CNAS Natural Allies Arm It Age Burns Fontaine

8/8/2019 CNAS Natural Allies Arm It Age Burns Fontaine

1/16

O c t O b e r

2 0 1 0

Naual Allis

A Blueprint for the Future of U.S.-India Relations

By Richard L. Armitage, Co-Chair

R. Nicholas Burns, Co-Chair

Richard Fontaine


2/16

Richard L. ArmitagePresident, Armitage International, Co-Chair

R. Nicholas BurnsProessor o the Practice o Diplomacy and International Politics, Harvard University, Co-Chair

Richard FontaineSenior Fellow, Center or a New American Security

The following study group participants endorse the contents of this report:

Karan BhatiaVice President & Senior Counsel or

International Law & Policy

General Electric

Steve BiegunVice President

Ford Motor Company

Marshall M. Bouton

President

The Chicago Council on Global Aairs

Stephen P. Cohen

Senior Fellow, Foreign Policy Studies

Brookings Institution

Lorne Craner

President

International Republican Institute

Abraham DenmarkFellow

Center or a New American Security

Evan FeigenbaumDirector, Asia, Eurasia Group

Adjunct Senior Fellow or Asia, Council on

Foreign Relations

Nathaniel C. FickChie Executive Ofcer


Sumit GangulyRabindranath Tagore Chair in Indian Cultures

and Civilizations

Indiana University, Bloomington

Michael J. GreenSenior Advisor and Japan Chair, Center or

Strategic and International Studies

Associate Proessor, Georgetown University

Ambassador Karl F. Inderurth

Elliott School o International Aairs

George Washington University

Chuck JonesDirector, Corporate International Business

Development

Lockheed Martin

Kenneth I. Juster

Managing Director

Warburg Pincus

Robert Kaplan

Senior Fellow


Anja Manuel

Partner, The RiceHadley Group LLC

CISAC Fellow, Stanord University

Ambassador Teresita C. SchaferDirector, South Asia Program

Center or Strategic and International Studies

John K. Schlosser

Vice President

Albright Stonebridge Group

Susan C. Schwab

Proessor, University o Maryland

Strategic Advisor, Mayer Brown LLP

Ashley J. Tellis

Senior Associate

Carnegie Endowment

or International Peace

Daniel Twining

Senior Fellow or Asia

German Marshall Fund o the United States

Ambassador Frank WisnerInternational Aairs Advisor

Patton Boggs, LLP

Philip ZelikowWhite Burkett Miller Proessor o History

University o Virginia


3/16

Natural Allies

A Blueprint for the Future of U.S.-India Relations

By Rcar L. Armag, CCar

R. Nclas Brns, CCar

Rcar Fnan

O C T O B E R2 0 1 0


4/16

Natural Allies

A Blueprint for the Future of U.S.-India RelationsO C T O B E R 2 0 1 0

2 |

The recommendations in this

report are based on the belie

that the United States has an

interest in working more closely

with India and in assisting its

urther emergence as one o the

worlds great powers. This will

require policy changes by both

the United States and India.

Many o these changes will be

dicult, and some diferences

may endure. But the potentialgain is worth the efort. Now is a

critical time in this partnership,

a moment to transorm past

bilateral accomplishments into

regional and global successes.

We urge American and Indian

leaders to seize it.


5/16

| 3

By Rcar L. Armag, R. Nclas Brns

an Rcar Fnan

A B L u e p R i N t F o R t h e F u t u R eo F u . S . - i N d i A R e L At i o N S

Te emergence o India as a new major globalpower is transorming the worlds geopolitical

landscape, with proound implications or the

uture trajectory o our century and or Americas

own global interests.

A strengthened U.S.-India strategic partnership

is thus imperative in this new era. Te transor-

mation o U.S. ties with New Delhi over the past

10 years, led by Presidents Clinton and Bush,

stands as one o the most signicant triumphs o

recent American oreign policy. It has also been a

bipartisan success. In the last several years alone,

the United States and India have completed a

landmark civil nuclear cooperation agreement,

enhanced military t ies, expanded deense trade,

increased bilateral trade and investment and deep-

ened their global political cooperation.

