November 2021
Event Program and Recording from Convergence and Divergence in U.S.-Indian Perspectives: Towards Bridging the Gap
How do Indian Gen-Z and millennials studying internationals and coming of age in a post-liberalization India perceive India-U.S. ties? Given nearly 15 years of increasingly strong strategic relations between the two countries, we might expect that millennials and G-Z would take close India-U.S. ties almost for granted. Or do they share a more complex view like earlier generations who witnessed a rockier bilateral relationship? Looking ahead, what do these budding IR scholars see as the key issues that bind India and the U.S. and what do they think needs to be done for even stronger bonds?
A recent Workshop held by George Washington University in Washington, D.C. and Christ University in Bangalore gave graduate and undergraduate university students studying international relations across South India the chance to weigh in with their views and questions on the topic of “Convergence and Divergence in US-India Perspectives: Towards Bridging the Gap.” Nearly four hundred students had the opportunity to engage with several leading U.S. based experts on issues ranging from economics and security to political values and soft power.
The Workshop sought to elicit student reactions to experts who put forth what they saw as the top three convergences and divergences. Across three panels, a lead U.S. foreign policy speaker was followed by two advanced graduate students who served as respondents. The first panel focused on Economics and Technology, the second on Security and Strategy, with the final one on Political Values and Soft Power.
What did the experts offer as their top picks for U.S-India convergences and divergences and what did the younger demographic have to say about it? What conclusions can we draw about perspectives on future relations?
Economics and Technology
The Expert: Growing Good Story But Not Without Friction Points
The main story in Indo-U.S. economic and tech area according to Rick Rossow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, is one of some friction in policy due to protectionism but very good numbers in actual trade and investment. India’s domestic market is large and promising, but it is still not pulling in the lion’s share of capital. Yet, commercial deals are breaking records despite the Covid disruption.
He identifies three growing convergences: diversifying imports away from China; promoting clean energy; and investing in low-cost “frugal innovation.” China’s dominance in manufacturing (via quasi-illegal ways), pharma ingredients, rare earths, and renewable energy products, which has been on full display thanks to the pandemic, is of major concern to both India and the U.S. While the two have common ground on clean energy, they are motivated by different reasons: India for more energy independence and leverage for domestic production; the U.S. due to climate change impact. Rossow sees great complementarity in frugal innovation (re-engineering products and services to suit consumers at the bottom of the pyramid) which Indian firms are good at and U.S. firms need.
The main divergences that Rossow points to lie in pharma patents, data flows, e-commerce, and regulatory precision. On pharma, Americans want long term protection to monetize and recoup investments whereas Indians want lower cost and greater access. On data, the U.S. has less regulations than India and takes a light touch on privacy with basic consumer protections.
The Student Exchange: Why Is the Relationship Still Too Transactional?
Post-graduate students Harini Madhusudhan and Johan Cherian led the broader student exchanges. In general students in India wanted greater support and mutual cooperation across the board—in technology, defense and economics. They wondered if the relationship was still too transactional. Within the private tech sector there seems to be plenty of cooperation, however students found the inability to elevate that to a stronger bilateral relationship confounding.
Importantly, students identified the need for scientific communities to interact in order to share advanced technologies. Students believe that the defence tech relationship suffers from mistrust as a result of past India-Russia defense cooperation. An important question for New Delhi and Washington is what will it take to get past this mistrust? Rossow and Washington colleagues suggested there is only so much the U.S. government can do to share strategic technology. With private sector ownership of these specialised technologies, the main option for India is to buy them. However, he noted that India and the US have cooperated on defence before even at low points in relations, pointing to the India Defense Technology and Trade Initiative (DTTI) and recent agreement on the development of drones. Indeed, Pentagon created the first ever, India Rapid Reaction Cell to speed up co-development and co-production of high tech equipment in the country, a privilege no other country enjoys.
