Opinion What a Big Idea delivers

With no major deliverable in store and Obama having spelled out his limitations ahead of the visit,the best outcome would now be for the prime minister to utilise this opportunity to invest in stronger personal bonding. Unlike past meetings,Obama is likely to be more receptive and realistic. Their immense respect for each other is not lost on anyone. Obama still has a lot of time left in his presidency and it is critical to reach out to him at this moment.

What is unfortunate on the bilateral front is that,even six years on,remnants of the nuclear deal remain the principal deliverables in a visit that ought to have aspired for more at the official level. Over the next few days,several officials will tell us this is now such a routine and regular relationship,fostering unprecedented habits of cooperation at various levels,that every step is only deepening and strengthening the partnership. In sum,no big ideas but baby steps that are equally important.

The problem is not with the limited outcomes,but the fact that the only big idea from the Indian side is to corner US endorsement for India’s candidature as a permanent member of the UN Security Council. The remaining outcomes all relate to the nuclear deal — be it removing Indian units from the “entities list”,or getting India into the Nuclear Suppliers Group. Still,these outcomes seem far more substantial than any of the other ideas on the table.

The paucity of ideas is also quite a problem on the US side. However,they have a better idea of their objectives. First,Obama should not face the same criticism as he did after his China visit,that he gave more than what he got — besides all the alleged “humiliation” in the one-on-one with Hu Jintao,versions of which were liberally leaked. And,second,if outsourcing isn’t to become a showstopper,then India must open its doors to US business that would create jobs — from dairy products to fighter aircraft and nuclear reactors. Essentially,America’s relaxing of rules must translate into business for its companies. Here,India’s recently-passed nuclear liability bill is seen as a major obstacle. (By signing the Convention on Supplementary Compensation,India has warded off immediate pressure but the US is far from satisfied.)

Negotiations already completed have shown divisions that run deep on both sides,particularly among the bureaucracy. They also showed that the absence of an overarching idea like the nuclear deal brings the red tape back in — laws,rules and other technical issues seem insurmountable problems. That was because there was no big idea to carry the momentum. The nuclear deal was not just a bilateral conversation but almost an omnibus,on which several other issues tagged along and got resolved. Once Bush firmly backed the deal,if there was a problem,a way had to be found around it — and if the rulebook did not make that possible,then the rules had to be changed. The point about big ideas is that they cannot be sustained without constant political persuasion. So,what then is the next big idea in the India-US relationship? Of course,one view is that there is no need to have one while others argue that there is no point going down that road with Obama who is very much looking like a single-term president.

For all the strong people-to-people ties,there is still a lot of ground to be covered in achieving cooperation from the US without actually being a US ally. India has always underlined the distinction between a partnership and an alliance in its dealings with the US. So,a lot has to constantly change and adjust in the US to accommodate India,which was never historically seen as a partner. In crunch situations like the war in Afghanistan or the political onslaught on Iran,the US cannot take a lot for granted from India. India,too,has to adjust to the nature of US relations with Pakistan. There are convergences when it comes to China but as India’s more nuanced position on the Yuan currency issue shows,approaches can be quite different. Look at this visit. Apart from the essentials on the table,the US side was very keen on feeding the symbolic democracy-democracy narrative with some substance. It pushed for two ideas — a centre for joint election monitoring in India (read Myanmar) and greater jointness in the UN Human Rights Council. India has skirted both for the moment,though the last-minute round of talks still remain.

After Mumbai,counter-terrorism cooperation was identified as the next big theme. But it is yet to go beyond passing intelligence alerts,sharing investigative techniques or the sort of cooperation that happened in the Headley case. One can argue that if leveraged well,there are strategic gains to be made. But,the only related deliverable in this visit is a concerted effort by India to get Lashkar-e-Toiba mentioned in the joint declaration.

At this stage,the best would be see this visit as not a milestone but as part of a continuum. The Indian political community understands electoral defeats and knows better than to cast aside losers. It is important now that Obama leaves Indian shores feeling better after having met people like him. The prime minister is quite effective in forging such political bonds.

In the long run,however,it is vital to construct a big idea for this partnership,so that it is not hijacked by rule-sticklers and file-pushers.

pranab.samanta@expressindia.com