May 5, 2025 • 56 mins
Hoover Senior Fellow Šumit Ganguly and Hoover Research Fellow Dinsha Mistree hosted a panel discussion and reception for the launch of "The Hoover Institution's Survey of India" at the Hoover Institution's Washington, DC office on Wednesday, April 30 from 5:30-6:30 pm ET.
The panel discussion featured a conversation with Senior Fellow Šumit Ganguly, twenty-fifth US Ambassador to the Republic of India Ambassador Kenneth I. Juster, Ashoka University Visiting Professor Ambassador Shivshankar Menon and Hoover Research Fellow Dinsha Mistree.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
[MUSIC]
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (00:04):
Hello, everybody.
Thank you for coming.
You can tell that our panel isrunning a little bit on India time for
lack of a bad joke.
Starting this on this panelon US India relationship by
badmouthing India might not bethe best way to go about it, but
today we are coming together to havediscussion with our eminent guests.
(00:27):
We will save some time forQ and A as well.
I can't say enough about thisgroup that we've brought together.
Ambassador Juster was the US ambassadorduring Trump 1 from 2017 to 2021,
he's had a long and distinguished careerin government and the private sector.
Before that, Ambassador Menon, ShivshankarMenon was the Foreign Secretary of India,
(00:50):
also had a long and distinguished career,of course in government.
And now,he's a professor at Ashoka University,
one of India's leadingliberal arts universities.
And of course Sumit Ganguly,the director of our program
on strengthening US India relationsat the Hoover Institution.
So, we've got a reallystellar panel today.
(01:12):
I'm going to start with just a fewbasic questions to get them warmed up.
My real goal is to try and stand back andwatch them have their own fireworks.
But I will be moderating.
My name is Dinsha Mistree, I'm a researchfellow with the Hoover Program
on strengthening US India Relations.
This is a program that's about five orsix years old now.
We touch on anything and everythingthat has to do with India, US Relations.
(01:35):
Today, we did some rounds on Capitol Hill.
Among other things, we talked about NorthCarolina apples and what this upcoming
trade deal, potential trade deal,might mean for that all the way to bigger
picture things like security, defense,terrorism, China and the like.
So this is going to be hopefullya freewheeling discussion, and with that,
(01:59):
let me get our panelists started.
So, Ambassador Juster, what do youthink Indians get wrong about America.
What are some of these conceptions?
>> Ambassador Kenneth Juster (02:08):
First of all, Dinsha, thank you very much,
it's a pleasure to be here withsuch a distinguished panel.
You know, the US India relationship hasgrown closer and closer over the years and
in part because of the over 5 millionIndian Americans in the United States who
I think have a pretty good sense ofAmerica and get a lot of things right.
(02:28):
Including that this is a country whereyou can come here and within a few years,
no matter what your name is, where youcame from, what your nationality is,
you have enormous economic opportunity.
So, there's a lot that they get right.
I think if you push me on what I saw,
some of the senior peoplemight not always get right.
(02:50):
I would first say that evenwhen Russia invaded Ukraine,
there were continual referencesthat the United States is not
a reliable partner andthat India needs to be cautious.
And I would have said up until maybethe last few months that we are a reliable
partner and that that is veryevident by how we reacted when China
(03:14):
created problems in 2020 atthe line of actual control when
we supported India in itsresponse to the Palwama incident.
I think we'll be supportive inaction as long as it's proportionate
to the situation in the currentterrorist situation.
Now, people are saying,
(03:36):
is the United States as reliable todayas it's been the last several decades?
I think in the case of the US,Indian relationship,
it still will be very reliable.
It's a very close relationship and
it's an important countryin the Indo Pacific region.
I think the other thing I would point tois this notion that the United States and
(03:58):
China may cut a G2 arrangementthat will divide the world and
have their own spheres of influence.
I think that there are structuralchallenges in the US China
relationship that even if the currentadministration were to try
to cut a trade deal with China,it's not going to have a broader G2
(04:21):
relationship relatingto the world at large.
Now, the current administrationis predictably unpredictable, so
I can't say anything with 100% certainty,but
I think think the notion that thatwould happen is also a mistake.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (04:36):
This sounds like some stuff that we really should be
working on and putting attention into howwe can demonstrate our reliability in
a more meaningful sense.
>> Ambassador Kenneth Juster (04:43):
Yeah, but I mean, I think we do it.
I mean,Prime Minister Modi came here in February.
And if you look at the joint statementthat came out of that visit,
it was rather extraordinary.
Less than a month into an administration,the first meeting that Secretary Rubio
had was with the quadrilateralquad ministers who were in town.
If you watch the inauguration,Minister Jay Shanker probably had the best
(05:06):
seat in the House,right opposite the president.
So, I really do think that thisis a very special relationship.
There are things and we can get back tothem where there are challenges and there
may be speed bumps along the way, butI think things are in pretty good shape.
And I like to feel in the firstTrump administration,
(05:28):
the US India relationship perhapsalong with the US Israel relationship
are the two strongest parts ofthe administration's foreign policy.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (05:36):
So, Ambassador Menon, turning the question on its head,
what do Americans sometimesget wrong about India?
And let's set aside the 5 millionAmericans of Indian origin,
people who are here,think about the rest of the country.
>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon (05:49):
Well, thank you for having me here and
thank you for this opportunity.
Two things I would say.
I think Americansunderestimate how popular
the US Is in India,because I think for many years,
I think the politics hassort of overshadowed depth.
(06:12):
You know, they sell real estate in Gurgaonoutside Delhi, by calling it Palm Beach
in Nassau County, that tells you somethingabout what people aspire to, right?
And so, I think, and the second thingis really common to both of us,
the political classes andthe chattering classes are stuck
(06:34):
in a time warp because the relationshiphas developed so fast.
I mean, in historical terms, it's reallyunprecedented what the transformation in
the relationship over the last three,three and a half decades.
If you look at that, I don't thinkpeople have quite the people who occupy
television screens,write op eds and so on, and
(06:54):
politicians have quite adjusted tothe reality of what that relationship is.
It's better than it's ever been before.
And it'syou can't think of an area where,you know,
it isn't an important relationship.
It's where it doesn't touch.
It touches every aspect of what,not just the state, but
(07:16):
what people do in theirlives in a remarkable way.
So, and I don't think either in the US orin India now,
part of the problem is that I think whenyou look at it purely geopolitically,
the US still tends to look at India asa geopolitical counterweight to China.
(07:38):
It's useful because of China,because of other things.
Whereas India looks at the USas an essential partner for
India's own transformation anddevelopment.
So, the economics of it andevery little economic issue,
every immigration issue,becomes a big issue in India.
And I mean, I'm not, you know,you can't expect Americans to
(08:01):
see the relationship exactlythe same way Indians do.
But there's enough congruencethat I think that I'm confident,
like Ken is that the future is good.
It's not, you know, I don't think we needto worry too much about where it's going.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (08:15):
Well, I'm sorry, on one dimension that's music to my ears as
somebody who really wants to seea strong US India relationship.
On another is somebody whose day job isto try and find things that other people
aren't working on, try andadvance this relationship.
I think you're right.
People are working on it across the boardand it's very heartening to see.
Sumit and I have recently puttogether this survey of India.
(08:40):
It's a document to try and informpeople about what's happening in India.
Sumit, maybe you want to say a littlebit about how it's hopefully putting
some of these concerns, misgivings,mistakes aside about it.
>> Dr. Sumit Ganguly (08:54):
Absolutely.
We initiated this project last year andyou have copies circulating here.
There are physical copies available foryou to collect and
there's a digital version that canbe easily accessed and shared.
The idea behind this wasthat there is no one
(09:19):
stop shop available untilthis publication of.
If you don't spend the bulk of yourwaking hours thinking about India,
and you want to know what's goingon in critical sectors in India,
whether it's the economy,whether it's foreign policy,
(09:41):
whether it's defense policy, whetherit's the state of health care in India.
This is a one-stop shop thatin a matter of hours you
can bring yourself up tospeed on how the historical
background to these areashave shaped Indian policy and
(10:03):
continue to shape Indianpolicy in these areas.
And each of these chaptersare written by specialists who have
devoted a considerable amountof their professional lives
thinking about these matters.
So these are not sort of fly by nightaccounts of India's defence policy or
(10:28):
the state of India's demography orthe state of health care in India.
And we are planning on doingthis on an annual basis.
There will be anotheriteration later this year.
And furthermore,one of the things that we're going to
(10:49):
depart from this particularversion is we are encouraging
all the contributors to putin policy recommendations for
both capitals, both for New Delhi and for
Washington DC about how mightpolicy be tweaked or altered so
that there's greater convergencebetween India and the United States.
(11:15):
Because we now see this,as both these gentlemen have underscored,
as an enduring relationship.
Unlike during the Cold War,
when the relationship wasbased upon fairly thin gruel.
Now it is a multifaceted relationship anda particular administration or
(11:38):
a particular government in New Delhican impede that relationship or
can expedite and expand that relationship.
But the relationship hasa momentum of its own.
It, which is irrespectivenow of particular
Governments in Washington,DC or in New Delhi.
(12:02):
This was not the case untilthe last couple of decades.
But critical choices onthe part of New Delhi and
on the part of Washington DC have imparteda momentum to this relationship where,
yes, as with all bilateral relationships.
(12:24):
You're going to have a certain setof disagreements and vicissitudes,
that's inevitable.
But we no longer face the prospect ofthis relationship becoming irrelevant.
That is simply beyondmy cognitive abilities
to think about this relationshipjust unraveling before our eyes,
(12:50):
because the links have become sointegrally intertwined.
Whether we are talking aboutthe Indian diaspora in this country and
as the inshores want to remind me,the million Americans
who are working in India,the economic relationship,
(13:14):
the diplomatic ties and the relationship,
all of these have made the two countriessort of fundamentally intertwined.
And consequently,a volume like this is designed to
inform people of the sheer significanceof India to the United States.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (13:38):
So from all three panelists, you're hearing something.
Things are going good.
This is the overall, I think takeawayof the US India relationship right now.
But it's useful, I think also to thinkabout what might be some of the hurdles,
some of the challenges thatwe might not be seeing.
You know,we have momentum on our side, but
what are some of the challenges as wellas what are some of the opportunities?