Other areas in the tech sector on students’ minds were largely concerning intellectual property rights protocol, nuclear deals, and data sharing agreements. Rossow agreed that new moves need to be made in all these spaces, especially the latter. Some highlighted the need for digital rights and equality by big tech and having a more inclusive digital development. Rossow pointed out that the divergence was because in general, America regulates more heavily and ahead of time to avoid legal challenges later, whereas Indian regulations are more loosely worded for flexibility which is inconvenient for big US investors.
On the economy, one big concern for students was cancellation of India’s developing country status under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) by the Donald Trump administration. Will the Joe Biden team reverse this? Students worried that any trade or other sanctions on India imposes a heavy cost, with long recovery time. On e-commerce, it was pointed out that while the Indian government gains a lot in revenues, this sector is still in the developmental stage, while the U.S. had longer lead time, so India needs to catch up. They also raised the question as to why more industries were not being redirected to India as part of the global supply chain restructuring. Why is India not becoming the “go to” for global manufacturing and why are U.S. automobile manufacturers leaving the Indian market?
Rossow and others responded that India has been applying new tariffs where there can be growth, thus restricting trade. He does not see any India specific deals or exemptions given the outlook of the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Ultimately the two countries are locked in a ‘low intensity trade war’ and neither knows how to escape from the tailspin according to Rossow. As for India becoming the global manufacturing choice in the post-pandemic era, regulatory concerns, obstructions by state governments, and continuing infrastructure deficiencies are standing in the way. Still, the U.S. and India remain on strong common ground in trying to diversify imports away a dominant China.
Security and Strategic Issues
Expert: Aligner Not Ally, And Not Zero Sum
The strategic cooperation between India and the U.S. is going steadily upwards, but continues to face stalls and hiccups along the way, according to Satu Limaye of the East-West Center, who set the stage for security and strategy. For Limaye, an important positive factor is that the relationship is not zero-sum, leaving room for flexibility. Indeed, some of the divergences also come with convergence (and vice versa).
The biggest convergences Limaye identifies are India’s Act East and American’s Free and Open Indo-Pacific concepts; trends in defense cooperation; and increasing overlapping friends and partners. This latter development makes up in part for the two countries not being treaty allies which he views as a possible divergence. The lack of a formal alliance does place some systemic limits which could manifest as differences. Delhi’s preference for India to be a pole in a multipolar world is also not entirely in concordance with an American view that does not see the benefits of multipolarity in the same way. Rather, U.S. global leadership and American primacy are Washington’s objectives. Limaye notes that given the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, counter-terrorism cooperation between India and the U.S. may become more difficult.
The Student Exchange: Regional Concerns, Global Cooperation
Student scholars Granth Vanaik and J. Varalini led off the wider student exchanges in this session. Students were encouraged by the signing of the four cornerstone bilateral strategic and defense agreements in recent years, and found American support in the Indo-Pacific against Chinese assertiveness reassuring. Some wondered why the Quad could not go further in cooperation in the realm of non-traditional security such as trafficking and piracy. Students were worried about American sanctions via CAATSA as India takes possession of Russian S-400 air defense missile systems. Any sanctions in turn could not only hamper Quad cooperation, but significantly reduce trust, which they felt would be deeply unfortunate.
Limaye pointed out that any waiver agreement customised for India through CAATSA was difficult, requiring the U.S. President and Congress for approval. India’s moves away from Russian arms purchases and towards acquisitions from the U.S. is being taken into account according to him, but any movement backwards may trigger secondary sanctions under section 231 of CAATSA (like Turkey).
Another immediate concern on the minds of many students was the destabilizing situation in Afghanistan with the return of the Taliban. Relatedly, students flagged the U.S.- Pakistan relationship as a major concern since a stronger alliance between the two during this time could mean a bolder Pakistan on Indian borders. Limaye urged students not to look at the relationships as a zero sum game, especially because India is set to face more complex pressures on the Himalayan region as a result of developments in Afghanistan. This means India and the U.S. need to cooperate even more, but the issues are only going to get more complicated, especially on counter terrorism where the “rubber meets the road” and granular details have to be hammered out. Expert and students agreed on the need to have much more discussion on this topic going forward.
