Thirty years ago, the United States and India were anything but allies. Now the U.S. is willing to allow India to obtain and foster a nuclear program. What brought about this change in their relationship, and what specific benefits are there for each, both immediate and in the long-term?

The improvement in U.S.-India relations was brought about by shifts at three levels: international, domestic, and national leadership. Internationally, the world system changed with the collapse of the former Soviet Union, and India’s political system sought to then align closer with the United States. Domestically, India’s political system rejected older socialist economic models, and opted for models based on free markets, trade, and foreign investment which made India more appealing to the U.S. At the leadership level, the leaders of both countries have been personally interested in advancing ties between the two countries.

The long term benefits of a stronger U.S.-India relationship are both political and economic. Politically, both countries would coordinate more closely in world affairs and in areas of mutual interest to each country. One could see greater coordination on, for example, items at the United Nations Security Souncil, the International Atomic Energy Agency, and Asian regional security organizations. Economically, both countries gain from trade and investment. For example, a growing Indian economy requires hundreds of billions of dollars in investment in critical areas such as power, transportation, finance, banking, etc, and this will provide opportunities for U.S. firms.

India has had a long and often contentious relationship with its neighbors, Pakistan and China. How do those countries perceive this agreement, and what impact will it have on those countries nuclear programs and their relationships with India and the United States?

A stronger U.S.-India partnership may proceed alongside a continuing U.S.-Pakistan partnership. Pakistan still receives a few billion dollars of U.S. aid annually. Strong U.S. relations with Egypt and Israel, and with Turkey and Greece, illustrate that Washington can in fact maintain good ties with pairs of states having contentious relationships with each other.

Clearly, allowing a nation to expand its fledgling nuclear program comes with some inherent risk. What proliferation concerns are there, and what direction do you feel this agreement is going to take India’s nuclear weapons program?

The civilian U.S.-India nuclear cooperation agreement does not directly affect India’s nuclear weapons program. India will advance or restrain its nuclear weapons program independent of the civilian agreement. However, the civilian agreement can make India’s government more cautious about undermining global norms such as those against nuclear testing.

Countries like North Korea and Iran are infamous for continuing to pursue nuclear technology. What does this agreement say to them, and do you think this will force them to reconsider their policies and cooperate with United Nations weapons inspectors?

The U.S.-India civil nuclear agreement essentially grants India access to civilian nuclear technology after about thirty years of denial of such technology and the denial was primarily because of India’s nuclear weapons program. Thus, the civilian nuclear agreement can send a strong message to countries seeking nuclear weapons that those countries would be denied civilian nuclear technology, for a long period of some thirty years, if they develop nuclear weapons.

Posted by Matt VanderZalm on October 16, 2007 11:42 AM | Permalink