NEW DELHI: On February 13, President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi are scheduled to meet in what could be their most consequential meeting yet. As Trump approaches the first month of his second term in the White House, a volley of Presidential executive orders have blitzed through the US administration, creating both dismay and admiration. Several have been stayed by US Federal Courts, and it remains to be seen whether the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS), where several of the legal challenges are likely to end up, would affirm or deny many of them. The US and India are the two largest democracies in the world, and a close partnership between them is a prerequisite for ensuring that the Indo-Pacific be freed of the dangers caused by the expansionist designs of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). During Modi 3.0 and Trump 2.0, a kinetic showdown between the PRC and the US with its allies and partners is rising in probability. Such a situation is making the need for a strong partnership between the US and India essential for the eventual victory of the democracies in what is now termed Cold War 2.0, in the way they overcame the USSR during Cold War 1.0, which ended in 1991 with the implosion of the country.
The PRC, which is the other global superpower besides the US is controlled by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which in turn is controlled by the highest echelon of the Party. This in turn is under the domination of the Office of the General Secretary of the CCP, who in that capacity is also the Chairman of the Central Military Commission (CMC) and also holds the position of President of the PRC. In the world’s second largest economy, the ruling, indeed the only, party, government, and military are controlled by the same individual, Xi Jinping. He appears to have surpassed PRC Founder Mao Zedong in the titles he holds, and can be compared only to Mao in terms of the control exercised by a single individual over a country officially having 1.3 billion citizens. This is next only to India, where the population officially moved ahead of the PRC during the previous decade. Unofficially, it may have done so earlier, as PRC population figures conceal the impact of the One Child policy, which although repealed, is frequently resorted to in practice because of the high cost of bringing up a child. The One Child policy led to the widespread abortion of female infants, usually before birth, and a consequent gender imbalance. The present generation in China is the first since the 1980s to have a lower standard of life than its predecessor, and this is causing unease and largely subterranean discontent within the broader populace, made worse by the wealth and power of “princelings” who are descendants of high-ranking CCP leaders, who give their progeny a substantial head start in their careers. Xi is the first princeling to become General Secretary of the CCP. In what is an existential issue for Xi, securing a fourth term in office may be possible only were he to secure a military victory, very probably by invading and occupying Taiwan.
(a) STRATEGIC COMMONALITY
PM Modi needs to navigate through several chokeholds proposed by the new Trump administration, among which is the Chabahar port project in Iran. During the previous Trump administration, India already cut off oil purchases from Iran. Pulling out of Chabahar altogether would result in the PRC getting control of that facility as well, adding to its lengthening list of control of ports across the western reaches of the Indo-Pacific. Where Iran is concerned, the impact of Israeli covert and overt operations on the country is severe, although a lifeline is being provided by China, which is by far the largest buyer of Iranian oil and gas. Rather than hand over one more sea, land and rail route to the PRC to access Central Asia and Afghanistan through Iran, it would be better for India to remain in the project. A sweetener would be the exclusion of China, and if India is able to persuade Iran to permit US cargo as well to pass through the port to Central Asia . This is a region where the PRC has gained substantially at the cost of the US, with the principal competitor being India.
The clerical regime in Iran has brought misery to its people, and getting it replaced by a democratic revolution would be welcome to the Iranian people, and not just the US and its allies and partners. The takeover of much of Syria last year by an Al Qaeda affiliate that has hatred for Shias as part of its DNA has resulted in land access between Iran and its affiliates Hamas and Hezbollah getting cut—a silver lining in the dark cloud of an Al Qaeda affiliate gaining control of a country located at the crossroads of a problematic region. The disparate extremist elements of the present rulers of Damascus are likely to begin an internecine war, as took place in Libya. Given the volatility around, India (i) retaining the Chabahar port, (ii) the regaining of control of the US of Bagram Air Base, (iii) getting the military in Pakistan to move away from its policy of giving control of Gwadar to the PRC, and (iv) persuading the Sri Lankans to take back Hambantota from the Chinese, to be slapped with secondary sanctions were they to refuse, would be important strategic successes for the Trump administration. As for Iran, it would best get liberated from the Khomeinist regime by a 1979 in reverse, a popular uprising against the political control of the clerics. An unintended consequence of the Maximum Pressure campaign initiated during Trump 1.0 once his term ended was a speeding up of the Iranian nuclear program and the decreasing distance between that and the possession of a nuclear explosive device. Should information on that trigger an Israeli response assisted by the US, deep penetration strikes on suspected nuclear facilities would take place, although there may be other locations not yet discovered by Israel or the US. A land invasion of Iran is impractical, given its size and the possibility that such a move would strengthen radical rather than moderate elements, in a repeat of what initially took place in Iraq after the war against that country in 2003 by the US. Public unrest swelling into a 1979-style crescendo is by far the best path towards a change from the existing control of the Khomeinists of that country.
(B) TARGETED ACTIONS NEEDED
Elon Musk is a genius in business, but the only person he has reported to throughout his career as a tech superstar is himself. President Trump has to report not just to his base but to as big a majority of US voters as is possible. Defunding USAID may in the process create unease and discontent among voters which may have consequences in subsequent elections. Rather than defund it, USAID needs to be pointed in the right direction through selection of staff understanding and implementing the Trump priorities. Reconfiguring USAID would be a better option than creating panic among all Federal employees, many of whom would have voted for Trump. In the same way, tariffs need to differentiate between Friend and Foe while getting levied. India, Canada, Japan or Mexico are not the same as China. In the February Modi-Trump meetings, the distinction between Friend and Foe needs to become clear to both sides. On Iran, the two sides may have different paths to the same objective, the blossoming of Iran into a genuine democracy, which is why the two sides could find common ground.
(C) SECURITY
On Russia, the Trump administration has a view that is a contrast to that held by its predecessor. Ensuring that Moscow remains neutral in a future kinetic showdown with China ought to be given priority. The Biden administration did all it could to ensure that Moscow gets pushed closer and closer to Beijing, while all the while India has been emphasising the point that Russia ought not to be viewed through the same lens as do Cold War 1.0 throwbacks who remain influential within the US establishment. Prime Minister Modi is ideally placed to serve as an intermediary between Washington and Moscow, should such be needed, while a location in India may be a good option for the expected summit between Trump and Putin. Similarly, the Modi government shares the wariness of the Trump administration about Wahhabism, especially ultra-Wahhabism of the Hayat Tahrir al-Shams variety that is now ruling Damascus. Where contacts on the ground are concerned, India has a wealth of the same in numerous trouble spots. In defence production, US companies are becoming uncompetitive in cost with their Chinese and sometimes Russian competitors, and locating some production facilities of major US defence producers in India would be beneficial to both sides. It is certain that PM Modi would welcome the idea, which is why he has actively been dismantling regulatory roadblocks to such cooperation. Nuclear cooperation is yet another potential field of partnership.
What has been listed above is just a fragment of the broad scope of potential collaboration between India and the US during the present term of Prime Minister Modi and President Trump. Converting the Quad into a full-fledged mutual security alliance is another. It would deter aggressive actions by China much more effectively than countless goodwill gestures and dialogues between China on the one side and the US and India on the other. Expect to see a profusion of outcomes important for the future of the Indo-Pacific from the February 13 Summit between President Trump and Prime Minister Modi.