May 27, 2005
THE NATURAL:
Why is India America's Natural Ally? (The Honorable Robert Blackwill, In the National Interest)
Let me answer in this way. Imagine a matrix, with America’s most important national security concerns along one side, and the world’s major countries along the other. What emerges may come as a surprise to many Americans—and perhaps to plenty of national security pundits as well.Think first of the vital national interests of the United States: prosecuting the global War on Terror and reducing the staying power and effectiveness of the jihadi killers; preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction, including to terrorist groups; dealing with the rise of Chinese power; ensuring the reliable supply of energy from the Persian Gulf; and keeping the global economy on track.
Now consider the key countries of the world. Which share with us these vital national interests and the willingness to do something about threats to these interests—in an unambiguous way, over the long term—for their own reasons? India may lead the list.
Henry Kissinger argues that a cooperative U.S.-Indian relationship is in the cards because of "the geopolitical objectives of India, which they are pursuing in a very hard-headed way, [and] which are quite parallel to ours." [...]
Not only do our vital national interests coincide, but we share common values as well. The policies of United States and India are built on the same solid moral foundation. India is a democracy of more than one billion people—and there are not many of those in that part of the world. Indian democracy has sustained a heterogeneous, multilingual and secular society. In the words of Sunil Khilnani, the author of The Idea of India (1999), India is a "bridgehead of effervescent liberty on the Asian continent." George W. Bush fastened onto the genius of Indian democracy very early on, long before he was president. This has now become an even more central element of American foreign policy, given the march of freedom across the Greater Middle East and the president’s emphasis on the growth of pluralism, democracy and democratic institutions in that region. At 130 million people, India’s Muslim population is the second-largest of any nation in the world, behind only Indonesia. Yet, it is remarkable for the near absence of Islamic extremism in Indian society. For instance, there is no record of a single Indian joining Al-Qaeda, no Indian citizens were captured in Afghanistan, and there are no Indian Muslims at the Guantanamo Bay military detention center. This all says something important about democratic processes and how they are a safety valve for extremist currents within societies.
So on these major issues connected to vital national interests and the values of liberty, India and the United States will find themselves together over the long term. They are natural allies not because of any current or future organizational connection; there will be no formal alliance between the two countries. But I cannot think of another nation with which the United States shares in such a comprehensive way, and with the same intensity, these vital national interests and democratic values, and which must face threats to them in the decades ahead.
It would actually be beneficial for there to be some loose but formalized Anglospheric/Axis of Good alliance, if for no other reason that it will overawe our mutual foes. Posted by Orrin Judd at May 27, 2005 8:10 PM
Not one notable jihadi among 130 million Muslims is not bad. Even the US has its Johnny Walker Lindh.
Posted by: Gideon at May 27, 2005 8:35 PMThe Muslims in India are not kept on a string by their government, to be played like puppets on demand (like the Palestinians, Egyptians, Pakistanis, Syrians, Iranians, etc.). Typically, they reserve their animus for Hindus, but they are outnumbered probably 9 to 1.
Here in the US, the most obnoxious Muslims I know have been from India. But, oddly enough, they seem more absorbed into the 'religious' aspects of Islam, as opposed to the jihadi (violent) part.
Posted by: jim hamlen at May 28, 2005 12:18 AMgiven that the indian muslims had a chance to live in an all-muslim country (pakistan) but chose not to, it can be implied their sense of indianess was stronger than their sense of muslimness
Posted by: cjm at May 28, 2005 10:38 AMOr, like many natives, had less initiative than the emigrants.
Posted by: oj at May 28, 2005 10:41 AMSan Fransisco had Johnny Walker Lindh, is SF part of the US? I keep forgetting.
Posted by: AML at May 28, 2005 12:40 PMThere's still the problem that politically, Indians (Hindu and Muslim) in general are not fond of America.
Noel
Posted by: Noel Erinjeri at May 28, 2005 12:42 PMwhat has fondness got to do with alliance? The Brits hate us.
Posted by: oj at May 28, 2005 1:33 PMwhich indians don't like us ? probably the same kind of person that doesn't like america anywhere, including here. vdh talks about this in his latest article.
Posted by: cjm at May 28, 2005 6:01 PMThe Indians (some of them, anyway) may not like us, but I have rarely seen one go back. And while some of them hate the way their children are growing up, they don't send them home, either.
