From Uncertainty to Solidarity? An ANATOMY of Post-Cold War India-U.S. Relations

For instance, almost all Annual Reports published by the Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, from 1990-91 to 1995-96 projected very bright India-U.S. relations after the Cold War. See in this context, Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India. Annual Report 1990-91; Annual Report 1991-92; Annual Report 1992-93; Annual Report 1993-94; Annual Report 1994-95; and Annual Report 1995-96. For similar projections in American official documents see, House of Representatives, 103^rd Congress, 1994. Round Table on South Asia: Testimony Before the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives - 103^rd Congress, Second Session, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Govt. Printing Press. Also see, House of Representatives, 105^th Congress, 1994. The Clinton Administration’s Policy Toward South Asia: Hearing, Before the Committee on International Relations, House of Representatives, 105^th Congress, First Session, Washington, D.C.,: U.S. Govt. Printing Press. For non-official documents see, Singh Jasjit 1992. Indo-US Relations in a Changing World. New Delhi: Lancer Publishers. Also see, Frankel Francine R , ‘Indo-US Relations: The Future is Now’, The Washington Quarterly, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 12949; also, Harrison Selig S. ‘South Asia and the United States: A Chance for a Fresh Start’, Current History, March 1992, pp. 97–105.

Ripley Randall B. Lindsay James M. , ed. 1977, U.S. Foreign Policy After the Cold War. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh; also, Jentleson Bruce W. 2000. American Foreign Policym The Dynamics of Choice in the 21st Century. New York: W.W. Norton and Co.

See in this context, Dutt Y.P. 1999. India’s Foreign Policy in a Changing World New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House; also, Shivam Ravinder K. 2001. India’s Foreign Policy: Nehru to Vajpayee. New Delhi: Commonwealth Publishers.

See in this context, Dixit J.N. 1999. ‘Indo-American Relations’, World Focus, vol. 20, nos. 10–12, pp. 41–43.

For more on this issue see, Chatterjee Aneek. 2005. ‘Human Rights and India-U.S. Relations during the Rao Premiership’, Jadavpur Journal of International Relations, vol. 9, pp. 155–160.

Embassy of India, Washington, D.C. ‘India-US Economic Relations’, [Online: web] Accessed on December 26, 2003. URL: http://www.indianembassy.org/economyrelations.asp.

In 1989, several hundred students of various Chinese universities assembled at the Tienanmen Square in Beijing for a movement for the restoration of democratic rights in China. The movement, which attracted attention and sympathy throughout the world, was crushed by the Chinese army. The U.S. condemned the forcible measures taken by the Chinese authorities to crush the movement for democracy. See in this context, Moody Peter R. Jr. 1993. Chinese Politics After Mao. New York: Praeger, 1993. Among other Sino-U.S. differences, the Taiwan issue remains’a prominent one. It started in 1949 when the Chinese Nationalist leader Chiang Kai Sheik took refuge in Taiwan (then Formosa) after his defeat at the hands of Mao’s Communist Party. The U.S. supported Chiang and the Chinese Nationalists in the civil war against the Chinese communists. China had also been claiming that Taiwan is an integral part of China, which Taiwan had been opposing. The U.S. follows a one-China policy, but has left a favourable eye on Taiwan. See in this context, Camilleri Joseph . 1980. Chinese Foreign Policy: The Maoist Bra and its Aftermath. Oxford: Martin Robertson.

See in this context, Ghose Arundhati . 1998. ‘India’s Objections to CTBT’, World Focus, vol. 19, nos. 6–7, pp. 16–17. Ambassador Ghose was India’s representative at the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva in 1996.

See in this context, Dixit J.N. 2003. India’s Foreign Policy: 1947–2003. New Delhi: Piens Books. In this book, the former Indian Foreign Secretary and National Security Advisor, wrote, “It has to be acknowledged that Gujral’s foreign policy had cosmetically improved the regional political atmosphere and improved India’s relations with all its neighbours in general terms”.