Many prominent Indians and Americans, however,

now ear this rapid expansion o ties has stalled.

Past projects remain incomplete, ew new ideas

have been embraced by both sides, and the orward

momentum that characterized recent coopera-tion has subsided. Te Obama administration

has taken signicant steps to break through this

inertia, including with its Strategic Dialogue this

spring and President Obamas planned state visit to

India in November 2010. Yet there remains a sense

among observers in both countries that this critical

relationship is alling short o its promise.

We believe it is critical to rejuvenate the U.S.-

India partnership and put U.S. relations with

India on a more solid oundation. Te relation-ship requires a bold leap orward. Te United

States should establish a vision or what it seeks

in the relationship and give concrete meaning to

the phrase strategic partnership. A nonpartisan

working group o experts met at the Center or

a New American Security (CNAS) over the past

eight months to review the main pillars o the

U.S.-India relationship and we articulate here a

specic agenda o action.


6/16

Natural Allies


4 |

In order to chart a more ambitious U.S.-Indiastrategic partnership, we believe that the United

States should commit, publicly and explicitly,

to work with India in support o its perma-

nent membership in an enlarged U.N. Security

Council; seek a broad expansion o bilateral

trade and investment, beginning with a Bilateral

Investment reaty; greatly expand the security

relationship and boost deense trade; support

Indian membership in key export control orga-

nizations, a step toward integrating India into

global nonprolieration eorts; and liberalize U.S.export controls, including the removal o Indian

Space Research Organization (ISRO) subsidiaries

rom the U.S. Entity List.

Tese and the other actions outlined in this

report will require India to make a number o

commitments and policy changes, including

taking rapid action to ully implement the Civil

Nuclear Agreement; raising its caps on oreign

investment; reducing barriers to deense and

other orms o trade; enhancing its rules or

protecting patents and other intellectual property;

urther harmonizing its export control lists with

multilateral regimes; and seeking closer coop-

eration with the United States and like-minded

partners in international organizations, including

the United Nations.

Te U.S. relationship with India should be rooted

in shared interests and values and should not

be simply transactional or limited to occasional

collaboration. Indias rise to global power is, we

believe, in Americas strategic interest. As a result,the United States should not only seek a closer rela-

tionship with India, but actively assist its urther

emergence as a great power.

U.S. interests in a closer relationship with India

include:

Ensuring a stable Asian and global balance o

power.

Strengthening an open global trading system.

Protecting and preserving access to the global

commons (air, sea, space, and cyber realms).

Countering terrorism and violent extremism.

Ensuring access to secure global energy

resources.

Bolstering the international nonprolieration

regime.

Promoting democracy and human rights.

Fostering greater stability, security and economic

prosperity in South Asia, including in Pakistan,

Aghanistan, Nepal, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka.

A strong U.S.-India strategic partnership will prove

indispensable to the regions continued peace and

prosperity. Both India and the United States have a

vital interest in maintaining a stable balance o power

in Asia. Neither seeks containment o China, but

the likelihood o a peaceul Chinese rise increases

i it ascends in a region where the great democratic

powers are also strong. Growing U.S.-India strategic

ties will ensure that Asia will not have a vacuum o

power and will make it easier or both Washington

and New Delhi to have productive relations with

Beijing. In addition, a strengthened relationship with

India, a natural democratic partner, will signal that

the United States remains committed to a strong and

enduring presence in Asia.

Te need or closer U.S.-India cooperation goes

well beyond regional concerns. In light o its rise,

India will play an increasingly vital role in address-

ing virtually all major global challenges. Now is thetime to transorm a series o bilateral achievements

into a lasting regional and global partnership.

Our recommendations are based on the belie that

a stronger and more prosperous India will allow

or a more vibrant U.S.-India relationship and that

the United States should encourage and acilitate

Indias rise as a ull stakeholder in the international

community.


