthrown the entrenched condescension in Delhi towards deal-making. With Trump, Delhi has no choice.
Like much of the world, Delhi is conscious of the fact that Washington is transiting through a surreal moment. Trump is running against America’s foreign policy establishment, both Democratic and Republican. He is yet to staff the government with political appointees who manage the higher echelons of the US government. His own inner circle is a divided house between the family, the internationalists and the nationalists.

Making matters worse is the larger political convulsions in America that produced the unanticipated victory for Trump. America’s internal turbulence is inducing an extraordinary volatility in the international system. Delhi has to deal not only with America’s uncertain trajectory under Trump, but also its consequences for India’s regional environment, ranging from the Suez to the South China Sea. Trump has injected much uncertainty into the management of global issues, from trade to climate change, from nuclear proliferation to migration.

Delhi needs to stay calm and be open to multiple outcomes from the current global turbulence generated by Trump. It must develop a more flexible, and yes, transactional approach, to its international relations. The NDA government has certainly been a lot less rigid than its predecessors, but has its work cut out in navigating the Trump disruption.

The writer is director, Carnegie India, Delhi and contributing editor on foreign affairs for ‘The Indian Express’

For all the latest Opinion News, download Indian Express App

  1. R
    Ravi Rana
    Jun 6, 2017 at 9:20 pm
    Mr. Raja Mohan, you have very clearly identified the mindset of the Indian diplomacy and the bureaucratic hurdles it finds itself in. This may be due to the approach we learnt from the British. The American way of diplomacy was always different. stan diplomats, though brought up in the same mode as us, were always more pragmatic and were always getting the better of us. Remember the 1965 war, except for USSR veto and Malaysian vote in the security council, all others voted for stan. In 1971 war also, we did slightly better with USSR and Poland with us and Britain and France abstaining, when it was so clear that it was stan which was the wrong one. But who cares!!! It is time we looked at the world differently. No point sitting on a high pedestal. Time to change tack. Good Luck India.
    Reply
    1. E
      Employ Ment
      Jun 6, 2017 at 4:11 pm
      💲💲मुफ्त रोजगार योजना💲💲 ✔मोदी जी द्वारा चलाए गए डिजिटल इन्डिया से जुड़े और कमाए हर महीने 15,000 - 50,000 रुपए ✔अब कोई नही रहेगा बेरोज़गार और नही करेगा कोई बेरोज़गार आत्महत्या ✔क्योंकि अब आ गई है 21वीं सदी की सबसे बड़ी रोज़गार क्रांति ✔हमारा सपना पूरे भारत को ही नही पूरी दुनिया को डिजिटल इंडिया से जोड़ना 💲सबका साथ सबका विकास💲 ➡शुरुवात कैसे करे ✔C.h.a.m.p`C.a.s.h को प्ले स्टोर से इन्स्टल करे, और साइन अप करे, $1 डॉलर बोनस स्पौन्सर ID: 468942 ➡चैलेंज को पूरा करे ➡और इंकम करनी शुरू करे 👇🏻इसे जरूर नोट कर ले👇🏻 स्पौन्सर ID: 468942 ........................ Gcfyhfyydu
      Reply
      1. P
        Parth Garg
        Jun 6, 2017 at 2:00 pm
        DElhi should also be concerned with : स्वर्ण मंदिर में लगे देश विरोधी नारे, खालिस्तान जिंदाबाद के नारे Last Updated: Tuesday, June 6, 2017 - 10:36
        Reply
        1. S
          Sham
          Jun 6, 2017 at 12:50 pm
          Months after Trump in power the situation in the US is still very "volatile". Actually no one knows what is black or white, till the president says it is neither of the two and it is blue, stupid. India's dependence on the USA has increased very much, in every sector. The statements of the US president on India have not been very encouraging & friendly. I think a visit by our PM to the US at this stage has lot of potential to "go atray", with unperdictable consequences for India. It would be a better idea to let the things settle down in the USA, before such a visit may take place. In this connection, I remember a statement by Rajiv hi during a visit to the US, saying"we do not buy weapons from the USA, as the USA is not a trustworthy partner, as they may suddenly stop the delivery of spares, etc".
          Reply
          1. P
            praful
            Jun 6, 2017 at 9:10 am
            Our foreign service is still burdened by Nehuruvian philosophy of non-alignment so it will be very difficult to change
            Reply
            1. C
              Covfefe
              Jun 6, 2017 at 10:00 am
              Diplomacy is not person centered. It is for interest of nation. World is not black and white it is gray.
              Reply
              1. R
                Ramesh Nittoor
                Jun 6, 2017 at 3:18 pm
                Nehru, had he been alive or had his legacy lived on would have brought India much closer to US and West. Nuclear and space tech access were due to his policy efforts. The studied policy of ambiguity he followed while seeking cooperation of west needs to be better appreciated if India is to succeed in making real breakthrough this time. India should never play second fiddle to anyone, never compromise its policy making independence, this he called non-alignment, and it had nothing to do with NAM. When India stands tall, only then liberal order world over shall feel ured that deep tie up with India of US is safe for democracies.
                Reply
              2. R
                Ramesh Nittoor
                Jun 6, 2017 at 7:11 am
                India enjo air superiority in 1962 though it was not deplo . At present China has access to latest Russian aircrafts, India has only earlier version, and much touted fifth generation collaboration still in negotiation stage. The Russian option is unlikely to cover the gap ever. The US offer is for dated F-16 plant which is getting mothballed. If India agrees to it on a one off joint-collaboration with an Indian family business house, it will clearly indicate the nature of BJP economic vision, but it is likely to remain short of real needs. The scope for access to best in west, in a manner Russia has provided to China, and keep it open ended, consistent with shared belief in market economy is the only realistic option to catch up and also build indigenous capacity. If there is mutual trust and the gap is primarily from Indian side, it may not be out of feasibility scope. A transactional kickstart could help.
                Reply
                1. Load More Comments