See in this connection, Dixit J.N. 2003. India’s Foreign Policy: 1947–2003. New Delhi: Piens Books.

See in this context, Chatterjee Aneek. 2008. ‘Beyond Expectations: Remarkable Development in India-U.S. Relations during the Gujral Premiership’, Jadavpur Journal of International Relations, vols. 11–12, pp. 25–46.

See in this connection, Cohen Stephen P. 2001. India: Emerging Power. New Delhi: Oxford University Press; also see, Sondhi M.L. Kapur Ashok , 2002. US and India: Changing Strategic Parameters. Delhi: Manak Publications.

See in this context, Akbar M.J. 1999. Kargil: Cross Border Terrorism. New Delhi: Mittal Publications.

Kumar Panja Mr. Ajit , Minister of State for External Affairs in the Vajpayee government described the visit as a “turning point” in India-U.S. relations, in an interview with this author on August 20, 2007 in Kolkata. According to Panja, the visit helped to turn India “from an adversary to an ally” of the U.S. Ms. Krishna Bose, Chairperson of the External Affairs Committee of the Indian Parliament (1999-2001) told this author (in an interview on August 25, 2007 in Kolkata) that the visit was a “complete success” and a “pathbreaking” one in India-U.S. relations. Apart from these politicians, who were in the ruling coalition in India at that time, several non-government personalities described the visit as one that heralded a new chapter in India-U.S. relations. For instance, Mr. Aloke Mukherjea, former President of the Confederation of Indian Industries (CII), and also, former President of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce and Industries told this author (in an interview on August 14, 2007) that the visit “gave a tremendous boost to trade and commerce” in both countries, especially, in India. Prof. Victor Vladimirovich Sumsky, Institute of World Economy and International Relations, Russian Academy of Sciences, also believed that the visit helped to improve India-U.S. relations to a great extent (in his reply to a ‘questionnaire’ sent to him by e-mail by this author).

Mansingh Surjit , 2005. ‘India and the US: A Closer Strategic Partnership?’ Economic and Political Weekly (Mumbai), Vol. XL, Nos. 22–23, p. 22–21.

Embassy of the United States of America, 2002. ‘The National Security Strategy’, Official Text, New Delhi: Public Affairs Section of the Embassy, p. 3.

Embassy of India, Washington, D.C. 2005. “India-U.S. Civil Nuclear Cooperation’, Fact Sheet.

Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), Government of India, 2005. India-U.S. Joint Statement, New Delhi: MEA.

The Hindu, June 21, 2008.

See in this context, Rajghatta Chidanand . 2009. ‘US rejects Pak plea on J & K’ The Times of India, March 29, 2009.

See in this connection, Rajghatta Chidanand . 2009. ‘US cracks terrorism whip, sets India rider to Pak aid’, The Times of India, April 5, 2009.

US Govt Press Release, ‘Remarks by President Obama and Prime Minister Singh of India in Joint Press Conference’, November 24, 2009; [On line: web] Accessed on April 30, 2010. URL: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office.

The Times of India, Kolkata, April 27, 2010.

The US did not supply India Cray XMP-24 supercomputers in 1988 despite promises to do so to the Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi. See in this context, Kux, Dennis, Estranged Democracies: India and the United States-1941-91, New Delhi, Sage, 1993, pp. 410-11. In 2005, the US sold F-16-50/52 series sophisticated aircrafts to Pakistan, while denying the same to India. India expressed grave concern over the matter. See in this connection, The Hindu, March 29, 2005. The US also objected to India’s proposed deal with Israel and Russia for Phalcon Radar System, and Ilyushin-76 transport planes in 2003, and to the Cryogenic rocket deal in 2001. See in this context, Carbaugh J.E. Jr. , ‘US-India Defence Ties Stymied by Continuous Difference over Military Sales’, October 22, 2003; [On line: web] Accessed on May 2 2010. URL: http://www.usindiafriendship.net/archives/viewpoints/carbaugh-102003.htm