(13:58):
So maybe Ambassador Juster,if you'd like to.
>> Ambassador Kenneth Juster (14:01):
Well, let me talk about some of the opportunities and
come up to some of the challenges,as Schumach was saying.
And you see it in the jointstatement that came out of
the Modi Trump meeting in February andalso what Shankar said.
The relationship covers everyissue in human endeavor.
(14:21):
Emphasis on defense cooperation,which has steadily grown.
There still are areas wherethe US Might like to do more than
India is currently prepared to do.
But we coordinate on a varietyof military exercises.
There is increasing purchasesof US defense equipment.
(14:42):
There's going to be co production and
even co development ofdefense articles in India.
There are people stationedin the other's headquarters,
and it's a very deep relationship.
Technology is a huge driver andit has been for the last 20 plus years.
But ways that we can cooperatein artificial intelligence,
(15:04):
quantum computing,semiconductors and the like.
Now, that, of course,also relates to Silicon Valley and
how we can work on innovation together andstartups in both countries.
The energy relationship hasgrown by leaps and bounds.
India imports a significant amountof its energy, and the US during my
tenure as ambassador, started exportingoil and liquefied natural gas.
(15:28):
There's now the prospect of workingtogether in the civil nuclear area,
which was the initial aspirationof the 2008 nuclear deal, but
was impeded by the civilliability law of 2010.
And India has indicated that it's goingto make amendments to that to enable
more cooperation, including inadvanced small nuclear reactors.
(15:51):
So those are all areas.
Health care is another area.
The challenge has been in the past,even though it continues to grow,
trade and investment.
It's underperformed relativeto the size of our economies.
The United States, the largest economy,India is the fifth largest, but
soon to be the third largest.
And while the trade amountshave steadily grown,
(16:12):
I think they're not what they should be.
In fact, the two leaders have pledged totry to reach $500 billion of bilateral
trade over the next few years,and we can come back to it.
There's going on now tradenegotiation in which
the United States is seeking toget India to lower its tariffs.
Something that I'm happy to elaborate on,I think is in India's own interest to do
(16:36):
and would be beneficial,especially because they want to lock
in the benefits of the US Market,which is their largest export market.
I think another potential obstacledown the road potentially
is that India has a differentvision of how the international
order should be structuredthan the United States.
(16:58):
India believes in a multipolar world, and
it wants to have good relations with allof the poles in that multipolar world.
And the United States traditionallyhas led a Western liberal order.
You know,we're now undergoing changes, and
we might be moving moretoward a multipolar world or
(17:18):
potentially on some levels,bipolar and other levels multipolar.
But those visions are not 100% in sync.
We saw this crystallized in the Russiainvasion of Ukraine when the United States
was hoping that India would supportsanctions against Russia and India,
which has a long historical relationshipfirst with the Soviet Union,
(17:43):
and then Russia was notwilling to take sides and
tried to be more neutral in itsapproach and eventually got the rest of
the world to respect that and to stillseek to have a very strong economic and
diplomatic relationship withthe government of India.
So those issues are out there, but
(18:04):
in the context of a increasinglystrong partnership.
And it's a partnership.
It's not an alliance,a partnership that covers every issue and
that is working together.
And I think that the technology worldwill force the two to be somewhat closer,
because at the end of the day,if China has a platform for
(18:28):
some of these technologies and the westhas a platform, it's hard to be on both.
And so if you wanna work closelywith the United States, and
I think India does see the US Shankaris saying, as enabling its own economic
development through technologicalcooperation, that will inevitably
(18:49):
mean that even though there may be multipoles, the distance between the US and
India polls is much narrower than itmight be between some other polls.
But those are, I think, some ofthe opportunities and potential obstacles.
And again, I happy to come backon the trade relationship, but
I hope we can reach an agreement,which would be something we haven't been
(19:10):
able to do previously, and it would reallyopen up much greater economic interaction.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (19:15):
That's an important one.
And thank you because you'regiving me lots of fodder for
what we have to investigatewith our program.
Ambassador Menon, how do you seethe relationship where the opportunities,
where the challenges fromthe Indian perspective?
>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon: Basically, (19:27):
undefined
I agree with what Ken said thatthere's huge opportunities in defense,
strategic issues andin technology especially.
And if you look at the developmentalpart of it, I think the economics of it.
But I think the problem is a failureof imagination on the trade and
(19:49):
commerce side.
And here, frankly, I'm no economist,as my bank manager will tell you.
But I think both sidesown thinking on trade and
especially on issues like globalization,protection and
so on, has shifted over time,maybe in the same direction,
(20:12):
more protectionist,more industrial policy.
But that hasn't meant that theystill see the relationship.
I think they're actually missing a hugeopportunity that even from India's
point of view, actually this is a momentwhere you could actually push forward and
do the things that younormally find hard to do.
(20:36):
That as you did in 1991, you had a crisison your hands, you changed course
economically and you changed the wayyou dealt with the rest of the world.
And so you need to, I think, use today'ssituation where there is uncertainty in
the world economy,nobody's quite sure where we're going.
We need to use this andthis negotiation that we're doing with
(20:58):
the US on the bilateral trade agreement.
We tried during the last six monthsof the first Trump administration.
I think this now is, as Lady Macbeth said,if were done to a best that
were done quickly, [LAUGH] I thinkthis is the time to actually do it.
(21:19):
So for me, this is both an opportunity anda challenge.
But it's a challenge to ourimagination because people are set
in their older ways of thinking.
And so if you ask me, are youconfident they'll take this chance?
I'm not really sure.
Of course there's other opportunities.
There's a whole host of things.
(21:40):
As Ken mentioned on the multipolar world,you know, yes,
the government of India tends to saythat they seek a multipolar world.
Many sorta middle paths saythey see a multipolar world.
It flatters them to presentthemselves as a present or
(22:01):
future pole andit works well with their populations.
But my attitude, I'm a minority here.
I really think you should becareful about what you wish for.
You never know how that it's going.
It's not necessarilygonna work in your favor.
You need to be a little careful.
If you look at India's trajectory, and
(22:25):
I speak as an Indian here, over time,
we did reasonably okayduring the Cold War, right?
We did actually much better.
Our high growth years and
the years when we pulled 140million people out of poverty,
where really the unipolar moment waswhen the US was the single superpower.
(22:50):
And even today,the world is not multipolar.
It might be multipolar economically.
China is an economic superpower.
But militarily there's only one powerwhich can project military power across
the world where it wants,when it wants, and
that's the US it's unipolar stillmilitarily maybe challenged in regions,
but not, you know, and politically,it's thoroughly confused.
(23:13):
So to talk of it as a multipolar world orto.
I'm not quite sure that that's reallysomething we should be wishing for.
So I wouldn't think that that in the longrun is going to stand in the way of
the development of the relationship.
>> Ambassador Kenneth Juster (23:28):
Well,
I think partly-
>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon (23:30):
That's, yeah.
>> Ambassador Kenneth Juster (23:31):
I just wanna pick up on Shankar's point about
the opportunity in the trade area.
While people may feel, gee,this is a tough thing for
India to deal with the Trumpadministration's demands,
I actually think, as Shankar was saying,it's a way for India to make some
reforms that are in its own selfinterest and perhaps blame, blame it on
(23:54):
pressure from the United States because ifyou want to become a manufacturing hub.
You need to have lower tariffs sogoods can move in and out and
companies can set up operations, wherethey have less friction on trading issues.
As I said earlier, the United Statesis India's largest market, so
(24:15):
you want to lock in those benefits.
We actually can see India gettingahead of other countries that produce
similar items and especially againstChina because their tariff rates
with the United States will go downwhile they'll stay high with China.
And if India reaches a trade agreement,they can do it in a way that relates to
(24:38):
the United States, butthey don't have to lower the tariffs for
China if they want to keepChinese products out.
And I still believe that trade overallis beneficial to one's economy and
it is unfortunate that I think we'reseeing increased protectionism and
industrial policy.
(25:01):
And India has the Prime Minister Modihas the political capital
to sell a deal with the United States, Idon't think he is threatened politically.
And I think for India, actuallythey should not only do a deal with
the United States, maybe do one withthe UK and the European Union and
(25:22):
become a greater economicpowerhouse overall.
And finally, they need a regionaltrade strategy, I mean,
that's really where China dominates,
is that their economicinfluence in Asia is enormous.
And India withdrew from the RegionalComprehensive Economic Partnership
Agreement, andI understand the reasons for doing so.
(25:46):
The United States withdrew fromthe Trans Pacific Partnership, but
we've got to build something else up,otherwise we're both
going to be shut out in the region,so trade has been an obstacle.
It is a sticky issue, there are alwaysdomestic interests that speak up,
Indian companies, by the way, are worldclass and can compete, in my opinion.
(26:07):
But it should really be an opportunityto do things that make sense but
have not always been easy.
And you get in the first group ofcountries that have agreements with
the United States and you'll send a strongsignal to the US Business Community
that India is open fortrade and investment.
If we fail to get a deal,it's going to send a negative signal and
(26:29):
have a detrimental impact.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (26:31):
Ambassador Juster also has a very nice article from a few
years ago talking about a Trans PacificPartnership with India included in it.
This is the kind of thinking that I thinkis really important because if it's just
US, India, that's great,well and good, strong,
but there are many more countries that->> Ambassador Kenneth Juster: We should
even build on the quad in which Japan andAustralia have a trade relationship.
(26:55):
Japan and India does, Australia and Indiadoes, The United States has with everyone,
but the United States and India don't.
And if those four countries canbuild out trade relations and
gradually get other countriesin Southeast Asia to join in.
I think that would bea very powerful signal and
very positive for economic growth.
(27:17):
So by and large, what we're hearing is from our two
ambassadors that economicconvergence is a real opportunity.
A lot of people have also talkedabout strategic convergence,
especially vis a vis facing China as abaseline for promoting India US relations.
Ambassador Juster has writtena paper about TPP plus India,
(27:37):
Sumit's written a book onChina India relations.
Sumit, what do you thinkabout the potential for
strategic convergence regarding China?,and just generally,
what do you see as the relationship,the promises and the pitfalls?
>> Dr. Sumit Ganguly (27:52):
To begin with, to disabuse anyone of any notion that
there is an imminent breakthroughin Sino Indian relations.
Let me say it's not about to happen, solet's not even entertain that prospect.
