Tears and joy

The title of the popular Bollywood movie Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham (KKKG) could possibly best sum up the relationship between India and the US in the near future. Normally the relationship should have been like one shared by natural partners since both countries share the three Ds Democracy, Diversity and Demographics. They share the concept of unity amidst unprecedented diversity matched, possibly for the first time, by a relatively young demographic profile (starkly youthful in India and not so old in the US).
Add to that the existence of genuinely multilayered and multidimensional partnerships threaded together by complementarities of skills, enterprises, markets and so on and one wonders why the KKKG syndrome should exist at all. The first reason for this relative pessimism (or realism?) amidst obviously optimistic factors is an old but interesting theory viz while Democratic presidents have consistently been much more popular in India than their Republican counterparts, in concrete terms, the latter have done much more for India than the former. This theory has broadly held good whether we compare Reagan, or Bush Sr, or his son to Carter, Clinton or Obama.
Carter was extremely popular but did much human rights-related India-bashing. People joked that Clinton could get elected unopposed to the top two elective positions in India but in actual fact, barring at the very end of his term, he was extremely hostile to India and Indian interests. It remains to be seen whether Obama will validate this theory or be the exception. By contrast, Reagan had a fairly India-friendly stint while Bush Sr clearly began the process which his son carried forward by reaching out in an unprecedented manner. The historic nuclear deal was the standout agreement but numerous other dialogues and high-powered mechanisms and committees on almost every major economic, cultural and social issue were initiated during George W Bush's term.
The continuing relative unpopularity of Republican presidents in India may well have something to do with the hangover of the Nixon era, and his administration's stand-off with a nationalistic Indira Gandhi and the use of extremely unparliamentary language about India by Nixon's foreign secretary, Henry Kissinger. Such is the reality of perception howsoever it may be removed from reality.
Obama has a great opportunity to prove the theory wrong. But it appears to be a tall order given the Democratic party's philosophy, which has always been more given to protectionism. We see it in the strong policy pronouncements by Obama, such as giving special tax breaks and other incentives to US companies that do not outsource their operations. Secondly, the traditional anti-proliferation concerns of Democratic presidents may well lead to a revival of static by the US on CTBT and NPT. At such moments, the US frequently forgets that the static generated by statements and dictates of general policy is frequently more prejudicial to Indo-US relations than any actual action itself.
Thirdly, there is a real danger of the US 're-hyphenating' the Indo-Pak relationship, which well and truly was 'de-hyphenated' by George W Bush's regime. Obama's strong Af-Pak policy is likely to lead to some direct trespass on an independent and bilateral Indo-US relationship. And then it is difficult to believe that Obama will be as alive as his predecessor to Indian sensitivities and sensibilities regarding Kashmir.
The object is not to sound pessimistic but to be genuinely realistic. Any reversal or even a slowdown of the remarkable trajectory of Indo-US relations in the recent past would be tragic because we have built a deep bond of mutual economic benefit, cultural empathy, social interaction, political dialogue and security reassurance. I hope to be proven pleasantly wrong in my prognosis.
The writer is a Rajya Sabha MP and the national spokesperson of the Congress.