7/16

| 5

Security and DefenseTe United States and India are strategic part-

ners with a shared interest in security throughout

Asia. While the two countries are unlikely ever to

become ormal treaty allies, security ties between

India and the United States already orm a key

pillar o the new relationship. Military-to-military

ties have expanded signicantly, counterterror-

ism cooperation has increased and dialogue on

regional security issues has improved. Te United

States now holds more military exercises with India

than with any other country. Te United Statesand India should build on this oundation, moving

toward a greatly expanded security relationship in

which the two militaries aim to achieve a greater

degree o cooperation in equipment and doctrine.

Counterterrorism. Te United States and India

share a resolve to stop violent extremism and the

threat it poses to our open and democratic way

o lie. Counterterrorism cooperation accelerated

rapidly aer the deadly 2008 Mumbai attacks and

was ormalized in a memorandum o understand-ing between the two governments in July 2010.

Te United States and India should continue to

enhance this cooperation by sharing inormation

about key threats, coordinating their approaches to

terrorist threats throughout the South Asia region

and undertaking other joint actions to protect our

democracies.

Deense trade. An expanded U.S.-India military

partnership, including enhanced deense trade,

should be a key aim o American policy and will

contribute to stronger security ties. Aer some

initial success, deense trade with India has all

too oen allen victim to bureaucratic inertia in

both countries. Indian leaders believe that the U.S.

export control system hinders Indias acquisition

o American high technology goods, including

deense items. Te United States should modiy

its export-control measures as described below,

permitting increased exports o deense-related

technology and goods to India.

India will need to take steps o its own or the secu-rity relationship to reach its ull potential. Indias

current cap on oreign investment in the deense

sector and onerous requirements or osets

(mandatory investments in the local deense indus-

try) inhibit deense trade. By modiying its oset

policy, and increasing its cap on oreign invest-

ment, India could boost such trade. Moreover,

completing outstanding agreements (including

the Communication Interoperability and Security

Memorandum o Agreement, or CISMOA, and the

Mutual Logistic Support Agreement, or MLSA)would give India increased access to advanced

U.S. deense technology. Finally, both govern-

ments should note that the ongoing competition

or Indias next tactical ghter aircra, known

as the medium multi-role combat aircra, will,

because o its importance and visibility, constitute

a signicant milestone in the deense and security

relationship between the two countries.

Regional issues. A more rank and open dialogue on

regional issues must be at the center o the bilateral

relationship. While U.S.-India discussions about

China have expanded signicantly, discussions

o Pakistan and Aghanistan remain inadequate.

Te United States and India should deepen their

dialogue on those two countries, recognizing

that we may continue to dier on elements o our

respective approaches. Te aim o these discussions

should be not only to increase mutual under-

standing, but to identiy specic areas o common

action. Tis is particularly important in the case o

Aghanistan, with which India has historic ties andto which it has provided substantial development

aid. Te United States should work with India to

identiy urther potential contributions taking

into consideration other regional sensitivities to

the international eort in Aghanistan. In addi-

tion, the United States and India should engage in a

robust dialogue about Pakistan and cooperate more

eectively in the global eort to end Irans pursuit

o nuclear weapons.


8/16

Natural Allies


6 |

Global Commons. As India emerges as a key

stakeholder in protecting the global commons, the

United States and India should seize the oppor-

tunity to shape international regimes to manage

air, sea, space and cyber realms that encourage all

global powers to use the commons responsibly. In

protecting sea lines o communication, preserving

reedom o navigation and ensuring the security o

cyber networks and satellites, the United States andIndian militaries will help ensure the continued

availability o realms critical to continued global

prosperity. oward that end, the two countries

should continue to enhance their bilateral and

multilateral maritime cooperation, particularly in

the Indian Ocean and the Persian Gul. In addi-

tion, the United States should view India as a

partner in outer space, beginning by modiying its

export controls as described below.

Economics and TradeTe economic relationship between the United

States and India has grown signicantly in recent

years but continues to all short o its ull potential.

Freer ows o trade and investment between the

two countries would increase prosperity, create

jobs and embed the overall bilateral relationship

in a web o private sector ties. Growing trade and

investment creates stakeholders in both countries,

constituents who see the benets o deepening the

relationship and can help maintain continuity dur-ing times o overall stasis or occasional stress.

