• The relations between India and the United States go back even before India secured its independence. It is interesting to note that it was an essay by American Humanist and philosopher Henry David Thoreau on ‘Civil Disobedience’, which inspired Gandhian strategy in South Africa and later in India. A few decades later, it was the Gandhian ideal of non-violence, which became a major inspiration for the ‘Civil Rights Movement’, led by Martin Luther King Jr.
• Even before Gandhi, Vivekananda visited America in 1893 and left a lasting impression about India’s spiritualism and philosophy. Later in 1913, the USA also became instrumental when the Ghadr party was formed in San Fransisco (USA).
• India US used to be known as ‘estranged democracies’ (Dennis Kux). While Vajpayee called the USA a natural ally, Prime Minister Modi held that India’s US relationship has overcome the “hesitations of history”. In the words of Indian foreign minister S Jaishankar, “India and the US earlier used to deal with each other, and now they work with each other.”
• Currently, there is strong defence cooperation, civil nuclear cooperation, high technology and space, and clean energy cooperation. Both are working together for stability in the Indo-Pacific region and there is much more to do. There are more than 50 dialogue forums where there is regular interaction, there is strong people-to-people connections, and the relationship has become too broad.

China factor

• China forms an important factor in the India US relations hip. USA sees a strategic interest in India, in the context of the rise of China. New Delhi’s own China strategy involves building partnerships (external balancing) and envisions a key role for the U.S. Some Indian policymakers highlight another benefit of the U.S. relationship – “Beijing takes Delhi more seriously because Washington does.”
• Both India and the U.S. share an interest in managing China’s rise. Neither would like a dominant China in Asia, and India/USA playing a minimal role. Although there is a recognition that China will play a crucial role in Asia, it is the nature of that role that concerns both countries. For this purpose, there is an East Asia dialogue in place that focuses on the strategic environment of Indo Pacific. The countries are also members of QUAD, a quadrilateral forum aimed at containing the Chinese actions in the Indo-Pacific.
• From another angle, neither India nor the U.S. is interested in the other party getting too close or too distant from China. For New Delhi, a too-cosy Sino-U.S. relationship (G-2) will deeply disturb its security equation. A China-U.S. conflict, on the other hand, is also not desirable since it will destabilize the region, forcing India to choose between the two. For the United States, the deterioration in India-China relations will drag it into an unwilling battle, and too much bonhomie between India and China would diminish the US influence in the Indo-Pacific, making its allies insecure.
• China certainly looms large on Indo-US relations. However, it is also important for Indo-US policymakers to keep in mind that “a partnership solely based on China is neither desirable nor sustainable.”

C Rajamohan says

• “In comparison to China, India fails to effectively combine power, principle and pragmatism. India should resist temptations to look at geopolitics in ideological terms. For long India wanted a multipolar world, now India should learn the art of living in the multipolar world.”
• “The India-US defence compact, it should be clear, is not an effort to contain Beijing. China is too large and powerful to be boxed in. It is an attempt to build a multipolar Asia with sufficient deterrent capabilities and ensure respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all states in the region.”
• “The credit for moving India and the US closer than ever before goes to the assertive policies of Xi Jinping.”
• “Democracy and nonalignment are part of the long-standing foreign-policy ideologies of the United States and India, and they are likely to remain an important part of each country’s domestic discourse. But neither ideology can be an end itself.”
• “If India’s foreign policy elite worried about an American “alliance entrapment”, Washington was neuralgic about non-alignment.”