There has been a little pause inthe relationship because China
(28:13):
is extremely preoccupied with the 145%tariff that it is contending with,
it does not want trouble on itssouthern border with India.
But let me be abundantly clear on this,
this is an enduring rivalry,this is not going away anytime soon.
(28:35):
It's an enduring rivalry because the PRC,regardless of regime,
sees India as the principalimpediment in Asia to
the realization of its dreamof dominating all of Asia.
The other impediment, of course,remains the United States, but
(28:57):
from a regional standpoint,India is the principal impediment.
The tragedy is that India hasa massive trade deficit with China and
it's worsening andIndian policymakers have
not come up with a panacea foraddressing this.
(29:19):
The PRC has flooded India,just as it did to the United States,
with a range of cheap consumer goodsto which the Indian middle class
has become largely addicted, andthere is no quick substitute for this.
There are complex reasons why Indiacannot provide suitable substitutes for
(29:44):
Chinese goods and having to do with deeplyflawed economic choices made decades ago,
and there is path dependenceas a consequence.
But the central point Iwill make is that Galwan,
the incursions in Ladakh in2020 is simply a precursor
(30:07):
of further incursionsthat are going to come.
If I put on my political scientist andinternational relations
scholars hat these are whatare called limited probes which
are designed to test your metalalong an unsettled border.
And these limited probes essentiallygive the PRC information
(30:32):
about India's capabilities andresolve along the border,
they tried it and they discoveredIndia's weaknesses in 2020.
You know, to quote McGeorge Bundy,who said at the height of the Vietnam War
when an American military basewas attacked in Vietnam Pleiku.
(30:55):
At a press conference,he said Pleikus are like streetcars,
to paraphrase McGeorge Bundy, Galwan isa streetcar, there's another one coming.
And if anyone believes otherwise,
they are living in a worldof their own making.
(31:17):
And my view is that Indiahas to do two things, one,
bolster its own domestic capabilities andsecond,
the only viable strategic partnerit has is the United States.
Unless New Delhi comesto this realization,
(31:37):
it is going to be facedwith multiple Galwans,
which are only going to SAP its strength.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (31:45):
Ambassador Menon, I think you mentioned something very
similar, you mentioned that you are inthe minority in this camp here,
thinking about the the USas a strategic partner.
Just like to hear you reflecton what Sumit has said and
whether there is a convergencebetween the US and India.
It could be provoked,encouraged by what we see with China, or
whether we're looking atthe wrong sort of elements here,
(32:05):
whether we should be looking at trade andother things.
>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon (32:08):
From my point of view,
opinion in India has alreadyshifted considerably.
I think most people in India doregard the US as a strategic partner
in shamelessly plugging something.
I've just published a small book whichsays India in a world adrift, and
it actually predicts that that'sgoing to get much closer.
(32:28):
But the Congress is based on a commonview of what Asia should be like.
It shouldn't be dominated by one power,that it needs to be open, plural.
And you know, but I think we also.
And so if you look at the extent ofIndia-US cooperation in defense and
(32:49):
security and intelligence,it's really unprecedented.
And soI think that understanding exists already.
The problem, the fundamental issuethough is that India is both
the continental and maritime power.
We have both continental security.
I mean, we have the world'slargest boundary dispute, right?
(33:11):
138,000 square miles,it's more than most members of the UN.
And we're a maritime power.
We worry about what'shappening in the Indian Ocean,
across the whole Indo Pacific, actually.
I mean, 38% of our trade goesthrough the South China Sea.
And so what happens acrossthe Indo Pacific matters.
The US Is not present oncontinental Asia anymore.
(33:35):
We have to work with whoeverwe find in continental Asia.
But if you look at what we're doing on themaritime space, it's incredible actually.
There are degrees of interoperabilitytoday which would have been unthinkable
ten years ago.
And Ken had a lot todo with this actually.
So I think we need tounderstand that both sides,
(33:58):
this is why the word partners isreally the right word because it's not
that we have identical interests orthat all our interests are going to be
dealt with by the other identicallyas the way we would like them to be.
I mean, Ukraine is a good example of that.
But that's not going to affectthe course of the relationship,
(34:20):
because there's enoughfundamental congruence.
If you have the same viewof where Asia is going,
if you have a similar kind of viewof what China is trying to do.
And what the effects of China'srise have been in the region.
We will work together andyou'll find more and
more to do together, andthat you have done successfully.
(34:43):
So sometimes I think we outthink ourselves, we overanalyze.
This is like taking the temperatureof a patient every hour, and
you'll convince yourself he's dyingbecause you frighten yourself.
The British Empire had this problem.
They didn't have an intelligencesystem until 1857.
(35:05):
So they did great things.
They conquered India.
After that, after 1857,they set up an intelligence system and
frightened the wits out of themselves andsaw enemies everywhere.
And that was the end of the expansion.
And there is partly thisproblem with India.
US relations are doing well, andare doing well despite the analysis and
(35:27):
all the chatterati andwhat the talking heads make of it.
So I really think there's enough strategiccongruence there to actually see us
through.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (35:36):
That's terrific.
So just turning now from east to west, thePalgam tragedy that's recently happened,
news in the US on India right now isdominated, I would say, by two topics.
One is the trade deal thatmight be coming through.
And then, of course, this Pilgrim tragedy.
(35:57):
I'm interested, Ambassador Juster,what can the US do to support India
in this time where theyface this terrorist attack?
>> Ambassador Kenneth Juster (36:04):
Well, I happened to be in India during the last
major terrorist attack in Pulwama, and
I would think we would do thingssimilar to what we did then.
We provided intelligence support.
We accepted the fact that India would betaking retaliatory action of some sort,
we wanted it to be proportionate andnot disproportionate.
(36:27):
We want it to be based onevidence that they have as to
where the terrorists may have come from.
And we then worked closelywith both India and
Pakistan to try to ensure thatthe conflict that came out of
Pulwama did not escalateinto something more drastic.
(36:49):
And so I think, again, the United Stateshas already said that we are with
India in terms of ourconcerns about terrorism and
the need to respond forcefullyto something that occurs.
And I believe we will be sharinginformation that might be helpful if and
when India takes response.
(37:10):
But India is going to do what it feelsappropriate at the time of its choosing
and in the manner that it feels best.
And, you know,
I think the Pakistanis have indicatedthey may then do something as well.
And if necessary, we're not gonna mediatebetween the two, that's not our role.
But we will try to help preventan unnecessary escalation overall.
(37:34):
But, you know, we feel very strongly,and this was again part of
the Modi Trump statement, thatterrorism is a scourge on humanity and
we've got to work together to putan end to it as best as possible.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (37:50):
So in Trump I, Ambassador Juster with Secretary Pompeo
played a leading role inencouraging restraint.
And should it come to that->> Ambassador Kenneth Juster: Know,
what it is, is that if each countrythinks the other is moving nuclear
weapons in a way that can be escalatory,the one country that has
visibility into that perhaps morethan any other is the United States.
(38:15):
And to the degree we're ableto convince both sides that
that's not what's really going on,we don't let rumors and
interpretations get out of hand overall.
And that's what we did in 2019.
So hopefully, ideally,
those lines of communication are alreadyestablished between India and
(38:37):
Pakistan, but the US can alsopotentially play a role there.
I think this is a good pointto open up to questions.
I see several hands coming up,please, Gaurav.
>> Gaurav Bansal (38:46):
Thank you.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (38:48):
We've got mics.
>> Gaurav Bansal (38:49):
Hi, my name is Gaurav Bansal.
I had the pleasure of working for Mr.
Juster and have served in India threetimes with the State Department.
I'm currently with the Houseof Foreign Affairs Committee.
So I'm gonna actually use thischance to ask Mr. Menon a question.
I'd say there's a lotof chatter about what
to do if there is a Chineseinvasion of Taiwan.
(39:15):
What do you think India's stance would be?
Do you think India would try to helpan international coalition if we were
to put something like that together?
And what would India be capable of doing?
Thank you.
>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon (39:28):
Well, I think there's a whole lot of
contingencies, you know, short of fullfledged invasion, blockades, islands.
I mean, there's.
And I'm sure that our peopleare talking about it.
We've been talking about it fora long time, between India and the US,
about what kinds of contingencies wecan expect and what each side would do.
(39:51):
As our capabilities grow, obviously,and they've grown over the years,
there are more things that wecould do that we could quite.
Coordinate that we couldn't, but
I haven't seen any of it inthe public domain so far.
But it's the kind of conversation.
That's why I say that our relationshiphas grown to a point where it's
(40:13):
the kind of conversation which you wouldexpect partners to have, and we do.
And, andit's not the only one of its kind.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (40:24):
That's great to hear.
Yes, please.
>> Kami Burton (40:30):
Yes, sir.
My name is Kami Burton withthe Pakistani Spectator.
And my question is about the currentissue between India and Pakistan.
And Trump's statement he saidthey are both best friends.
Is that because he knew that there wasa accident in Pakistani Balochistan
where whole train was hijacked andIndia might have involvement with it.
(40:52):
And my second question is how can Indiabecome a powerhouse when you have
Islamic cancer?
Next country According to Statistic15 Army Chief of retired army chief
are living abroad Pakistani army chief andonly one is in Pakistan.
I mean this country is ruledby thieves and crooks.
And I think this was failure ofWinston Churchill who divided India into
(41:16):
two parts.
But which party has better vision, BJP or
Congress to somehow resolvethese issues peacefully.
And I know being Indian you don'twant 200 million troublemaker to be
in India because you alreadyhave like 150 million.
But I mean, is there any solution,
(41:37):
is there any vision about bringing thesetwo country at least not like America and
Canada, butat least they can survive peacefully.
Thank you very much.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (41:47):
Sumit, do you want to take this one?
This was a question I think about Pakistanand what I think the US should be thinking
about as well as what India should bethinking about vis a vis Pakistan, which I
would say, I would describe it personallyas a state on life support right now,
it can get much worse, butit's not exactly flourishing.
Sumit, would you like to saysome words about Pakistan?
>> Dr. Sumit Ganguly (42:08):
Sure.
The central problem is thatregardless of what India does or
does not do, Pakistan needs to reconcileitself to the status quo in Kashmir.