Bilateral trade and investment. Te United States

and India should prioritize the need to advance the

multilateral trading system. Tey can accomplish this

by adopting bilateral trade and investment measures

that they would like to see other countries emulate.

Tis should begin with the launch o serious negotia-

tions toward the long-delayed Bilateral Investment

reaty that would, in light o the tremendous domes-

tic Indian market and increasing bilateral investment

ows, create a more stable environment or growth.

o urther enhance bilateral trade ows, the U.S

and Indian governments should convene leaders o

various sectors to harvest specic ideas, including

on such issues as green technologies, agricultural

production, and the protection o intellectual prop-

erty. Te United States should also liberalize its

H1B visa regime so that additional talented Indians

can contribute to the American economy.

India will need to take several steps o its own.o encourage greater economic activity with the

United States, the Indian government should

establish robust rules or protecting patents and

other intellectual property and adequately enorce

those rules. It should also increase access to the

Indian market by lowering taris, eliminating o-

set requirements, increasing investment caps and

acilitating business visas.

Regional trade agreements. Both countries have

an interest in a set o trans-Pacic institutions

and relationships that help ensure that the region

remains stable and secure, permits the ree ow o

goods and capital and is not dominated by any one

Asian power. India could play a signicant role in

this eort. Te United States and other nations that

have pledged to negotiate the new rans-Pacic

Partnership (PP) should consult with India on the

development o the PP to identiy pragmatic steps

that could ultimately lead to Indias participation.

Freer ows o trade and

investment between the

two countries would

increase prosperity, create

jobs and embed the overall

bilateral relationship in a

web o private sector ties.


9/16

| 7

Global trade talks. Te United States and India arewell placed to aid the expansion o the global trad-

ing system. While the possibility o reviving the

Doha Round o global trade talks appears remote,

the United States and India together should seize

a leadership role either by presenting to World

rade Organization (WO) members a package

o proposals or concluding the Doha Round, or

by outlining steps to launch a post-Doha initiative

that will move the WO orward. Tis will require

India to soen its insistence on maintaining its

ability to raise taris on agricultural and manyother imports at any time, and it will require the

United States to be willing to urther reduce its

own taris and agricultural subsidies.

Te G-20 and International Financial Institutions.

Te G-20 is a select group o key powers that has

already beneted rom Indias participation. Te

United States should coordinate with India beore

each G-20 session and work with it to encourage

the ree and properly regulated ow o nancial

capital across borders, in part by actions coordi-

nated through the Financial Stability Forum. At

the same time, Indias voting shares at the World

Bank and the International Monetary Fund are

increasing, permitting those institutions to better

reect the contemporary global power balance.

Te United States and India should use this posi-

tive development to help address the challenge o

destabilizing nancial imbalances and currency

practices.

Agriculture and Education Cooperation. Dr.

Norman Borlaug and other Americans wereinstrumental in launching Indias rst Green

Revolution, which transormed agricultural

production in the 1960s. Indias Prime Minister,

Manmohan Singh, has spoken o the importance

o spurring a second Green Revolution in the

subcontinent, and U.S.-India collaboration in this

area should represent a major new bilateral initia-

tive. Comprehensive reorm o Indian agriculture

will require research into methods or increasing

yields and, in pursuit o this goal, the United Statesshould explore ways in which American land-

grant universities can increase their involvement.

Te potential to involve American universities

goes beyond agriculture; the United States and

India should seek ways o increasing cooperation

in higher education. Tis could include the estab-

lishment o satellite campuses and other higher

education collaborations in India as the country

liberalizes its laws to permit oreign investment in

Indian higher education.

Energy and Climate ChangeIndias emergence as a key actor at the Copenhagen

summit on climate change in December 2009 rep-

resented a turning point in its global activism. Te

Copenhagen talks put new stresses on the bilateral

relationship when India sided with the BASIC (i.e.,

Brazil, South Arica, India, and China) bloc rather

than with the United States and its other partners.

