If so much was truly invested in India-US relations in the last 25 years, the rupture would not have been this quick. The truth is that this so-called strategic partnership was always minimal and patchy. 1/4
Every time the US perceived a conflict between a short-term interest and a long-term building of partnership with India, the former was chosen and the latter was taken for granted. 👇shows the variety of issues that were prioritized over 🇮🇳 partnership 2/4
The result was a partnership hyped up in speeches and joint statements, yet very weak in its foundations. Almost no political faction in the US came to defend this strategic partnership in the last month, when it has been under attack every day of the week and the weekends. 3/4
Even the arsonists who tried to set fire to the Indian consulate in San Francisco have received better protection than the India strategic partnership. This probably sums up the neglect central to this relationship. 4/4
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
There is a bipartisan disinterest in the India relationship. If you ask, both Democrats and Republicans will say it is an important relationship. But will they prioritize it when there is a clash in pursuing India relations and doing other things? 1/7
These other things could be: pressuring Russia, penalizing those buying Iranian oil, spreading democracy and human rights, logistical access to Afghanistan, safeguarding nukes in Pakistan, reaching an economic/climate agreement with China, and so on. 2/7
Finally, even if there are people who care enough about India to prioritize the relationship, and if they are in a position to influence, will they use their scarce political capital for this purpose? The US does a ton of things around the world at the same time. 3/7
We should reflect on why we got this so wrong. This has been a diplomatic earthquake. However, Indians and India-focused scholars ignored the signs indicating that we were living in a perilous seismic zone. A thread 🧵 on the problems in our study of India-US follows: 1/n
First, many (if not most) who study aspects of India-US ties do not study any other country. If they did, they would have realized that India does not figure in the top 5 partners of the US in the Indo-Pacific, which itself is 3rd priority after Europe and the Middle East. 2/14
As a result, we are misled by the flowery language in joint statements and begin to truly believe that the India-US partnership is the most imp in the 21st century. For the US, India might be the partner number 23 or 37-- in other words, not important at all. 3/14
The real implications of Indian jet losses on May 7: Much of the Pakistani rhetoric around Indian jet losses is to show that Pakistan won this round of conflict on May 7-10 against India. I think this inference is flawed, even going by Pakistan's own logic. 1/18
First of all, there is not much point in declaring "victory" or "loss" in a short conflict like this, but let's play along for a moment. India hit nine terror-associated sites, including high-profile ones in Muridke and Bahawalpur, on the night of May 6-7. 2/18
Pakistan's success in air-to-air combat came on the morning of May 7 itself when, reportedly, multiple Indian jets were downed. If this was sufficient for victory, the Pakistani Army should have taken the win and accepted the offer of not escalating further. 3/18
Today, both Penny Wong and S Jaishankar were asked if the inconsistency in positions between India and the rest of the Quad on Russia creating problems for the Quad. Both the foreign ministers replied in the negative. A small thread 1/10 foreignminister.gov.au/minister/penny…
India is the novelty in the Quad. Australia was a US ally long before the emergence of China threat. It will mostly remain a US ally if the China threat magically disappears tomorrow. The roots of US-Australia alliance lie in identity & history of ties with the UK. 2/10
Japan was, similarly, a US ally long before the emergence of China threat and will remain so if the China threat magically disappears tomorrow. The roots of US-Japan alliance lie in how the World War II ended with Japan's surrender and occupation by Allied forces. 3/10
A thread 🧵 on India-US relations. Last few weeks/months have been puzzling. Americans-- the govt less than strategic community-- have been surprised over the extent of divergence between India and the US over Russian invasion of Ukraine. 1/20
Indians thought America's last excuse for its bewildering Pakistan embrace ended with the exit from Afghanistan. Now, we are finding that that is not so-- Pakistan's role has reduced in US calculus but it is still not completely a matter of the past. 2/20
Does it seem like we are sliding back to Cold war days? Of course, there is a lot of difference: India-US ties have never been stronger & Pakistan-US ties are very weak if not the weakest. The recent public admonishing of a Russian president by an Indian PM was a rare event. 3/20
A thread on Indian position on Russian invasion of Ukraine. Why it is not a puzzle and actually eminently defensible. First, the near-term pragmatism: presence of thousands of Indian students in Ukraine. 1/n
We saw this in Yemen. Good relations with both parties in the conflict, and especially the aggressor, helped in the evacuation of Indian citizens. If required, India would try to leverage its relationship with Russia to do the same. 2/n
Second-- and everyone and their uncle have already said this-- Russia is India's pre-eminent arms supplier. It is not just any commercial relationship that can be easily substitutable. Russia supplies to India stuff that is not offered by anyone else: SSN, S-400, you name it. 3/n