An attempt to revise borders in blood,whether through
(42:29):
the incursions that tookplace in 1999 in Kargil or
subsequent support forany number of terrorist
organizations from its own soilin is a losing proposition.
The discrepancies between India andPakistan have become so great.
(42:50):
And Pakistan'sdisproportionate contribution
to its defense budgetis a proposition that
cannot be sustained over the long term.
And unless the military establishmentin Pakistan recognizes that this,
(43:13):
to use their term,that a war of a thousand cuts is actually
a losing proposition until itcomes to that realization,
I'm afraid we will get no resolutionof the Indo Pakistani conflict.
Abandoning this fruitless quest
(43:37):
to wrest all of Kashmir backto Pakistan is a lost cause.
And until that realization dawnson the military establishment
which casts an overweeningshadow on Pakistan's
(43:57):
domestic politics andforeign policy choices,
I'm afraid that this is going toremain a source of contention and
periodic violence tothe detriment of both countries.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (44:15):
Ambassador Menon, on this question,
just following up the question of whetherBJP or Congress has a better view on this.
It seems like there'sa lot of cross party,
cross party convergence onmatters of foreign policy and
particularly on Pakistan, especially inlight of the recent terrorist attacks.
Would you agree with that assessment or
would you say that one party hasa different vision from another?
>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon (44:36):
I don't think it's very different fundamentally.
I think what has changed becauseif you look at it between
Vajpayee Mohan Singh you hada very similar approach.
But I think what Mumbai,Obama, all these have done is
they've convinced peopleacross the political spectrum,
(44:59):
both BJP that its that changingPakistan's behavior is near impossible.
Now that's a very sad conclusionto come to because it then cuts
off a whole set of policy optionswhich have much more hope.
Right.
And that's one reason why you're inthis situation I think today where
(45:24):
people fear the worst though I don'tthink it's actually going to happen.
I think there are sensible peopleon both sides and nobody wants to,
the risks aren't worthit on both sides but
there will probably be someform of kinetic action.
I mean it can't not be, but how farit will go and so on, I don't know.
(45:47):
But it's sad because so
today I don't think you can actually drawa distinction between Congress, bjp.
This that you heard inthe all-party meeting,
the Congress actually supportedwhat the government has been doing.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (46:02):
Ambassador Menon has some nice quotes as well in
the New York Times about this recently.
Akshar, please.
>> Akshar (46:09):
Thank you, Dean Shah and thank you Professor Ganguly,
Ambassador Juster and Ambassador Menon.
I just wanted to touch about restraint.
Ambassador Menon, because you wrotea lot about it after you know, 26 11.
That was of course one of the worstattacks and there the juxtaposition that
we're seeing now andthen in terms of one of the worst attacks.
I want to touch upon that because rightnow it almost seems like, you know,
(46:30):
cutting off Indus Water Treatywhich never happened and you know,
talks about that 65, 70.
Yes.>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon: Bans.
The bands, sorry, abeyance rather.
And that would just be seem likea proportion that the Pakistani military
has spoken about equivalent to war.
I just want to know howthe Pakistani thinks.
>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon (46:47):
Well, they said if you shut off the water,
it's an act of war.
Nobody shut off the water.
>> Akshar (46:54):
Exactly.
So I'm just curious.
>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon (46:55):
It's not the easiest thing to do.
>> Akshar (46:57):
Right.
I'm just curious right now given that therelations have been at a nader since 2019,
there's been no High Commissioner.
The worst we've seen since 71 to 76.
Where does the Pakistanimilitary strategy go from here?
What is their thought process right now?
>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon (47:12):
I can't answer for Pakistan.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (47:16):
Although it would be fun to watch.
Yes.
Yeah, please.
>> Speaker 8 (47:23):
I also follow up with his.
Thanks.
Thank you all forhosting a wonderful panel and
going from the west on to the east,I wanted to look into the South China Sea.
Ambassador Juster andAmbassador Menon had spoken on it a bit.
Do we see any preeminent like partnershipsin regard to India and any Southeast Asian
(47:45):
countries vis a vis their look eastpolicy at all or act east, rather?
And can you all speak about thata little bit more, I guess,
in the rising tensions inthe region as a whole?
Thank you.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (47:56):
Would you like to go first, Ambassador?
>> Ambassador Kenneth Juster (47:58):
I'm not an expert on this, but.
But India wants to continue to develop and
cultivate its economic relations withthe countries of Southeast Asia.
And India and the United States haveboth said that ASEAN centrality
is important to the broaderconcept of the Indo Pacific.
I'm not sure that India is doing security,extensive efforts,
(48:22):
although they do do jointexercises with countries and
certainly with the Quad countries.
While it's not underthe auspices of the Quad,
they do a Malabar naval exercise,there's domain awareness exercises.
And again, there may be bilateralexercise that India does
(48:43):
with some of the countriesin Southeast Asia.
Shankar may know more about that.
But certainly this is a critical region,and
it's one that the countries there don'twant to have to choose one side or
the other,whether it's the United States or China.
They like to have goodrelations with everyone, but
(49:03):
they're going to beimportant economic players.
And, you know, I think that waspart of the missed opportunity for
both the United States and India, notbeing in sort of a regional architecture.
But India does have a free trade agreementwith the Asean countries more broadly.
Sometimes they're concerned that Chinauses that as a backdoor to penetrate
the Indian market.
(49:23):
But it's certainly an area of focus andopportunity.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (49:28):
Is this an area where the US and
India can work together towardsapproaching these Southeast Asian
countries in a meaningful respect,would you say.
Or is this->> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon: On trade
or on->> Dr. Dinsha Mistree: Open, I mean,
I think trade, perhaps, you can alsothink about perhaps defense and security.
>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon (49:42):
On defense and
security, there's beena fair amount of work.
It started, I mean, after all,the Quad started with the tsunami, right?
In 2004, when these were the four naviesthat actually responded, and since then,
also, if you look at it, counter piracy,for instance, India's done.
(50:06):
There's a fusion center in Singaporewe've worked with Malaysia, Singapore,
all the Malacca Straits,Indonesia, the others, Thailand.
There's a lot of work done betweenthe navies across the entire Indo Pacific.
It's in bits and pieces.
Malabar, during Quad 1,we'd invited Singapore,
(50:27):
Australia to Malabar, they're nowAustralia's back in Malabar in.
In Quad 2, okayain.
So there's a whole networkof sort of interrelations,
it's not a formal architecture,
unlike Europe orwhere Instead of that, there's this.
(50:48):
I'd say it's a networked arrangement, andyou'll notice that it has multiple sides.
We've sold missiles, for instance,Ramos missiles, to the Philippines.
We have naval cooperation with Vietnam.
I mean, you saw the Japaneseare in the Philippines right
(51:09):
now coordinating whattheir navies do together.
What you've seen is over the last decadeand a half is a real intensification
of defense and security linksacross the entire maritime Asia,
all those affected basicallyby the rise of China.
(51:30):
This is not an alternativeto the US Hub and spokes and
to US commitments to securityin the region at all.
But that's been strengthened too,whether it's US Japan, US Korea, etc.
US India ties,you've seen what's happened in defense.
But I would, I would look at it as,
as a web rather than assome formal architecture.
(51:51):
And that seems to work better formost people in Asia,
this pragmatic buteffective way of dealing with it.
>> Ambassador Kenneth Juster (52:03):
I would just add that there is a sensitivity by
all countries that it not beseen as an anti China web or
that an Asian NATO whichthe Chinese have complained about.
But as Shankar saying, there's beenjust an increase in coordination,
whether it's on humanitarian assistance,whether it's on domain awareness,
(52:24):
whether it's on anti piracy.
What is interesting, anda lot of commentators don't pick this up,
the quadrilateral securitydialogue that began in 2007
is not referred to by the partiesas security dialogue.
The word security is not in there,it's just referred to as the quad.
>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon (52:43):
Yeah. >> Ambassador Kenneth Juster
because there's a desire not to make itlook like it's a security arrangement.
But I assume, andI have no doubt that some of these
issues are discussed generallybehind closed doors,
but with a sensitivityto not making it seem
(53:03):
like it's an anti Chinamilitary coalition.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (53:08):
So I think I would
like->> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon: There
must be a lot going on becausethe Chinese used to say,
quad is foam on the ocean, but now theysay it's a nation NATO in the making.
So they seem to take it seriously.
So this is a bittersweet panel for, it's bitter for
two reasons.
I think it's sweet because we've talkeda lot about the potential for US India and
(53:29):
they've given.
Our panel has given us a lotto be optimistic about.
It's bitter one,because two esteemed gentlemen to my.
To my left have worked sohard on the relationship and
I would love it if they were still ingovernment promoting and building and
doing the things that have reallydefined this U S India relationship.
It's bitter for a second reason too,which is in the course of an hour,
(53:52):
we can only touch on somany different topics.
However, we've got a receptionto follow right after this and
I think that you can grill andPepper our esteemed panel separately,
outside of the din of the cameras andthe rest of the crowd,
I'd like to give, of all people,Sumit, the last word as the director
(54:13):
of our Huntington program onstrengthening US India relationship.
So Sumit, vote of thanks,as they say in India.
>> Dr. Sumit Ganguly (54:21):
Thanks.
Yes, I'll try andavoid that particular phrase.
I've never cared forit because you don't get to vote.
But I do want to thank mycolleague Dinshwa Misri for
presiding over this panel.
To our two panelists,Ambassador Kenneth Juster and
(54:45):
former Foreign Secretary andNational Security Adviser,.
Ambassador Shivshankar Menon,and obviously,
the extraordinary staff of Hoover,Washington D.C.
and Hoover Central back in Palo Alto.
(55:06):
They are too numerous to mention and
I'm always mindful that I'mgoing to forget someone.
So I'm just going to issue a blanket vote,
you implanted in my heada sweeping set of thanks for
the extraordinary amount of effort and
(55:27):
organization that went intomaking this event happen.
And we look forward to doingsimilar events in the future.
Not necessarily linked to the launchof the Hoover annual survey,
but on topical issuesconcerning US India relations.
(55:48):
And since Hoover has madethis extraordinary investment
in this project, which is unique,unlike most people,
I will not say quite unique becausesomething is unique or it's not.
And all too often in the United States,people say this is virtually unique.
(56:10):
No, it can't be virtually unique,it s unique.
