mead cohen berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn
India Nuke Deal
Thanks, Obama! (And Bush, and Modi)
Features Icon
Features
show comments
  • Pait

    Good news, and good work by the 3 most recente US presidents!

  • ljgude

    Even though I drove a stake through the heart of my inner Tom Friedman years ago, I have admit that this optimistic piece may actually be good news. Even though the cascade of dysfunction has disrupted the Republican status quo and nearly done the same for the Democrats it is well to remember that there are some parts of the system that are still functioning well. I’m sure a critic could find fault with this deal, but compared to what we have seen over the past 16 years this one makes all those unforced errors even more bewildering.

  • imahockeydad

    Don’t forget that India is the world’s largest democracy and a member of the Anglosphere. Their leadership thinks like the West, not like a Muslim country.

  • John Brown

    Actually Bush was the one that moved quickly to strengthen ties with India, and when our moron, idiot, worthless President Obama took office he slowed down that relationship way down because Obama preferred Communist China over the World’s largest democracy. The only thing that got the absolutely essential relationship with India back on track was the fact that China has spit in Obama’s face over and over, and after watching Putin take Obama to the cleaners they have moved aggressively and belligerently in the South China Sea push the U.S. out of that entire region of the world, and dominate our allies there like Japan and S Korea. That didn’t leave Obama any choice, but to move forward with the relationship with India, but better late than never. Usually Obama is so arrogant and full of himself that he never makes corrections to failed policies but just doubles down on them. Fortunately the Chinese didn’t allow that and gave him no choice as they continue to make him look weak and stupid.

  • TVS

    United States cannot get on the coattails of India like this. After creating a cesspool of violence and instability in the region comprising Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, for many decades, the US is now turning to India for help. In the last 8 years, US policy towards India has been directed by Fareed Zakaria, who has promptly ensured that the interests of the middle east, particularly Iran, takes precedence over India’s. Don’t forget the book President Obama read in his first vacation was Zakaria’s “The Post-American World”. US needs to be more respectful of India. Just by doing some backdoor diplomacy like giving photo opportunities for the Prime Minister Narendra Modi with President Obama, the US expects to become India’s partner. But, it is highly unlikely that Indo-US relationships would improve this way. There needs to be a more historical basis for the US to associate itself with India.

    • texasjimbo

      The US did not create “a cesspool of violence and instability in the region.” The fact that you’re willing to make such an assertion indicates that your opinion is less than worthless: it is actually harmful. The reasonable response is mockery, or, baring that ignoring you.

      • TVS

        “your opinion is worthless …”. You sound very much like the two secret service officials in the American embassy who were making extremely derogatory comments about India on Facebook (during the Devyani Khobragade) case. They were removed from the embassy along with the then ambassador Nancy Powell. The US needs to be highly respectful of India. You should watch what you are writing.

        I am not the first one to suggest that the US created a cesspool of violence and instability in the region. This opinion is widely shared by foreign policy experts in the US. Have you been watching the speeches of Donald Trump? Trump, a true American patriot, has been saying that so many times in the last one year alone.

        • texasjimbo

          “You should watch what you are writing” Why? Is that a threat?

          “I am not the first one to suggest that the US created a cesspool of violence…” So? Saying the US “contributed to” that cesspool of violence (which is primarily the fault of the people engaging in the violent behavior and the culture(s) of the region) is a perfectly reasonable, even if over stated assertion. Claiming the US created it is to absolve the people who are actually to blame. The opinion of other idiots who make the suggestion is equally deleterious and contemptible.

          “You sound very much like…making extremely derogatory comments bout India.” I don’t think your interpretation of my remarks as critical of India is reasonable at all. There are few countries in the world that generate more positive sentiments in my mind than India and India is one of the few causes for optimism about the world’s future for me.

          • TVS

            “The US needs to be highly respectful of India. You should watch what you are writing”. How else does the US plan to navigate the perils of the 21st century? By propping up Pakistan, with aid and military assistance, to spew violence and hatred towards India, as was done in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s? Those days are long gone. You seem like someone for whom it is totally alien to respect the ideals and principles that India has always stood for. Plenty of people are showing newly found friendly feelings towards India these days.

            “Contributed” to the cesspool of violence vs. “created”. First of all, it should be clear from my comments here, and above (on the “establishment”) that when I refer to the damages that the US created, I am not referring to United States, the country, but only to the entrenched lobby of the establishment (in the media, in the political circles, in the bureaucracy).

            This lobby has repeatedly mismanaged and bungled all the foreign policy engagements in Asia, Africa and Latin America, ever since the end of the Second World War. Though, to be fair, I will say that when it comes to Europe, this establishment seems to have done a good job with winning the cold war. However, this establishment has long outlived its purpose. Today, the greatest threat to the long-term interest of the United States is this establishment lobby.

            “Claiming the US created it is to absolve the people who are actually to blame”. The historical enmity between the Islamic civilization and the Western civilization goes back to the 7th century. India has nothing to do with this. The extremists — in the Middle East, North Africa, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Indonesia, Malaysia — who are inciting the violence are able to do that, because the entrenched establishment lobby in the US is giving them the means.

            Let us take the example of the Arab Spring. Instead of engaging India and China, whom every expert agrees are going to be really important in the 21st century, the newly elected Obama administration, lacking for any sound judgement in foreign policy, got hoodwinked by so-called experts in the media, and ended up giving great importance to the Arab Spring.

            To any reasonable expert, it would have been obvious that these countries have a long history of tribal enmity and ethnic violence. They have no tradition of democracy and liberty. Yet, the media glamorized their association with the United States. Eight years later, you have a litany of failures in Libya, Syria, Iran, Iraq, … It is not just the Obama administration. It goes back so many decades.

  • mickBelker

    So India is getting its reactors after signing off on Obama’s Climate Change program. What else did Obama buy with my money, I wonder.

  • WigWag

    Here is a more clear-eyed assessment of American-Indian relations the Professor Mead implied.

    http://atimes.com/2016/06/prime-minister-modi-resets-compass-for-post-obama-america/

  • Angel Martin

    What is driving the USA-India relationship is the threat from China. Just as the threat from China is driving Japan, Taiwan, S Korea, Vietnam and the Philippines together.

    Obama has not been able to interrupt this process, even though at the start of his presidency he seemed to favour Islamic “Pokistan” over India.

    If China dries up and blows away, and is no longer a threat, the old enmities between these new allies will resurface.

  • TVS

    Two years ago, when Prime Minister Modi first visited the US, it was Fareed Zakaria, under the auspices of the state department, who interviewed Modi. In that interview, Modi stressed that it was the relationships between the business folks in India and in the US that was the main concern for India. The relationship between the two governments or other geopolitical necessities were not of first importance. That was two years ago.

    Yet, now, two years later, Modi has told the joint session of the US Congress that Indo-US cooperation in security matters is really important. This is all neither in the interests of India nor that of the US. India should wait for the next President before acting on its plans for fostering relations with the US. With the Trump-Bernie revolution gathering storm, the “establishment” is getting closer and closer to being removed. Whatever his faults, no one can deny that Trump is a true American patriot who has the interests of the US close to his heart.

    On the other hand, this “establishment”, entrenched in the media and the state department, is a community of fraudulent self-serving mercenaries, who claim to be acting in American interest, but in fact, they undermine the long-term interests of the United States blatantly. Only when this establishment is removed, will there be a clear view in the US about its own long-term interests. So, Modi’s visit and this deal to construct six nuclear reactors is completely worthless, as far as India is concerned.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2016 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service