NEW DELHI Five years ago John Kerry, then a senator, helped persuade Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to pursue a civil nuclear agreement with the United States despite considerable political risks, and on Monday the two will meet again.
Nothing so momentous is likely to emerge from this years meeting between the prime minister and Mr. Kerry, who is arriving here Sunday in his new role as secretary of state.
The two mens shared history symbolizes a relationship between India and the United States that has grown so close in recent years that there are few surprises.
Nothing dramatic is happening or is going to happen, said Naresh Chandra, a former ambassador to the United States from India. Things are boringly stable.
Still, the two men have a lot to talk about on such issues as the future of Afghanistan, Chinas growing assertiveness in the region, investment rules for foreigners in India and pending immigration legislation in the United States, officials said.
Whether the famously taciturn Mr. Singh gets a word in edgewise with the loquacious Mr. Kerry is uncertain. The conversation is likely to be livelier when Mr. Kerry meets Salman Khurshid, Indias foreign minister.
Mr. Khurshids recent elevation to foreign minister is a sign of how much the relationship between the United States and India has deepened. He lived for years in the United States and is known to favor better ties between the two giants.
Ashley J. Tellis, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, said that the relationship between Mr. Kerry and Mr. Khurshid could be crucial.
Far more gets done in bilateral ties when people invest in personal relationships, Mr. Tellis said.
In a video released on the eve of his visit, Mr. Kerry said that the two countries were going to talk about our shared interest in enhancing economic integration in the region; our commitment to a secure, stable and prosperous Afghanistan; and our support for Indias regional leadership.
Mr. Kerry is expected to sign an agreement providing American assistance to Indian efforts to open 200 community colleges that would train workers in marketable job skills, officials said, while an agreement on increased military cooperation is also likely. In a briefing for foreign reporters here, a top Indian official noted that India had more military exercises with the United States than with any other nation.
We have a very active relationship, and many of the things which five years ago or 10 years ago would have been considered remarkable are now normal, said the official, who insisted on anonymity when discussing military matters.
India has been courted in recent years by every major world power. Its huge purchases of military hardware have contributed greatly to this geopolitical popularity, but so has the sense that its affections are winnable.
Indian officials have coyly refused to commit too much to any particular suitor. Li Keqiang of China came courting last month, bestowing upon India the honor of being the first country he visited as prime minister. Mr. Singh received Mr. Li cordially but then flew off to Japan, a visit that was seen as a mild rebuke to China.
No such rebuke is likely after Mr. Kerrys visit, but no great breakthrough is likely either. In part that is because national elections will take place in India next year, and cozying up to the United States has never been a particularly good electoral strategy. Communists are still relevant politically here, and one of the few issues that unites them and a sizable contingent of Indias intellectual class is anti-Americanism.
Those electoral politics are there, but they are changing, said K. Shankar Bajpai, a former Indian ambassador to the United States, China and Pakistan. There is hardly anyone in India of any prominence who doesnt have a relative in the United States and doesnt love going there.
Another reason progress is often slow is that India has just three diplomats charged with negotiating agreements between the two, and they must oversee 36 continuing dialogues covering issues like defense, space exploration, security and scientific and health agreements. American diplomats complain that getting a moment with their harried Indian counterparts can be a challenge.
But an intriguing area of discussion between the two countries is still energy. The civil nuclear agreement in 2008 was a landmark politically but has been a bust commercially. Other energy initiatives could have a different outcome.
Mr. Kerry is personally committed to clean energy, while India is desperately looking for ways to bolster the stability and capacity of its electrical grid.
I think energy is one place that the United States and India can make really needed, concrete progress, Mr. Chandra said. Because everyone knows that Indias energy needs are going to be a problem.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/22/w...t-no-surprises-likely-for-kerry-in-india.html
Nothing so momentous is likely to emerge from this years meeting between the prime minister and Mr. Kerry, who is arriving here Sunday in his new role as secretary of state.
The two mens shared history symbolizes a relationship between India and the United States that has grown so close in recent years that there are few surprises.
Nothing dramatic is happening or is going to happen, said Naresh Chandra, a former ambassador to the United States from India. Things are boringly stable.
Still, the two men have a lot to talk about on such issues as the future of Afghanistan, Chinas growing assertiveness in the region, investment rules for foreigners in India and pending immigration legislation in the United States, officials said.
Whether the famously taciturn Mr. Singh gets a word in edgewise with the loquacious Mr. Kerry is uncertain. The conversation is likely to be livelier when Mr. Kerry meets Salman Khurshid, Indias foreign minister.
Mr. Khurshids recent elevation to foreign minister is a sign of how much the relationship between the United States and India has deepened. He lived for years in the United States and is known to favor better ties between the two giants.
Ashley J. Tellis, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, said that the relationship between Mr. Kerry and Mr. Khurshid could be crucial.
Far more gets done in bilateral ties when people invest in personal relationships, Mr. Tellis said.
In a video released on the eve of his visit, Mr. Kerry said that the two countries were going to talk about our shared interest in enhancing economic integration in the region; our commitment to a secure, stable and prosperous Afghanistan; and our support for Indias regional leadership.
Mr. Kerry is expected to sign an agreement providing American assistance to Indian efforts to open 200 community colleges that would train workers in marketable job skills, officials said, while an agreement on increased military cooperation is also likely. In a briefing for foreign reporters here, a top Indian official noted that India had more military exercises with the United States than with any other nation.
We have a very active relationship, and many of the things which five years ago or 10 years ago would have been considered remarkable are now normal, said the official, who insisted on anonymity when discussing military matters.
India has been courted in recent years by every major world power. Its huge purchases of military hardware have contributed greatly to this geopolitical popularity, but so has the sense that its affections are winnable.
Indian officials have coyly refused to commit too much to any particular suitor. Li Keqiang of China came courting last month, bestowing upon India the honor of being the first country he visited as prime minister. Mr. Singh received Mr. Li cordially but then flew off to Japan, a visit that was seen as a mild rebuke to China.
No such rebuke is likely after Mr. Kerrys visit, but no great breakthrough is likely either. In part that is because national elections will take place in India next year, and cozying up to the United States has never been a particularly good electoral strategy. Communists are still relevant politically here, and one of the few issues that unites them and a sizable contingent of Indias intellectual class is anti-Americanism.
Those electoral politics are there, but they are changing, said K. Shankar Bajpai, a former Indian ambassador to the United States, China and Pakistan. There is hardly anyone in India of any prominence who doesnt have a relative in the United States and doesnt love going there.
Another reason progress is often slow is that India has just three diplomats charged with negotiating agreements between the two, and they must oversee 36 continuing dialogues covering issues like defense, space exploration, security and scientific and health agreements. American diplomats complain that getting a moment with their harried Indian counterparts can be a challenge.
But an intriguing area of discussion between the two countries is still energy. The civil nuclear agreement in 2008 was a landmark politically but has been a bust commercially. Other energy initiatives could have a different outcome.
Mr. Kerry is personally committed to clean energy, while India is desperately looking for ways to bolster the stability and capacity of its electrical grid.
I think energy is one place that the United States and India can make really needed, concrete progress, Mr. Chandra said. Because everyone knows that Indias energy needs are going to be a problem.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/22/w...t-no-surprises-likely-for-kerry-in-india.html