And this is a unique program, and
we hope to see many of you backat our events here in Washington.
Thank you for coming andwithout any further ado, to this marvelous
reception that the Hoover staffin Washington have put together.
(56:30):
Thank you.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (56:31):
Thank you. >> [APPLAUSE]
[MUSIC]
[MUSIC]
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (00:04):
Hello, everybody.
Thank you for coming.
You can tell that our panel isrunning a little bit on India time for
lack of a bad joke.
Starting this on this panelon US India relationship by
badmouthing India might not bethe best way to go about it, but
today we are coming together to havediscussion with our eminent guests.
(00:27):
We will save some time forQ and A as well.
I can't say enough about thisgroup that we've brought together.
Ambassador Juster was the US ambassadorduring Trump 1 from 2017 to 2021,
he's had a long and distinguished careerin government and the private sector.
Before that, Ambassador Menon, ShivshankarMenon was the Foreign Secretary of India,
(00:50):
also had a long and distinguished career,of course in government.
And now,he's a professor at Ashoka University,
one of India's leadingliberal arts universities.
And of course Sumit Ganguly,the director of our program
on strengthening US India relationsat the Hoover Institution.
So, we've got a reallystellar panel today.
(01:12):
I'm going to start with just a fewbasic questions to get them warmed up.
My real goal is to try and stand back andwatch them have their own fireworks.
But I will be moderating.
My name is Dinsha Mistree, I'm a researchfellow with the Hoover Program
on strengthening US India Relations.
This is a program that's about five orsix years old now.
We touch on anything and everythingthat has to do with India, US Relations.
(01:35):
Today, we did some rounds on Capitol Hill.
Among other things, we talked about NorthCarolina apples and what this upcoming
trade deal, potential trade deal,might mean for that all the way to bigger
picture things like security, defense,terrorism, China and the like.
So this is going to be hopefullya freewheeling discussion, and with that,
(01:59):
let me get our panelists started.
So, Ambassador Juster, what do youthink Indians get wrong about America.
What are some of these conceptions?
>> Ambassador Kenneth Juster (02:08):
First of all, Dinsha, thank you very much,
it's a pleasure to be here withsuch a distinguished panel.
You know, the US India relationship hasgrown closer and closer over the years and
in part because of the over 5 millionIndian Americans in the United States who
I think have a pretty good sense ofAmerica and get a lot of things right.
(02:28):
Including that this is a country whereyou can come here and within a few years,
no matter what your name is, where youcame from, what your nationality is,
you have enormous economic opportunity.
So, there's a lot that they get right.
I think if you push me on what I saw,
some of the senior peoplemight not always get right.
(02:50):
I would first say that evenwhen Russia invaded Ukraine,
there were continual referencesthat the United States is not
a reliable partner andthat India needs to be cautious.
And I would have said up until maybethe last few months that we are a reliable
partner and that that is veryevident by how we reacted when China
(03:14):
created problems in 2020 atthe line of actual control when
we supported India in itsresponse to the Palwama incident.
I think we'll be supportive inaction as long as it's proportionate
to the situation in the currentterrorist situation.
Now, people are saying,
(03:36):
is the United States as reliable todayas it's been the last several decades?
I think in the case of the US,Indian relationship,
it still will be very reliable.
It's a very close relationship and
it's an important countryin the Indo Pacific region.
I think the other thing I would point tois this notion that the United States and
(03:58):
China may cut a G2 arrangementthat will divide the world and
have their own spheres of influence.
I think that there are structuralchallenges in the US China
relationship that even if the currentadministration were to try
to cut a trade deal with China,it's not going to have a broader G2
(04:21):
relationship relatingto the world at large.
Now, the current administrationis predictably unpredictable, so
I can't say anything with 100% certainty,but
I think think the notion that thatwould happen is also a mistake.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (04:36):
This sounds like some stuff that we really should be
working on and putting attention into howwe can demonstrate our reliability in
a more meaningful sense.
>> Ambassador Kenneth Juster (04:43):
Yeah, but I mean, I think we do it.
I mean,Prime Minister Modi came here in February.
And if you look at the joint statementthat came out of that visit,
it was rather extraordinary.
Less than a month into an administration,the first meeting that Secretary Rubio
had was with the quadrilateralquad ministers who were in town.
If you watch the inauguration,Minister Jay Shanker probably had the best
(05:06):
seat in the House,right opposite the president.
So, I really do think that thisis a very special relationship.
There are things and we can get back tothem where there are challenges and there
may be speed bumps along the way, butI think things are in pretty good shape.
And I like to feel in the firstTrump administration,
(05:28):
the US India relationship perhapsalong with the US Israel relationship
are the two strongest parts ofthe administration's foreign policy.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (05:36):
So, Ambassador Menon, turning the question on its head,
what do Americans sometimesget wrong about India?
And let's set aside the 5 millionAmericans of Indian origin,
people who are here,think about the rest of the country.
>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon (05:49):
Well, thank you for having me here and
thank you for this opportunity.
Two things I would say.
I think Americansunderestimate how popular
the US Is in India,because I think for many years,
I think the politics hassort of overshadowed depth.
(06:12):
You know, they sell real estate in Gurgaonoutside Delhi, by calling it Palm Beach
in Nassau County, that tells you somethingabout what people aspire to, right?
And so, I think, and the second thingis really common to both of us,
the political classes andthe chattering classes are stuck
(06:34):
in a time warp because the relationshiphas developed so fast.
I mean, in historical terms, it's reallyunprecedented what the transformation in
the relationship over the last three,three and a half decades.
If you look at that, I don't thinkpeople have quite the people who occupy
television screens,write op eds and so on, and
(06:54):
politicians have quite adjusted tothe reality of what that relationship is.
It's better than it's ever been before.
And it'syou can't think of an area where,you know,
it isn't an important relationship.
It's where it doesn't touch.
It touches every aspect of what,not just the state, but
(07:16):
what people do in theirlives in a remarkable way.
So, and I don't think either in the US orin India now,
part of the problem is that I think whenyou look at it purely geopolitically,
the US still tends to look at India asa geopolitical counterweight to China.
(07:38):
It's useful because of China,because of other things.
Whereas India looks at the USas an essential partner for
India's own transformation anddevelopment.
So, the economics of it andevery little economic issue,
every immigration issue,becomes a big issue in India.
And I mean, I'm not, you know,you can't expect Americans to
(08:01):
see the relationship exactlythe same way Indians do.
But there's enough congruencethat I think that I'm confident,
like Ken is that the future is good.
It's not, you know, I don't think we needto worry too much about where it's going.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (08:15):
Well, I'm sorry, on one dimension that's music to my ears as
somebody who really wants to seea strong US India relationship.
On another is somebody whose day job isto try and find things that other people
aren't working on, try andadvance this relationship.
I think you're right.
People are working on it across the boardand it's very heartening to see.
Sumit and I have recently puttogether this survey of India.
(08:40):
It's a document to try and informpeople about what's happening in India.
Sumit, maybe you want to say a littlebit about how it's hopefully putting
some of these concerns, misgivings,mistakes aside about it.
>> Dr. Sumit Ganguly (08:54):
Absolutely.
We initiated this project last year andyou have copies circulating here.
There are physical copies available foryou to collect and
there's a digital version that canbe easily accessed and shared.
The idea behind this wasthat there is no one
(09:19):
stop shop available untilthis publication of.
If you don't spend the bulk of yourwaking hours thinking about India,
and you want to know what's goingon in critical sectors in India,
whether it's the economy,whether it's foreign policy,
(09:41):
whether it's defense policy, whetherit's the state of health care in India.
This is a one-stop shop thatin a matter of hours you
can bring yourself up tospeed on how the historical
background to these areashave shaped Indian policy and
(10:03):
continue to shape Indianpolicy in these areas.
And each of these chaptersare written by specialists who have
devoted a considerable amountof their professional lives
thinking about these matters.
So these are not sort of fly by nightaccounts of India's defence policy or
(10:28):
the state of India's demography orthe state of health care in India.
And we are planning on doingthis on an annual basis.
There will be anotheriteration later this year.
And furthermore,one of the things that we're going to
(10:49):
depart from this particularversion is we are encouraging
all the contributors to putin policy recommendations for
both capitals, both for New Delhi and for
Washington DC about how mightpolicy be tweaked or altered so
that there's greater convergencebetween India and the United States.
(11:15):
Because we now see this,as both these gentlemen have underscored,
as an enduring relationship.
Unlike during the Cold War,
when the relationship wasbased upon fairly thin gruel.
Now it is a multifaceted relationship anda particular administration or
(11:38):
a particular government in New Delhican impede that relationship or
can expedite and expand that relationship.
But the relationship hasa momentum of its own.
It, which is irrespectivenow of particular
Governments in Washington,DC or in New Delhi.
(12:02):
This was not the case untilthe last couple of decades.
But critical choices onthe part of New Delhi and
on the part of Washington DC have imparteda momentum to this relationship where,
yes, as with all bilateral relationships.
(12:24):
You're going to have a certain setof disagreements and vicissitudes,
that's inevitable.
But we no longer face the prospect ofthis relationship becoming irrelevant.
That is simply beyondmy cognitive abilities
to think about this relationshipjust unraveling before our eyes,
(12:50):
because the links have become sointegrally intertwined.
Whether we are talking aboutthe Indian diaspora in this country and
as the inshores want to remind me,the million Americans
who are working in India,the economic relationship,
(13:14):
the diplomatic ties and the relationship,
all of these have made the two countriessort of fundamentally intertwined.
And consequently,a volume like this is designed to
inform people of the sheer significanceof India to the United States.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (13:38):
So from all three panelists, you're hearing something.
Things are going good.
This is the overall, I think takeawayof the US India relationship right now.
But it's useful, I think also to thinkabout what might be some of the hurdles,
some of the challenges thatwe might not be seeing.
You know,we have momentum on our side, but
what are some of the challenges as wellas what are some of the opportunities?
(13:58):
So maybe Ambassador Juster,if you'd like to.
>> Ambassador Kenneth Juster (14:01):
Well, let me talk about some of the opportunities and
come up to some of the challenges,as Schumach was saying.
And you see it in the jointstatement that came out of
the Modi Trump meeting in February andalso what Shankar said.
The relationship covers everyissue in human endeavor.