At the same time, direct Indian engagement in

these global negotiations demonstrated that it is

essential to any international solution to this press-

ing problem.

While real dierences exist and will likely con-

tinue on the best methods or reducing carbon

emissions, this eort should not be seen as a

competition between developed and developing

countries. On the contrary, any meaningul reduc-

tion in carbon emissions will require the active

collaboration o the worlds largest energy consum-

ers. India, one o the two astest-growing energy

markets in the world today, is critical to this eort.

Climate change. Given the divergence in views over

caps on carbon emissions, the United States and

India should ocus on reducing emissions on the

supply side that is, through greater efciency in

energy production and distribution and the adop-

tion o new green technologies. Such a ocus will

require greater protections or intellectual property

rights in India. In addition, given the wide dis-

tribution o responsibilities or managing climate


10/16

Natural Allies


8 |

change issues, particularly within the Indiangovernment, the United States and India should

establish more direct bilateral channels or discus-

sions and negotiations.

Bilateral progress can create positive momentum

in multilateral rameworks, and the United States

should enhance its climate change dialogue with

the BASIC countries and the European Union in

the post-Copenhagen era. Given the two sides di-

erences, the United States should avoid pursuing

agreements that will lead to zero-sum contests with

India and other states that could become pillars o

the emerging international order.

Energy security. Currently, membership in the

International Energy Agency (IEA), the major

organization representing energy consumers,

requires membership in the Organization o

Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

Given the unlikelihood that India will join the

OECD in the near term, the United States should

support observer status or India or the creation o

an IEA+2 or an IEA+5 that would include Indiatogether with China and possibly a handul o

other countries. Te aim should be to ensure that

India, a country with growing energy needs, has a

seat at the table as IEA member states coordinate

policy and discuss energy security issues.

Nonproliferation and Export ControlsDespite tremendous achievements in recent years,

signicant work remains or the United States and

India in the areas o nuclear trade, nonproliera-

tion, and export controls. While the two sidesagreed on the historic Civil Nuclear Agreement in

July 2007, U.S.-India nuclear trade has not com-

menced. In addition, India views the U.S. export

control regime as anachronistic and sees U.S.

denials o licenses to access sensitive technology

as conicting with the intent o the new bilateral

relationship. We believe that U.S. export control

reorm is indeed necessary. Changes to U.S. export

control regulations would permit the increased

export o high-technology U.S. goods to India anddemonstrate a degree o mutual trust commen-

surate with the ambitious goals o the strategic

relationship.

Civil nuclear cooperation. Te Civil Nuclear

Agreement constituted a historic step orward in

U.S.-India ties and has become the cornerstone o

the new partnership. Failure to complete the steps

necessary to implement the agreement, however,

risks severely damaging the rest o the relationship.

Consequently, the United States and India must

press vigorously or rapid implementation o the

agreement. Te Indian Parliament recently passed

a nuclear-liability law that deviates signicantly

rom international standards and renders equip-

ment suppliers potentially liable or as long as 80

years. Tis law is a major disappointment to private

and public ofcials in the United States, and India

should take quick and resolute action to resolve

this issue. Failure to do so will undermine the

most important agreement the two countries have

negotiated and pose grave risks or the relationship

at the political level. By resolving the issue o legal

liability, and by providing the remaining nonproli-

eration assurances that the United States requires,

India can secure this historic achievement.

Export controls and high-technology trade. Since

the liing o sanctions on India in 2001 and the

establishment o the U.S.-India High echnology

Cooperation Group in 2003, there has been

substantial liberalization o U.S. export controls

and a steady increase in the volume o high-tech-

nology trade with India. Nevertheless, or India,both the dual-use and munitions export-control

systems continue to be sources o irritation in the

relationship, restricting many o the very items

India seeks. Removing some o these controls,

consistent with U.S. law and legitimate concerns

about the spread o sensitive technology, is in

Americas interest. Doing so would acilitate

deense cooperation and military-to-military ties,

expand bilateral trade in the high-technology,


11/16

| 9

commercial space, and civil nuclear sectors andenable the two countries to ocus on other bilat-

eral priorities, including reducing other market

barriers that restrict bilateral trade.

