by Dr Prakash Ambegaonkar

22-11-06

The countries of the Power Triangle all have an interest in improving relations with one another.
Like the other two states, China has a strong interest in issues related to market access, energy security, and the fight against Islamic terrorism.

On November 16, as the United States Senate overwhelmingly passed S-3709, a bill on the subject of nuclear cooperation with New Delhi, Chinese President Hu Jintao was preparing to make a state visit to India. While the two events may seem unrelated at first glance, perceptions of China were a significant factor in the US-India nuclear deal, albeit one that has not yet been publicly debated.
The US-India strategic relationship has generally centred on trade, energy security, and terrorism. Pressure from large corporations has demonstrated the increasing importance of the Indian market to American companies. Unified by the goal of creating a favourable economic relationship with India, they were able to apply enough pressure on the American government to make it concede to Indian demands.

While the tasks of removing barriers to trade, creating energy security, and fighting terrorism have all played a significant and public role in the development of US-India relations, particularly in the case of the recent nuclear deal, the strategic significance of China has also played a pivotal part. Henry Kissinger, for one, has said that the Pacific has replaced the Atlantic as the world’s centre of gravity.
Yet, when Indian or American officials are asked publicly whether their perceptions of China played into the nuclear deal, or whether America is using India to hedge against China’s growing influence, they always deny that this is the case. Nonetheless, most of them admit off the record that China has influenced the US-India relationship.

China, India, and the United States form what can best be described as the “Power Triangle” of the 21st century. As India and China become more important actors on the world stage, their power -- measured in several different ways -- has begun to approach that of the United States. All three parties are increasingly conscious of this dynamic. As a result of the current power balance, when any two of them sign a bilateral deal, the third is always concerned about its implications.
Recently, Sino-Indian ties have been growing faster than ever before. In the past few years, China and India have worked hard -- with some success -- to settle their border disputes. The value of their trade is expected to exceed $ 20 bn this year, and is predicted to reach $ 100 bn within six years.

Diplomatic ties have also warmed. Chinese president Hu Jintao’s visit to India was the first by a Chinese head of state in ten years, and the two governments have symbolically called 2006 “China-India Friendship Year.” The desire of the United States to balance these growing ties was a driving force in its effort to sign a nuclear deal with India.
American relations with both countries have not developednearly as strongly as Sino-Indian ties in recent years. From the American point of view, progress could be made if the two countries lowered trade barriers facing US goods and services. However, relations depend on far more than just trade. Partnerships also need to take into account economic integration as well as support in multinational relations.

The countries of the Power Triangle all have an interest in improving relations with one another. Like the other two states, China has a strong interest in issues related to market access, energy security, and the fight against Islamic terrorism. It is also in China’s interests to cooperate with India over a variety of issues, including WTO regulations and outsourcing. This is the case despite lingering disputes over borders, the status of Tibet, and India’s quest for a seat on the United Nations Security Council.
From India’s point of view, it thus becomes important to cooperate with both China and the United States. India spent the Cold War officially non-aligned, but was widely perceived as siding with the USSR over the United States. It is important that it does not make a similar mistake by siding with -- or being seen to side with -- United States exclusively, but that it pursues a path of genuine non-alignment. As large developing countries, India and China have much to gain by cooperating on the international stage, and their bilateral disagreements should not be allowed to get in the way of this.

The writer is the Founder and CEO of Bridging Nations, a Foundation based in Washington, DC. He wrote this article exclusively for Daily Times. Julie Berson, Julio Martinez and Nitin Gogia also contributed to this article.