(14:21):
Emphasis on defense cooperation,which has steadily grown.
There still are areas wherethe US Might like to do more than
India is currently prepared to do.
But we coordinate on a varietyof military exercises.
There is increasing purchasesof US defense equipment.
(14:42):
There's going to be co production and
even co development ofdefense articles in India.
There are people stationedin the other's headquarters,
and it's a very deep relationship.
Technology is a huge driver andit has been for the last 20 plus years.
But ways that we can cooperatein artificial intelligence,
(15:04):
quantum computing,semiconductors and the like.
Now, that, of course,also relates to Silicon Valley and
how we can work on innovation together andstartups in both countries.
The energy relationship hasgrown by leaps and bounds.
India imports a significant amountof its energy, and the US during my
tenure as ambassador, started exportingoil and liquefied natural gas.
(15:28):
There's now the prospect of workingtogether in the civil nuclear area,
which was the initial aspirationof the 2008 nuclear deal, but
was impeded by the civilliability law of 2010.
And India has indicated that it's goingto make amendments to that to enable
more cooperation, including inadvanced small nuclear reactors.
(15:51):
So those are all areas.
Health care is another area.
The challenge has been in the past,even though it continues to grow,
trade and investment.
It's underperformed relativeto the size of our economies.
The United States, the largest economy,India is the fifth largest, but
soon to be the third largest.
And while the trade amountshave steadily grown,
(16:12):
I think they're not what they should be.
In fact, the two leaders have pledged totry to reach $500 billion of bilateral
trade over the next few years,and we can come back to it.
There's going on now tradenegotiation in which
the United States is seeking toget India to lower its tariffs.
Something that I'm happy to elaborate on,I think is in India's own interest to do
(16:36):
and would be beneficial,especially because they want to lock
in the benefits of the US Market,which is their largest export market.
I think another potential obstacledown the road potentially
is that India has a differentvision of how the international
order should be structuredthan the United States.
(16:58):
India believes in a multipolar world, and
it wants to have good relations with allof the poles in that multipolar world.
And the United States traditionallyhas led a Western liberal order.
You know,we're now undergoing changes, and
we might be moving moretoward a multipolar world or
(17:18):
potentially on some levels,bipolar and other levels multipolar.
But those visions are not 100% in sync.
We saw this crystallized in the Russiainvasion of Ukraine when the United States
was hoping that India would supportsanctions against Russia and India,
which has a long historical relationshipfirst with the Soviet Union,
(17:43):
and then Russia was notwilling to take sides and
tried to be more neutral in itsapproach and eventually got the rest of
the world to respect that and to stillseek to have a very strong economic and
diplomatic relationship withthe government of India.
So those issues are out there, but
(18:04):
in the context of a increasinglystrong partnership.
And it's a partnership.
It's not an alliance,a partnership that covers every issue and
that is working together.
And I think that the technology worldwill force the two to be somewhat closer,
because at the end of the day,if China has a platform for
(18:28):
some of these technologies and the westhas a platform, it's hard to be on both.
And so if you wanna work closelywith the United States, and
I think India does see the US Shankaris saying, as enabling its own economic
development through technologicalcooperation, that will inevitably
(18:49):
mean that even though there may be multipoles, the distance between the US and
India polls is much narrower than itmight be between some other polls.
But those are, I think, some ofthe opportunities and potential obstacles.
And again, I happy to come backon the trade relationship, but
I hope we can reach an agreement,which would be something we haven't been
(19:10):
able to do previously, and it would reallyopen up much greater economic interaction.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (19:15):
That's an important one.
And thank you because you'regiving me lots of fodder for
what we have to investigatewith our program.
Ambassador Menon, how do you seethe relationship where the opportunities,
where the challenges fromthe Indian perspective?
>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon: Basically, (19:27):
undefined
I agree with what Ken said thatthere's huge opportunities in defense,
strategic issues andin technology especially.
And if you look at the developmentalpart of it, I think the economics of it.
But I think the problem is a failureof imagination on the trade and
(19:49):
commerce side.
And here, frankly, I'm no economist,as my bank manager will tell you.
But I think both sidesown thinking on trade and
especially on issues like globalization,protection and
so on, has shifted over time,maybe in the same direction,
(20:12):
more protectionist,more industrial policy.
But that hasn't meant that theystill see the relationship.
I think they're actually missing a hugeopportunity that even from India's
point of view, actually this is a momentwhere you could actually push forward and
do the things that younormally find hard to do.
(20:36):
That as you did in 1991, you had a crisison your hands, you changed course
economically and you changed the wayyou dealt with the rest of the world.
And so you need to, I think, use today'ssituation where there is uncertainty in
the world economy,nobody's quite sure where we're going.
We need to use this andthis negotiation that we're doing with
(20:58):
the US on the bilateral trade agreement.
We tried during the last six monthsof the first Trump administration.
I think this now is, as Lady Macbeth said,if were done to a best that
were done quickly, [LAUGH] I thinkthis is the time to actually do it.
(21:19):
So for me, this is both an opportunity anda challenge.
But it's a challenge to ourimagination because people are set
in their older ways of thinking.
And so if you ask me, are youconfident they'll take this chance?
I'm not really sure.
Of course there's other opportunities.
There's a whole host of things.
(21:40):
As Ken mentioned on the multipolar world,you know, yes,
the government of India tends to saythat they seek a multipolar world.
Many sorta middle paths saythey see a multipolar world.
It flatters them to presentthemselves as a present or
(22:01):
future pole andit works well with their populations.
But my attitude, I'm a minority here.
I really think you should becareful about what you wish for.
You never know how that it's going.
It's not necessarilygonna work in your favor.
You need to be a little careful.
If you look at India's trajectory, and
(22:25):
I speak as an Indian here, over time,
we did reasonably okayduring the Cold War, right?
We did actually much better.
Our high growth years and
the years when we pulled 140million people out of poverty,
where really the unipolar moment waswhen the US was the single superpower.
(22:50):
And even today,the world is not multipolar.
It might be multipolar economically.
China is an economic superpower.
But militarily there's only one powerwhich can project military power across
the world where it wants,when it wants, and
that's the US it's unipolar stillmilitarily maybe challenged in regions,
but not, you know, and politically,it's thoroughly confused.
(23:13):
So to talk of it as a multipolar world orto.
I'm not quite sure that that's reallysomething we should be wishing for.
So I wouldn't think that that in the longrun is going to stand in the way of
the development of the relationship.
>> Ambassador Kenneth Juster (23:28):
Well,
I think partly-
>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon (23:30):
That's, yeah.
>> Ambassador Kenneth Juster (23:31):
I just wanna pick up on Shankar's point about
the opportunity in the trade area.
While people may feel, gee,this is a tough thing for
India to deal with the Trumpadministration's demands,
I actually think, as Shankar was saying,it's a way for India to make some
reforms that are in its own selfinterest and perhaps blame, blame it on
(23:54):
pressure from the United States because ifyou want to become a manufacturing hub.
You need to have lower tariffs sogoods can move in and out and
companies can set up operations, wherethey have less friction on trading issues.
As I said earlier, the United Statesis India's largest market, so
(24:15):
you want to lock in those benefits.
We actually can see India gettingahead of other countries that produce
similar items and especially againstChina because their tariff rates
with the United States will go downwhile they'll stay high with China.
And if India reaches a trade agreement,they can do it in a way that relates to
(24:38):
the United States, butthey don't have to lower the tariffs for
China if they want to keepChinese products out.
And I still believe that trade overallis beneficial to one's economy and
it is unfortunate that I think we'reseeing increased protectionism and
industrial policy.
(25:01):
And India has the Prime Minister Modihas the political capital
to sell a deal with the United States, Idon't think he is threatened politically.
And I think for India, actuallythey should not only do a deal with
the United States, maybe do one withthe UK and the European Union and
(25:22):
become a greater economicpowerhouse overall.
And finally, they need a regionaltrade strategy, I mean,
that's really where China dominates,
is that their economicinfluence in Asia is enormous.
And India withdrew from the RegionalComprehensive Economic Partnership
Agreement, andI understand the reasons for doing so.
(25:46):
The United States withdrew fromthe Trans Pacific Partnership, but
we've got to build something else up,otherwise we're both
going to be shut out in the region,so trade has been an obstacle.
It is a sticky issue, there are alwaysdomestic interests that speak up,
Indian companies, by the way, are worldclass and can compete, in my opinion.
(26:07):
But it should really be an opportunityto do things that make sense but
have not always been easy.
And you get in the first group ofcountries that have agreements with
the United States and you'll send a strongsignal to the US Business Community
that India is open fortrade and investment.
If we fail to get a deal,it's going to send a negative signal and
(26:29):
have a detrimental impact.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (26:31):
Ambassador Juster also has a very nice article from a few
years ago talking about a Trans PacificPartnership with India included in it.
This is the kind of thinking that I thinkis really important because if it's just
US, India, that's great,well and good, strong,
but there are many more countries that->> Ambassador Kenneth Juster: We should
even build on the quad in which Japan andAustralia have a trade relationship.
(26:55):
Japan and India does, Australia and Indiadoes, The United States has with everyone,
but the United States and India don't.
And if those four countries canbuild out trade relations and
gradually get other countriesin Southeast Asia to join in.
I think that would bea very powerful signal and
very positive for economic growth.
(27:17):
So by and large, what we're hearing is from our two
ambassadors that economicconvergence is a real opportunity.
A lot of people have also talkedabout strategic convergence,
especially vis a vis facing China as abaseline for promoting India US relations.
Ambassador Juster has writtena paper about TPP plus India,
(27:37):
Sumit's written a book onChina India relations.
Sumit, what do you thinkabout the potential for
strategic convergence regarding China?,and just generally,
what do you see as the relationship,the promises and the pitfalls?
>> Dr. Sumit Ganguly (27:52):
To begin with, to disabuse anyone of any notion that
there is an imminent breakthroughin Sino Indian relations.
Let me say it's not about to happen, solet's not even entertain that prospect.
There has been a little pause inthe relationship because China
(28:13):
is extremely preoccupied with the 145%tariff that it is contending with,
it does not want trouble on itssouthern border with India.
But let me be abundantly clear on this,
this is an enduring rivalry,this is not going away anytime soon.