Te Obama administrations current review o

U.S. export controls presents a unique oppor-

tunity to grant India preerred access to both

dual-use and munitions items. Te United

States should remove Indian Space Research

Organization (ISRO) subsidiaries rom the U.S.

Entity List and consider removing other organi-

zations rom the list as the Indian governmentdraws clearer lines between its civil space and

civil nuclear activities on the one hand, and its

ballistic missile and nuclear weapons activities

on the other. Such distinctions would clariy and

ease licensing policy or Indian acquisition o

more sophisticated deense items and technol-

ogy. India could enhance and accelerate these

changes by urther harmonizing its export control

lists with those o certain multilateral regimes,

permitting all end-use assurance visits, conclud-ing key deense agreements with the United

States, allowing greater oreign investment in

its deense sector and strengthening its export-

control inrastructure and enorcement capacity.

aking such steps will require active top-down

guidance in both governments and sustained

attention rom political leaders to break through

longstanding bureaucratic obstacles. As part o

this eort, the two governments should con-

solidate the various dialogues regarding export

controls and technology transer into a singleorum that addresses dual-use, munitions and

civil nuclear trade. Te United States should des-

ignate an appropriate senior ofcial at the cabinet

level to coordinate export-control issues related to

India and take the lead in resolving overlapping

regulatory and policy issues.

Nonprolieration. Building on past nuclear and

nonprolieration achievements, the United States

should urther integrate India into the mainstream

o global nonprolieration institutions. Tis should

include unambiguous American support or Indias

membership in multilateral export-control regimes

(i.e., the Nuclear Suppliers Group, the Australia

Group, the Wassenaar Arrangement and the

Missile echnology Control Regime). o the extent

that India remains outside these regimes, the

United States should encourage it to harmonize its

policies and practices with the underlying guide-

lines and control lists o the multilateral regimes.

Te United States should also cease calling or

India to join the Nuclear Non-Prolieration reaty(NP) as a non-nuclear state, as it has or many

years; rather, the United States should encourage

India to ully conorm its laws, policies and prac-

tices to those o NP members, irrespective o its

non-member status. For its part, India should work

closely with the United States and the rest o the

international community to prevent Irans develop-

ment o nuclear weapons.

Changes to U.S. export

control regulations would

permit the increased

export o high-technology

U.S. goods to India

and demonstrate a

degree o mutual trust

commensurate with the

ambitious goals o the

strategic relationship.


12/16

Natural Allies


10 |

International InstitutionsTe United States should support Indias emer-

gence as a ull stakeholder in the international

community and ull integration into international

institutions. Indias leadership in the G-20 has con-

tributed positively to U.S.-India relations. As the

United States enters a period in which building and

sustaining international partnerships is ever more

critical, American policymakers must sketch out a

uture o broad U.S.-Indian cooperation across the

range o global issues and within the spectrum o

global institutions.

United Nations Security Council. As the United

States and India build a strategic relationship in the

years and decades ahead, the two countries must

cooperate more closely within international bod-

ies. oday, the U.N. Security Council quite plainly

ails to reect the distribution o power in todays

world, and it does not take into account Indias

rise to global power status. As a result and in

light o U.S. aspirations or the U.S.-India strategic

partnership the United States should commit,publicly and explicitly, to work with India in sup-

port o its permanent membership in an enlarged

U.N. Security Council.

Te two countries should view cooperation at the

U.N. including cooperation on key votes as

comparable to cooperation between the United

States and its major allies. Tis kind o partner-

ship may take time to develop. While the United

States and India have worked together closely on

issues related to U.N. peacekeeping, they dier

on a number o issues that have recently come

beore the Security Council. New Delhi has long

leaned toward nonintererence, and India and

U.S. votes in the U.N. General Assembly last year

matched just 30 percent o the time. With U.S.

support or Indian permanent membership on the

U.N. Security Council, the character o bilateral

cooperation at the U.N. will need to change. Te

two countries should establish a robust dialogue

that examines all o the pressing global issues and

develops specic actions on which the UnitedStates and India can collaborate. Indias upcom-

ing nonpermanent Security Council membership

provides an important opportunity or the two

countries to work together.

