While the excitement over Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s engagements
in the U.S. is high, the expectations from his meeting with President
Barack Obama are lower
From the very beginning of his tenure when he invited
SAARC leaders to New Delhi, Prime Minister Narendra Modi made it clear
that he intended to pursue summit-style diplomacy: the idea that two
nations can resolve their issues when their leaders sit face-to-face.
The Prime Minister had reason for such confidence. As Chief Minister of
Gujarat, for example, he had single-handedly attracted foreign
investment to the State, winning invitations from China and Japan that
were only accorded to heads of state. When he took oath of office in the
presence of subcontinental leaders, summit-style diplomacy was
endorsed, given that Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka among others
had serious issues to resolve with India. Mr. Modi was able to transform
the atmosphere through bilateral meetings with those leaders.
The
Prime Minister then met other leaders at a gruelling pace, flying to
Brazil for the BRICS summit where he had one-on-one meetings with nearly
a dozen leaders. Each meeting was a first and the leaders said they
were impressed with him. Chinese President Xi Jinping later said, “I
didn’t feel like this was the first time we met. It was like meeting an
old friend.” The emphasis was clearly on Mr. Modi the person and not Mr.
Modi the Prime Minister, as he personalised relations with countries in
an unprecedented way, exchanging, for instance, gifts with Pakistan
Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif for their mothers.
Testing times
But
four months on and several bilateral meetings later, Mr. Modi’s
summit-style diplomacy is facing testing times. While his visit to Nepal
was hailed a success, his meeting with Prime Minister Sushil Koirala
did not yield two agreements that had been billed as “deliverables”: the
Power Trading Agreement and the Project Development Agreement. If this
was a disappointment, it was a minor one given the great response his
visit generated combined with his speech in Parliament.
Similiarly, his visit to Japan yielded a massive investment commitment
of $35 billion; yet, despite his close interaction with Japanese Prime
Minister Shinzo Abe (referred to as a “bromance”), the visit failed to
see the big takeaway — the signing of the nuclear agreement between the
two countries. Mr. Modi and Mr. Abe spent a considerable amount of time
in Kyoto and then in an official meeting along with delegations in
Tokyo, but were unable to close the considerable gap between Japan’s
expectations and what India was willing to give by way of assurances on
nuclear testing. While this was a tough challenge, many including Mr.
Modi had believed that it could be achieved during the visit. It was
even understood that his Japan visit had been put off twice so as to
allow time for nuclear negotiations. Meeting her Japanese counterpart
Fumio Kishida in Myanmar in August, External Affairs Minister Sushma
Swaraj had told him that India was “very keen” to conclude the civil
nuclear deal, and officials as well as background negotiators were
confident that the final push to deliver it would come from the personal
chemistry between Mr. Modi and Mr. Abe. The nuclear deal wasn’t the
only expected “deliverable” that didn’t come through. An agreement to
upgrade the strategic dialogue to the 2+2 format, a deal for US-2
amphibian aircraft, and the commercialisation of an agreement between
the Department of Atomic Energy and Toyota Tsusho for exporting rare
earth minerals didn’t make the “last mile” in negotiations. In a
scathing article in Japan Times titled “Showmanship trumps
substance during Modi visit,” analyst Jeff Kingston called the visit a
“much-touted summit that was an inconclusive washout.” Indian
commentators were much more charitable, and accepted that many of the
outcomes would be delivered in the months and years to come. Some
consolation came from Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbot’s visit to
sign the nuclear deal for Uranium imports.
The next
test came shortly after, with Mr. Xi’s visit. The bonhomie on the first
day of his visit and the picture of the two leaders sitting side-by-side
on a swing in Ahmedabad failed to achieve the change in the India-China
discourse that Mr. Modi had hoped for in his “INCH towards MILES” or
“India-China towards Millenium of Exceptional Synergy” analogy. Instead,
the discourse was overrun by the incidents at the border, and an
effective stand down of the troops could not be achieved despite the two
leaders spending hours in conversation, both by the Sabarmati
Riverfront and in Delhi’s official Hyderabad House.
Some
of the problem with the summit-style diplomacy format has been that Mr.
Modi, while being an effective interlocutor, has spread himself a bit
thin with the crushing pace of international engagements he has set for
himself. Also, a centralised style of foreign policy-making means the
MEA is often caught off-guard by decisions, and must then scramble to
try and put them into action. Finally, given Mr. Modi’s pace and the
paucity of officers in the MEA, there has been a reduced focus on
preparation and little ability for follow-up.
Modi-Obama meet
It
is with tempered expectations that the world now turns to the
Modi-Obama summit in Washington next week. While the excitement over his
engagements in the U.S. (more than 50 in five days) is high, the
expectations from the “big” engagement with Mr. Obama are lower, given
the past year’s dip in ties that Mr. Modi can hardly be held accountable
for. The reasons for the doldrums have been many: the diplomatic war
over Devyani Khobragade, the late start in engaging with Mr. Modi after
years of him being denied a visa, the U.S.’s own preoccupation with its
war on terror, the government shutdown and its economic resurgence. As a
result, issues like the nuclear logjam over India’s supplier liability
law, Intellectual Property Rights, trade issues over a bilateral
investment treaty, and the TFA, H1B visas are all hanging fire for the
moment. On the global stage, India isn’t expected to give much by way of
assistance to the U.S. in its war against the Islamic State, and hasn’t
been supportive of U.S. anger against Russia in Ukraine. These are all
issues that will fill up the menu of discussions between the two leaders
who have much in common — from their modest backgrounds to their
incredible skills at oratory and belief in resolving issues in a
personal style.
President Obama has also found over
the past year — from the cyber security summit with Mr. Xi that was
overshadowed by the Snowden revelations and his unsuccessful attempt at
curbing Russia’s actions in Ukraine — that ‘one-on-one’s’ don’t
transform ties. When these two personalities meet (albeit over a dinner
of nimbu paani), it will be the weight of those experiences
rather than faith in the school of summit-style diplomacy that will help
them script a new beginning for Indo-U.S. ties.
suhasini.h@thehindu.co.in
