The Wall Street Journal: “Handle the India-U.S. Relationship with Care”

But an intense week of meetings in Bangalore and Delhi with politicians, think tankers, religious leaders and journalists made clear that while Americans and Indians share strategic and economic interests, and we both value democracy, we remain divided by important differences in values and perceptions. Unless managed carefully, these differences could derail U.S.-India cooperation at a critical time.

Americans and Indians often see the same problem in very different ways. India, for example, does not see Russia’s attack on Ukraine as a threat to world order. While Americans have been disturbed by India’s continued willingness to buy oil from Russia, Indians resent the West’s attempt to rally global support for what many here see as a largely Western problem in Ukraine. Pointing out that Europeans scarcely noticed China’s attacks on Indian frontier posts in 2020, Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar told a conference in Bratislava, Slovakia, last week that Europe has to grow out of the mindset that Europe’s problems are the world’s problems.

Walter Russell Mead

On some level I can relate to the point that states far from the conflict zone perceive the war in Ukraine as a local matter between Europe and Russia and that it’s not in their best interest to take sides. On the other hand, whenever crisis break out in other parts of the world, who do people turn to for help? Europe and the United States. If the West should care and distribute assistance around the world, it’s only fair that the rest of the world pay heed to problems in the West and contribute to a solution.

The case of Ukraine is a good example that in fact Europe’s problems can be the world’s problems, as the ongoing fighting is threatening to cause dire food shortages in several countries. If India (and China) do not wish to break ties with Russia and impose sanctions, they could at least apply diplomatic pressure on Putin to end hostilities and restart trade from Ukraine. Their unwillingness to do so means they stand partially responsible for the food crisis, despite refusing to acknowledge this.

External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar. Photo Credit: PTI

From my albeit limited point of view, if seems many former colonies have settled into a pattern of playing perpetual victim, blaming their former colonial rules for everything going wrong in their societies, while boasting about their achievements as if they were accomplished independently. They want Western assistance and economic ties, but not Western advice or to follow Western values. They constantly condemn Western European colonialism in the past (in order to blame and shame, and extract aid), but not Russian colonialism in the present. A counterproductive and hypocritical position in my opinion – naturally the West, and the US in particular, have their fair share of hypocritical stances.

India’s situation reflects this as well. Their economic growth was fueled by Western investment and countless outsourced jobs over past decades. They have benefited greatly from the US-backed international order and globalization. Eventually, the Ukraine war may not have the importance we Europeans ascribe to it, but the increased geopolitical instability and the weakening of global economic relations will likely affect poorer countries more than rich ones. In this situation, I think India is myopically prioritizing short-term objectives – buying cheap Russian oil and weapons – over long-term goals of lifting its population out of poverty and becoming an internationally recognized power. That doesn’t necessarily mean India should follow US’ lead on most major geopolitical issues, but instead to look beyond their narrow interests and use their diplomatic and economic ties to engage in the global community.