Tis will not be a painless process; bilateral coop-

eration historically has been easier than U.S.-India

collaboration in multilateral organizations. Given

the countries diering perceptions o interest on

key issues such as Burma, Iran, and the general

efcacy o economic sanctions, unambiguous

support or deeper Indian integration into global

governance holds short-term risks. But the long-

term benets outweigh these risks. A true strategic

partnership with India will remain incomplete

without uller cooperation at the multilateral level.

And multilateral institutions that exclude India

will become increasingly anachronistic, ailing to

reect the world as it is.

Values and Democracywelve years ago, then-Prime Minister Atal Bihari

Vajpayee declared that the United States and India,the worlds biggest democracies, were natural

allies. Parties in both countries routinely oer as a

central rationale or the growing bilateral relation-

ship precisely those values that trump dierences

in global outlook. And whereas during the Cold

War the interests and values o India and the

United States requently pulled in opposite direc-

tions, today they reinorce each other in a number

o areas. Democracy, an inherent strength o the

Indian and American systems, inuses the bilateral

relationship with its unique character and ormsthe bedrock on which countries can pursue shared

interests. Te United States and India should work

together to spread the culture o democracy in

lands where it does not yet exist.

Tere are limits to values-based cooperation. Te

United States and India have genuine dierences

both on their approaches to the expansion o

democracy and human rights and on the countries


13/16

| 11

best suited or such support. Tese dierencesmaniest themselves in policy disagreements

about several o the countries in Indias neighbor-

hood such as Pakistan and Burma. But our leaders

should not allow occasional disagreements to pre-

clude wider cooperation in support o the universal

values that orm the heart o the two democracies.

Moreover, this cooperation should not be limited

to the two governments; on the contrary, support-

ing democracy and human rights should involve

the people o both countries.

Support or democracy and human rights. India

oers the world a unique perspective as a success-

ul, diverse, non-Western democracy; perhaps or

this reason Indian eorts to support democracy

abroad have accelerated in recent years. India was

one o 10 ounding members o the Community

o Democracies and a co-ounder and contributor

to the U.N. Democracy Fund. It has partici-

pated in the multilateral activities o the Center

or Democratic ransitions, the Partnership or

Democratic Governance and the Asia-Pacic

Democracy Partnership. Tese activities and the

resilience o Indias own political system dem-

onstrate vividly that democracy is not a Western

invention or an American export.

Given the strength o Indo-U.S. people-to-people

ties and the civic nature o democracy assistance,

the two countries should channel much o their

bilateral cooperation in this area through non-

governmental organizations. Te two countries

recently launched a womens empowerment initia-

tive that could be expanded beyond Aghanistan.In addition, India could consider establishing a

nongovernmental organization that could work

with American counterparts to support democracy

abroad. At the intergovernmental level, the United

States should seek to reinvigorate its cooperation

with India in key multilateral orums, including

the U.N. Democracy Fund and the Asia-Pacic

Democracy Partnership.

Development assistance. Long a recipient o or-eign assistance, India has emerged as a donor in its

own right. Te United States should explore with

India whether some o the dramatic reorms in

U.S. oreign aid, such as channeling aid through

the Millennium Challenge Corporation, which

enshrines commitments to democratic governance

and economic and social development, could be

coordinated with Indian aid programs. o begin,

the two countries should choose one major devel-

opment project and coordinate their aid, linking

it to a domestic reorm plan in the target nation.By doing so, both countries would have the oppor-

tunity to maximize the impact o their aid and to

better promote reorms in recipient countries.

Internet reedom. As open societies that ben-

et greatly rom unettered access to the cyber

commons, India and the United States have an

economic interest in the ree ow o inormation

over the Internet. As a result, the United States and

India could orm part o a core group o countries,

including partners in Europe, to launch a new

global Internet-reedom initiative. Such an eort

could include a code o conduct that establishes

basic norms o governmental and corporate behav-

ior impacting privacy, reedom o online speech

and assembly and protections or national security.