(28:35):
It's an enduring rivalry because the PRC,regardless of regime,
sees India as the principalimpediment in Asia to
the realization of its dreamof dominating all of Asia.
The other impediment, of course,remains the United States, but
(28:57):
from a regional standpoint,India is the principal impediment.
The tragedy is that India hasa massive trade deficit with China and
it's worsening andIndian policymakers have
not come up with a panacea foraddressing this.
(29:19):
The PRC has flooded India,just as it did to the United States,
with a range of cheap consumer goodsto which the Indian middle class
has become largely addicted, andthere is no quick substitute for this.
There are complex reasons why Indiacannot provide suitable substitutes for
(29:44):
Chinese goods and having to do with deeplyflawed economic choices made decades ago,
and there is path dependenceas a consequence.
But the central point Iwill make is that Galwan,
the incursions in Ladakh in2020 is simply a precursor
(30:07):
of further incursionsthat are going to come.
If I put on my political scientist andinternational relations
scholars hat these are whatare called limited probes which
are designed to test your metalalong an unsettled border.
And these limited probes essentiallygive the PRC information
(30:32):
about India's capabilities andresolve along the border,
they tried it and they discoveredIndia's weaknesses in 2020.
You know, to quote McGeorge Bundy,who said at the height of the Vietnam War
when an American military basewas attacked in Vietnam Pleiku.
(30:55):
At a press conference,he said Pleikus are like streetcars,
to paraphrase McGeorge Bundy, Galwan isa streetcar, there's another one coming.
And if anyone believes otherwise,
they are living in a worldof their own making.
(31:17):
And my view is that Indiahas to do two things, one,
bolster its own domestic capabilities andsecond,
the only viable strategic partnerit has is the United States.
Unless New Delhi comesto this realization,
(31:37):
it is going to be facedwith multiple Galwans,
which are only going to SAP its strength.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (31:45):
Ambassador Menon, I think you mentioned something very
similar, you mentioned that you are inthe minority in this camp here,
thinking about the the USas a strategic partner.
Just like to hear you reflecton what Sumit has said and
whether there is a convergencebetween the US and India.
It could be provoked,encouraged by what we see with China, or
whether we're looking atthe wrong sort of elements here,
(32:05):
whether we should be looking at trade andother things.
>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon (32:08):
From my point of view,
opinion in India has alreadyshifted considerably.
I think most people in India doregard the US as a strategic partner
in shamelessly plugging something.
I've just published a small book whichsays India in a world adrift, and
it actually predicts that that'sgoing to get much closer.
(32:28):
But the Congress is based on a commonview of what Asia should be like.
It shouldn't be dominated by one power,that it needs to be open, plural.
And you know, but I think we also.
And so if you look at the extent ofIndia-US cooperation in defense and
(32:49):
security and intelligence,it's really unprecedented.
And soI think that understanding exists already.
The problem, the fundamental issuethough is that India is both
the continental and maritime power.
We have both continental security.
I mean, we have the world'slargest boundary dispute, right?
(33:11):
138,000 square miles,it's more than most members of the UN.
And we're a maritime power.
We worry about what'shappening in the Indian Ocean,
across the whole Indo Pacific, actually.
I mean, 38% of our trade goesthrough the South China Sea.
And so what happens acrossthe Indo Pacific matters.
The US Is not present oncontinental Asia anymore.
(33:35):
We have to work with whoeverwe find in continental Asia.
But if you look at what we're doing on themaritime space, it's incredible actually.
There are degrees of interoperabilitytoday which would have been unthinkable
ten years ago.
And Ken had a lot todo with this actually.
So I think we need tounderstand that both sides,
(33:58):
this is why the word partners isreally the right word because it's not
that we have identical interests orthat all our interests are going to be
dealt with by the other identicallyas the way we would like them to be.
I mean, Ukraine is a good example of that.
But that's not going to affectthe course of the relationship,
(34:20):
because there's enoughfundamental congruence.
If you have the same viewof where Asia is going,
if you have a similar kind of viewof what China is trying to do.
And what the effects of China'srise have been in the region.
We will work together andyou'll find more and
more to do together, andthat you have done successfully.
(34:43):
So sometimes I think we outthink ourselves, we overanalyze.
This is like taking the temperatureof a patient every hour, and
you'll convince yourself he's dyingbecause you frighten yourself.
The British Empire had this problem.
They didn't have an intelligencesystem until 1857.
(35:05):
So they did great things.
They conquered India.
After that, after 1857,they set up an intelligence system and
frightened the wits out of themselves andsaw enemies everywhere.
And that was the end of the expansion.
And there is partly thisproblem with India.
US relations are doing well, andare doing well despite the analysis and
(35:27):
all the chatterati andwhat the talking heads make of it.
So I really think there's enough strategiccongruence there to actually see us
through.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (35:36):
That's terrific.
So just turning now from east to west, thePalgam tragedy that's recently happened,
news in the US on India right now isdominated, I would say, by two topics.
One is the trade deal thatmight be coming through.
And then, of course, this Pilgrim tragedy.
(35:57):
I'm interested, Ambassador Juster,what can the US do to support India
in this time where theyface this terrorist attack?
>> Ambassador Kenneth Juster (36:04):
Well, I happened to be in India during the last
major terrorist attack in Pulwama, and
I would think we would do thingssimilar to what we did then.
We provided intelligence support.
We accepted the fact that India would betaking retaliatory action of some sort,
we wanted it to be proportionate andnot disproportionate.
(36:27):
We want it to be based onevidence that they have as to
where the terrorists may have come from.
And we then worked closelywith both India and
Pakistan to try to ensure thatthe conflict that came out of
Pulwama did not escalateinto something more drastic.
(36:49):
And so I think, again, the United Stateshas already said that we are with
India in terms of ourconcerns about terrorism and
the need to respond forcefullyto something that occurs.
And I believe we will be sharinginformation that might be helpful if and
when India takes response.
(37:10):
But India is going to do what it feelsappropriate at the time of its choosing
and in the manner that it feels best.
And, you know,
I think the Pakistanis have indicatedthey may then do something as well.
And if necessary, we're not gonna mediatebetween the two, that's not our role.
But we will try to help preventan unnecessary escalation overall.
(37:34):
But, you know, we feel very strongly,and this was again part of
the Modi Trump statement, thatterrorism is a scourge on humanity and
we've got to work together to putan end to it as best as possible.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (37:50):
So in Trump I, Ambassador Juster with Secretary Pompeo
played a leading role inencouraging restraint.
And should it come to that->> Ambassador Kenneth Juster: Know,
what it is, is that if each countrythinks the other is moving nuclear
weapons in a way that can be escalatory,the one country that has
visibility into that perhaps morethan any other is the United States.
(38:15):
And to the degree we're ableto convince both sides that
that's not what's really going on,we don't let rumors and
interpretations get out of hand overall.
And that's what we did in 2019.
So hopefully, ideally,
those lines of communication are alreadyestablished between India and
(38:37):
Pakistan, but the US can alsopotentially play a role there.
I think this is a good pointto open up to questions.
I see several hands coming up,please, Gaurav.
>> Gaurav Bansal (38:46):
Thank you.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (38:48):
We've got mics.
>> Gaurav Bansal (38:49):
Hi, my name is Gaurav Bansal.
I had the pleasure of working for Mr.
Juster and have served in India threetimes with the State Department.
I'm currently with the Houseof Foreign Affairs Committee.
So I'm gonna actually use thischance to ask Mr. Menon a question.
I'd say there's a lotof chatter about what
to do if there is a Chineseinvasion of Taiwan.
(39:15):
What do you think India's stance would be?
Do you think India would try to helpan international coalition if we were
to put something like that together?
And what would India be capable of doing?
Thank you.
>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon (39:28):
Well, I think there's a whole lot of
contingencies, you know, short of fullfledged invasion, blockades, islands.
I mean, there's.
And I'm sure that our peopleare talking about it.
We've been talking about it fora long time, between India and the US,
about what kinds of contingencies wecan expect and what each side would do.
(39:51):
As our capabilities grow, obviously,and they've grown over the years,
there are more things that wecould do that we could quite.
Coordinate that we couldn't, but
I haven't seen any of it inthe public domain so far.
But it's the kind of conversation.
That's why I say that our relationshiphas grown to a point where it's
(40:13):
the kind of conversation which you wouldexpect partners to have, and we do.
And, andit's not the only one of its kind.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (40:24):
That's great to hear.
Yes, please.
>> Kami Burton (40:30):
Yes, sir.
My name is Kami Burton withthe Pakistani Spectator.
And my question is about the currentissue between India and Pakistan.
And Trump's statement he saidthey are both best friends.
Is that because he knew that there wasa accident in Pakistani Balochistan
where whole train was hijacked andIndia might have involvement with it.
(40:52):
And my second question is how can Indiabecome a powerhouse when you have
Islamic cancer?
Next country According to Statistic15 Army Chief of retired army chief
are living abroad Pakistani army chief andonly one is in Pakistan.
I mean this country is ruledby thieves and crooks.
And I think this was failure ofWinston Churchill who divided India into
(41:16):
two parts.
But which party has better vision, BJP or
Congress to somehow resolvethese issues peacefully.
And I know being Indian you don'twant 200 million troublemaker to be
in India because you alreadyhave like 150 million.
But I mean, is there any solution,
(41:37):
is there any vision about bringing thesetwo country at least not like America and
Canada, butat least they can survive peacefully.
Thank you very much.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (41:47):
Sumit, do you want to take this one?
This was a question I think about Pakistanand what I think the US should be thinking
about as well as what India should bethinking about vis a vis Pakistan, which I
would say, I would describe it personallyas a state on life support right now,
it can get much worse, butit's not exactly flourishing.
Sumit, would you like to saysome words about Pakistan?
>> Dr. Sumit Ganguly (42:08):
Sure.
The central problem is thatregardless of what India does or
does not do, Pakistan needs to reconcileitself to the status quo in Kashmir.
An attempt to revise borders in blood,whether through
(42:29):
the incursions that tookplace in 1999 in Kargil or
subsequent support forany number of terrorist
organizations from its own soilin is a losing proposition.
The discrepancies between India andPakistan have become so great.
(42:50):
And Pakistan'sdisproportionate contribution
to its defense budgetis a proposition that
cannot be sustained over the long term.