Political Values and Soft Power
Expert: Are India and the U.S. ‘Natural Allies’?
There has been a sea change in U.S.-India relations when it comes to soft power and shared values from the days of the cold war, but there remains some specific gaps in each other’s understanding and expectations of the other, as Manjari Miller at the Council on Foreign Relations explains. The two countries now strongly converge as long standing democracies committed to free and fair elections, with the U.S. additionally fully behind the idea of India increasing its soft power and influence, and ready to facilitate India’s rise in a liberal world order. Both seek to counter an assertive China in the Indo-Pacific that threatens their interests. This is a far cry from the period of Indian non-alignment and U.S. apprehensions.
At the same time, Miller pointed out that there are some differences between India and the U.S. about just when and how to exercise soft power, and particular strategies to meet China’s growing influence. She also noted the emergence of populist nationalism in India and the U.S. which could impact their respective democracies, and in turn their foreign policies. Miller identified a key driver of divergence embedded in national identities—both India and the U.S. see themselves as “exceptional” but do not view the other as such. Their view of what constitutes exceptionalism also differs, with the U.S. emphasising its uniqueness and position as a global beacon for liberal democracy, whereas India stresses its anti-colonial nationalism and ensuing moral authority.
The Student Exchange: How to Translate Shared Values into Action?
Research scholar Saagar Kote and post-graduate student Simron Tandi, led the student interaction with comments regarding Indian perceptions on how U.S. handles exceptionalism, culture exchanges, and questions of democracy at home and abroad. It was pointed out that American exceptionalism has been used to intervene in global conflicts, whereas India has not gone beyond its regional limits using its version of exceptionalism. Likewise, a question is whether the U.S. tries to assimilate rather than accommodate Indian values and culture by westernizing them such as International Yoga Day.
There is also some concern about the Biden administration’s criticism (veiled or not) on the current state of Indian democracy. It was pointed that out that Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar rebuked western critics on March 13 as “self-appointed custodians of the world who find it very difficult to stomach that somebody in India is not looking for their approval, is not willing to play the game they want to play.” These kind of exchanges between U.S. and India were considered undesirable and unproductive by students. There was worry that the rise of populist nationalism in both countries has the potential to add more fuel.
Miller emphasized that America backs India’s use of soft power internationally, even if it does not always agree with the manner it is deployed. She gives the example of Indian companies being better received in Africa than Chinese companies which the U.S. clearly welcomes. But Africa is more receptive to India thanks to shared anti-colonial nationalist identity, something on which India and the U.S. do not have a meeting of the minds. As for the impact of populism on bilateral relations, Miller cautions that no one knows just how nationalism will play out in India and the U.S. going forward, so this remains an open question.
Conclusion: Go Faster and Go Deeper
Across the sessions, concern over China’s challenge was strong, even as India’s immediate attention is trained on developments in Afghanistan and its western border in the aftermath of American withdrawal. Students want greater openness from the United States to cooperation and understanding of Indian needs in emerging areas such as digital tech and e-commerce. They wonder why more Indian tech labor cannot work in industries in the U.S. that need these skills. They are looking for deeper appreciation of Indian values that emanate from India’s own unique history and politics. Addressing these issues will ensure that the ideal of India and the U.S. being ‘natural allies’ would be reached faster and go deeper.
By Deepa Ollapally, Workshop Moderator, Research Professor of International Affairs & Director, Rising Powers Initiative, and Medha Prasanna, M.A. Candidate in International Affairs, Elliott School of International Affairs, The George Washington University.
This Policy Brief is a part of the ‘Shared Values and Worldviews in U.S.-India Relations’ project of the United States Government, George Washington University and Christ University. The opinions expressed here are solely of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the United States Government, George Washington University or Christ University.