ConclusionMore than six decades have passed since Prime

Minister Jawaharlal Nehru addressed a joint ses-

sion o the United States Congress. Tough we

may know the history and something o the culture

o our respective countries, the prime ministersaid, what is required is a true understanding and

appreciation o each other even where we dier.

Out o that understanding grows ruitul coopera-

tion in the pursuit o common ideals.

For many years, that ruitul cooperation remained

ar below its potential. Only 15 years ago, col-

laboration in many o the areas described above

would have been unthinkable. Since then, relations


14/16

Natural Allies


12 |

between the United States and India have grown

by leaps and bounds, and the pace has exceeded

the predictions o even the most optimistic pro-

ponents. But this progress is not sel-sustaining. It

requires bold leadership to expand and deepen the

U.S.-India partnership in a spirit commensurate

with its vital importance.

Progress also requires vision. In this young cen-

tury, the United States and India must articulate

an ambitious agenda o cooperation that willserve both countries or decades to come. Acting

as strategic partners, our two countries can bet-

ter promote peace and stability in Asia, increase

the prosperity and economic opportunity o our

populations, tackle key transnational issues like

terrorism and climate change, embark on a close

and enduring deense relationship and spread the

culture o democracy on which our two nations

are built.

Te recommendations in this report are based onthe belie that the United States has an interest in

working more closely with India and in assisting

its urther emergence as one o the worlds great

powers. Tis will require policy changes by both

the United States and India. Many o these changes

will be difcult, and some dierences may endure.

But the potential gain is worth the eort. Now is

a critical time in this partnership, a moment to

transorm past bilateral accomplishments into

regional and global successes. We urge American

and Indian leaders to seize it.

Tough we may know the

history and something o

the culture o our respective

countries, what is required

is a true understanding

and appreciation o each

other even where we difer.

Out o that understanding

grows ruitul cooperation

in the pursuit o common

ideals. PRIME MINISER

JAWAHARLAL NEHRU


15/16

About the Center for aNew American Security

The mission o the Center or a New AmericanSecurity (CNAS) is to develop strong,pragmatic, and principled national securityand deense policies. Building on the expertiseand experience o its sta and advisors, CNASaims to engage policymakers, experts and thepublic with innovative act-based research,ideas, and analysis to shape and elevate thenational security debate. A key part o ourmission is to help inorm and prepare thenational security leaders o today and tomorrow.

CNAS is located in Washington, D.C., and wasestablished in February 2007 by Co-oundersKurt M. Campbell and Michle A. Flournoy. CNASis a 501c3 tax-exempt nonproft organization.Its research is nonpartisan; CNAS does not takespecifc policy positions. Accordingly, all views,positions, and conclusions expressed in this

publication should be understood to be solelythose o the authors.

2010 Center or a New American Security.

All rights reserved.

Center for a New American Security1301 Pennsylvania Avenue, NWSuite 403Washington, DC 20004

TEL 202.457.9400FAX 202.457.9401EMAIL [email protected]

Production Notes

Soy inkis a helpul component in paper recycling. It helps in this

process because the soy ink can be removed more easily than

regular ink and can be taken out o paper during the de-inking

process o recycling. This allows the recycled paper to have less

damage to its paper fbers and have a brighter appearance.

The waste that is let rom the soy ink during the de-inking

process is not hazardous and it can be treated easily through

the development o modern processes.

Paper recycling is reprocessing waste paper fbers back into

a usable paper product.


16/16

1301 Pennslvania Avene, NW

Site 403

Washintn, DC 20004

STRoNg, PRAgMATIC AND PRINCIPLEDNATIoNAL SECuRITy AND DEFENSE PoLICIES

TEL 202.457.9400

FAX 202.457.9401

EMAIL [email protected]

www.cnas.r

Date post:	10-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	sdamopdasdsa
View:	219 times
Download:	0 times

CNAS Natural Allies Arm It Age Burns Fontaine

Documents