And unless the military establishmentin Pakistan recognizes that this,
(43:13):
to use their term,that a war of a thousand cuts is actually
a losing proposition until itcomes to that realization,
I'm afraid we will get no resolutionof the Indo Pakistani conflict.
Abandoning this fruitless quest
(43:37):
to wrest all of Kashmir backto Pakistan is a lost cause.
And until that realization dawnson the military establishment
which casts an overweeningshadow on Pakistan's
(43:57):
domestic politics andforeign policy choices,
I'm afraid that this is going toremain a source of contention and
periodic violence tothe detriment of both countries.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (44:15):
Ambassador Menon, on this question,
just following up the question of whetherBJP or Congress has a better view on this.
It seems like there'sa lot of cross party,
cross party convergence onmatters of foreign policy and
particularly on Pakistan, especially inlight of the recent terrorist attacks.
Would you agree with that assessment or
would you say that one party hasa different vision from another?
>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon (44:36):
I don't think it's very different fundamentally.
I think what has changed becauseif you look at it between
Vajpayee Mohan Singh you hada very similar approach.
But I think what Mumbai,Obama, all these have done is
they've convinced peopleacross the political spectrum,
(44:59):
both BJP that its that changingPakistan's behavior is near impossible.
Now that's a very sad conclusionto come to because it then cuts
off a whole set of policy optionswhich have much more hope.
Right.
And that's one reason why you're inthis situation I think today where
(45:24):
people fear the worst though I don'tthink it's actually going to happen.
I think there are sensible peopleon both sides and nobody wants to,
the risks aren't worthit on both sides but
there will probably be someform of kinetic action.
I mean it can't not be, but how farit will go and so on, I don't know.
(45:47):
But it's sad because so
today I don't think you can actually drawa distinction between Congress, bjp.
This that you heard inthe all-party meeting,
the Congress actually supportedwhat the government has been doing.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (46:02):
Ambassador Menon has some nice quotes as well in
the New York Times about this recently.
Akshar, please.
>> Akshar (46:09):
Thank you, Dean Shah and thank you Professor Ganguly,
Ambassador Juster and Ambassador Menon.
I just wanted to touch about restraint.
Ambassador Menon, because you wrotea lot about it after you know, 26 11.
That was of course one of the worstattacks and there the juxtaposition that
we're seeing now andthen in terms of one of the worst attacks.
I want to touch upon that because rightnow it almost seems like, you know,
(46:30):
cutting off Indus Water Treatywhich never happened and you know,
talks about that 65, 70.
Yes.>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon: Bans.
The bands, sorry, abeyance rather.
And that would just be seem likea proportion that the Pakistani military
has spoken about equivalent to war.
I just want to know howthe Pakistani thinks.
>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon (46:47):
Well, they said if you shut off the water,
it's an act of war.
Nobody shut off the water.
>> Akshar (46:54):
Exactly.
So I'm just curious.
>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon (46:55):
It's not the easiest thing to do.
>> Akshar (46:57):
Right.
I'm just curious right now given that therelations have been at a nader since 2019,
there's been no High Commissioner.
The worst we've seen since 71 to 76.
Where does the Pakistanimilitary strategy go from here?
What is their thought process right now?
>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon (47:12):
I can't answer for Pakistan.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (47:16):
Although it would be fun to watch.
Yes.
Yeah, please.
>> Speaker 8 (47:23):
I also follow up with his.
Thanks.
Thank you all forhosting a wonderful panel and
going from the west on to the east,I wanted to look into the South China Sea.
Ambassador Juster andAmbassador Menon had spoken on it a bit.
Do we see any preeminent like partnershipsin regard to India and any Southeast Asian
(47:45):
countries vis a vis their look eastpolicy at all or act east, rather?
And can you all speak about thata little bit more, I guess,
in the rising tensions inthe region as a whole?
Thank you.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (47:56):
Would you like to go first, Ambassador?
>> Ambassador Kenneth Juster (47:58):
I'm not an expert on this, but.
But India wants to continue to develop and
cultivate its economic relations withthe countries of Southeast Asia.
And India and the United States haveboth said that ASEAN centrality
is important to the broaderconcept of the Indo Pacific.
I'm not sure that India is doing security,extensive efforts,
(48:22):
although they do do jointexercises with countries and
certainly with the Quad countries.
While it's not underthe auspices of the Quad,
they do a Malabar naval exercise,there's domain awareness exercises.
And again, there may be bilateralexercise that India does
(48:43):
with some of the countriesin Southeast Asia.
Shankar may know more about that.
But certainly this is a critical region,and
it's one that the countries there don'twant to have to choose one side or
the other,whether it's the United States or China.
They like to have goodrelations with everyone, but
(49:03):
they're going to beimportant economic players.
And, you know, I think that waspart of the missed opportunity for
both the United States and India, notbeing in sort of a regional architecture.
But India does have a free trade agreementwith the Asean countries more broadly.
Sometimes they're concerned that Chinauses that as a backdoor to penetrate
the Indian market.
(49:23):
But it's certainly an area of focus andopportunity.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (49:28):
Is this an area where the US and
India can work together towardsapproaching these Southeast Asian
countries in a meaningful respect,would you say.
Or is this->> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon: On trade
or on->> Dr. Dinsha Mistree: Open, I mean,
I think trade, perhaps, you can alsothink about perhaps defense and security.
>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon (49:42):
On defense and
security, there's beena fair amount of work.
It started, I mean, after all,the Quad started with the tsunami, right?
In 2004, when these were the four naviesthat actually responded, and since then,
also, if you look at it, counter piracy,for instance, India's done.
(50:06):
There's a fusion center in Singaporewe've worked with Malaysia, Singapore,
all the Malacca Straits,Indonesia, the others, Thailand.
There's a lot of work done betweenthe navies across the entire Indo Pacific.
It's in bits and pieces.
Malabar, during Quad 1,we'd invited Singapore,
(50:27):
Australia to Malabar, they're nowAustralia's back in Malabar in.
In Quad 2, okayain.
So there's a whole networkof sort of interrelations,
it's not a formal architecture,
unlike Europe orwhere Instead of that, there's this.
(50:48):
I'd say it's a networked arrangement, andyou'll notice that it has multiple sides.
We've sold missiles, for instance,Ramos missiles, to the Philippines.
We have naval cooperation with Vietnam.
I mean, you saw the Japaneseare in the Philippines right
(51:09):
now coordinating whattheir navies do together.
What you've seen is over the last decadeand a half is a real intensification
of defense and security linksacross the entire maritime Asia,
all those affected basicallyby the rise of China.
(51:30):
This is not an alternativeto the US Hub and spokes and
to US commitments to securityin the region at all.
But that's been strengthened too,whether it's US Japan, US Korea, etc.
US India ties,you've seen what's happened in defense.
But I would, I would look at it as,
as a web rather than assome formal architecture.
(51:51):
And that seems to work better formost people in Asia,
this pragmatic buteffective way of dealing with it.
>> Ambassador Kenneth Juster (52:03):
I would just add that there is a sensitivity by
all countries that it not beseen as an anti China web or
that an Asian NATO whichthe Chinese have complained about.
But as Shankar saying, there's beenjust an increase in coordination,
whether it's on humanitarian assistance,whether it's on domain awareness,
(52:24):
whether it's on anti piracy.
What is interesting, anda lot of commentators don't pick this up,
the quadrilateral securitydialogue that began in 2007
is not referred to by the partiesas security dialogue.
The word security is not in there,it's just referred to as the quad.
>> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon (52:43):
Yeah. >> Ambassador Kenneth Juster
because there's a desire not to make itlook like it's a security arrangement.
But I assume, andI have no doubt that some of these
issues are discussed generallybehind closed doors,
but with a sensitivityto not making it seem
(53:03):
like it's an anti Chinamilitary coalition.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (53:08):
So I think I would
like->> Ambassador Shivshankar Menon: There
must be a lot going on becausethe Chinese used to say,
quad is foam on the ocean, but now theysay it's a nation NATO in the making.
So they seem to take it seriously.
So this is a bittersweet panel for, it's bitter for
two reasons.
I think it's sweet because we've talkeda lot about the potential for US India and
(53:29):
they've given.
Our panel has given us a lotto be optimistic about.
It's bitter one,because two esteemed gentlemen to my.
To my left have worked sohard on the relationship and
I would love it if they were still ingovernment promoting and building and
doing the things that have reallydefined this U S India relationship.
It's bitter for a second reason too,which is in the course of an hour,
(53:52):
we can only touch on somany different topics.
However, we've got a receptionto follow right after this and
I think that you can grill andPepper our esteemed panel separately,
outside of the din of the cameras andthe rest of the crowd,
I'd like to give, of all people,Sumit, the last word as the director
(54:13):
of our Huntington program onstrengthening US India relationship.
So Sumit, vote of thanks,as they say in India.
>> Dr. Sumit Ganguly (54:21):
Thanks.
Yes, I'll try andavoid that particular phrase.
I've never cared forit because you don't get to vote.
But I do want to thank mycolleague Dinshwa Misri for
presiding over this panel.
To our two panelists,Ambassador Kenneth Juster and
(54:45):
former Foreign Secretary andNational Security Adviser,.
Ambassador Shivshankar Menon,and obviously,
the extraordinary staff of Hoover,Washington D.C.
and Hoover Central back in Palo Alto.
(55:06):
They are too numerous to mention and
I'm always mindful that I'mgoing to forget someone.
So I'm just going to issue a blanket vote,
you implanted in my heada sweeping set of thanks for
the extraordinary amount of effort and
(55:27):
organization that went intomaking this event happen.
And we look forward to doingsimilar events in the future.
Not necessarily linked to the launchof the Hoover annual survey,
but on topical issuesconcerning US India relations.
(55:48):
And since Hoover has madethis extraordinary investment
in this project, which is unique,unlike most people,
I will not say quite unique becausesomething is unique or it's not.
And all too often in the United States,people say this is virtually unique.
(56:10):
No, it can't be virtually unique,it s unique.
And this is a unique program, and
we hope to see many of you backat our events here in Washington.
Thank you for coming andwithout any further ado, to this marvelous
reception that the Hoover staffin Washington have put together.
(56:30):
Thank you.
>> Dr. Dinsha Mistree (56:31):
Thank you. >> [APPLAUSE]
[MUSIC]
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!